Valve Single Player Clarification

A Gabe Newell interview offers a clarification of recent comments that "Portal 2 will probably be Valve's last game with an isolated single-player experience." Here's word:
“I think what we’re trying to talk about is the fact that, not that we’re not doing single player games. Portal 2 was a pretty good example of what we’ve learned over the years in terms of how to create those experiences. It’s more that we think we have to work harder in the future, that entertainment is inherently increased in value by having it be social, by letting you play with your friends, by recognizing that you’re connected with other people.”
[…]
“That’s the thing that we’re trying to say, is that, single player is great but we also have to recognize that you have friends, and we wanna have that connected as well. So, it’s not about giving up on single player at all, it’s like saying, we actually think that there’s a bunch of features and capabilities that we need to add into our single player games to recognize the socially connected gamer.”
Thanks RipTen via VG247.
View : : :
12.
 
Re: Valve Single Player Clarification
May 8, 2011, 18:08
12.
Re: Valve Single Player Clarification May 8, 2011, 18:08
May 8, 2011, 18:08
 
ldonyo wrote on May 8, 2011, 17:24:
Graham wrote on May 8, 2011, 17:07:
Mashiki Amiketo wrote on May 8, 2011, 16:45:
I uh...don't want to be socially connected. I want to play a single player game so I don't have to listen and deal with other people. I mean this isn't a hard concept to wrap your brain around guys.

So you'll be left behind. It happens. They won't get your money and you won't play their game.

I quite enjoy the social aspect. I enjoy virtual milestones like achievements, and I like being able to compare how I did with my friends. You don't. That's not an indictment of either of us, it's just the way it is.

The only sad part is that more people seem to think the way I do; developers are recognizing that people do want more social integration into their gaming. Hopefully they keep it opt-in so you can still enjoy your experience, but if not you're going to be uncomfortable, and that's a shame.

Achievements can be reached without having to play in any type of multiplayer setting. You can then discuss and compare them to your heart's content via whatever social channel you wish. Heck, they can even set up a chat area in a game's matchmaking lobby where anyone who wishes can do all of the socializing they want.

The "left behind" dig was completely unnecessary and more than a tad condescending, IMO. Kind of represents why some of us like single player games.

The problem here is that the few people who are adamant about this NOT being in the game reduces the quality and impact of those of us who do. I wasn't being condescending, I was describing what's going to happen in a straightforward way; facts do not lend themselves to condescension. If this is what Valve and many other companies have described as their strategy (and it is) and you don't like it, then yes, you will be left behind.

The complaints here have a ring of bitter, jaded gamer to them. I've watched this hobby transform itself several times over the last few decades, and each time there have been greybeards decrying advancements as they've happened. Again, I hope that the connected aspect of these future titles is optional so that it doesn't make you uncomfortable, but if it isn't... well, that's progress.
Date
Subject
Author
1.
May 8, 2011May 8 2011
8.
May 8, 2011May 8 2011
61.
May 10, 2011May 10 2011
3.
May 8, 2011May 8 2011
10.
May 8, 2011May 8 2011
11.
May 8, 2011May 8 2011
13.
May 8, 2011May 8 2011
4.
May 8, 2011May 8 2011
7.
May 8, 2011May 8 2011
9.
May 8, 2011May 8 2011
 12.
May 8, 2011May 8 2011
   Re: Valve Single Player Clarification
14.
May 8, 2011May 8 2011
23.
May 8, 2011May 8 2011
31.
May 8, 2011May 8 2011
32.
May 8, 2011May 8 2011
24.
May 8, 2011May 8 2011
25.
May 8, 2011May 8 2011
26.
May 8, 2011May 8 2011
28.
May 8, 2011May 8 2011
30.
May 8, 2011May 8 2011
35.
May 9, 2011May 9 2011
36.
May 9, 2011May 9 2011
37.
May 9, 2011May 9 2011
42.
May 9, 2011May 9 2011
43.
May 9, 2011May 9 2011
48.
May 9, 2011May 9 2011
50.
May 9, 2011May 9 2011
51.
May 9, 2011May 9 2011
52.
May 9, 2011May 9 2011
53.
May 9, 2011May 9 2011
54.
May 9, 2011May 9 2011
             Re: Valve Single Player Clarification
55.
May 9, 2011May 9 2011
58.
May 9, 2011May 9 2011
             Re: Valve Single Player Clarification
69.
May 10, 2011May 10 2011
              Re: Valve Single Player Clarification
59.
May 9, 2011May 9 2011
60.
May 10, 2011May 10 2011
64.
May 10, 2011May 10 2011
66.
May 10, 2011May 10 2011
             Re: Valve Single Player Clarification
67.
May 10, 2011May 10 2011
              Re: Valve Single Player Clarification
68.
May 10, 2011May 10 2011
               Re: Valve Single Player Clarification
70.
May 10, 2011May 10 2011
                Re: Valve Single Player Clarification
71.
May 10, 2011May 10 2011
                 Re: Valve Single Player Clarification
72.
May 10, 2011May 10 2011
                  Re: Valve Single Player Clarification
73.
May 10, 2011May 10 2011
                   Re: Valve Single Player Clarification
74.
May 10, 2011May 10 2011
                    Re: Valve Single Player Clarification
76.
May 11, 2011May 11 2011
                    Re: Valve Single Player Clarification
75.
May 11, 2011May 11 2011
                  Re: Valve Single Player Clarification
56.
May 9, 2011May 9 2011
46.
May 9, 2011May 9 2011
62.
May 10, 2011May 10 2011
63.
May 10, 2011May 10 2011
65.
May 10, 2011May 10 2011
33.
May 8, 2011May 8 2011
15.
May 8, 2011May 8 2011
17.
May 8, 2011May 8 2011
19.
May 8, 2011May 8 2011
16.
May 8, 2011May 8 2011
22.
May 8, 2011May 8 2011
27.
May 8, 2011May 8 2011
29.
May 8, 2011May 8 2011
34.
May 9, 2011May 9 2011
39.
May 9, 2011May 9 2011
44.
May 9, 2011May 9 2011
45.
May 9, 2011May 9 2011
47.
May 9, 2011May 9 2011
49.
May 9, 2011May 9 2011
57.
May 9, 2011May 9 2011