@bybeach said:
@Branthog:
I wasn't trying to be serious, but yes there is reasoning. 1) I strictly play SP. I do not do multi player, and up to now, the Battlefield games as opposed to The Bad company efforts, were MP. I do own the 2 Bad companies, played a tenth of one SP and none of the other, steam of course. 2) this is billed as a realistic effort. I do not know if I am into that....I won't pontificate, I just have a personal view about it. Now the irony and the hypocrisy. I vowed never to play a war kill game at all long ago, then full in true luv with COD one and Two. I also enjoyed the hyper,over the top roller-coaster madness of Modern warfare. But I never played MP in these games, all for the story, sometimes great, sometimes wtf. But except for the distinction of bearing a military weapon, a bit beyond real. the pull was the over the top intensity after all, where you could not hear yourself for all the small arms and bullets wizzing by, and your squad leader is telling you you stay put though it is certain death. But i won't sell those games here because it's not in any way my intent, and I'm not expecting much this time, and with both games I am in a minority anyways for who and what they are intended for.
Yes, Battlefield has a Sp this time, which some things are being said about. we will see. But I will avoid it for the same personal reason I avoided that other, what was it, Medal of Honor game? The one clearly in Afghanistan or such? Though I do have a dirty secret about all this, I played and enjoyed Vietcong. I remember that war.....
Enjoy Battlefield 3.
If your interest is only in single player, then I can absolutely understand the lack of interest. BF3 may have great single player, for all we know, but to me it's an add-in. An afterthought. It's something that's nice to have there, but isn't why you come to BF3. If it turns out to be awesome, then I could see putting in $20 or $30 to play it in a few months or a year, but without multiplayer and without the interest in that multiplayer . . . it's hard to see the value.
Myself - I enjoy singleplayer and I hate when games jam in a mulitiplayer mode that nobody is ever going to play and that won't have an active community three months after launch, but I also absolutely love multiplayer. In fact, single player is often just a diversion from me as competing against other humans - whether in Civilization of Counter-Strike or anything in-between - is kind of vital to me. I like to know there's another human that I'm competing against. That they're thinking. That they're making me better. That they're swearing at their monitor when I get one over on them. To me, it's the difference between folding one end of the ping-pong table up and hitting the ball against it versus having a skilled opponent on the other end, trying to score on your ass the moment you let up.
Anyway, I definitely see your point. It would be like me saying that I don't have an interest in Pokemon games. You know, because I don't have an interest in Pokemon. It just isn't in my wheel-house. :)
Log in to comment