- Plasma Prestige
- |
- Intrepid Legendary Member
Expressing my strong liberal views without shame. Favorite quotes below:
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."
"One starts to live when he can live outside himself."
- Albert Einstein
...about the portion of their community which has almost always been more interested with the single player components of their games than the multiplayer.
What makes me say this is Halo 3, and all the games onward. This thread isn't about these games however, I'm using them as examples to further the point I'm trying to get across.
In both Halo 3 and Halo Reach, the last two full games Bungie made, the multiplayer was more important than the single player. How can I tell? Quality. Halo 3's overall story arch wasn't bad, but that is attributed to the fact that it ended the trilogy. The actual dynamics were terrible. The level design early on wasn't very impressive, and the characters were just abysmal, at least in comparison to Halo 2. While Reach improved level design, the characters were still awful, and same in ODST.
But this thread's point, as mentioned earlier, isn't to simply bash Reach and Halo 3.
Bungie's commitment to the single player component of any title they make will, at least to me, largely dictate whether I remain a fan of theirs or not. Even if their next title is a massive online game, the Universe, characters, and plot have to be of high quality.
Seeing as Bungie employees frequent this forum, I only have one simple question. What should lead me to believe that you actually give a damn about the part of your community which actually discerns your talent as writers, designers, and artists? I didn't need to ask this question before Halo 3 and Reach, but I do now.
Lastly, I only ask this because I have enough respect for Bungie to give them a second chance. I don't despise them, or I wouldn't be here, but that doesn't mean I'm not becoming disappointed with what I'm seeing.