EA: Battlefront won't have single player because "people don't want it."

battlefront_logo.jpg

In a recent interview with Peter Moore, COO of EA, Moore was asked about the controversy of yearly released sports titles, as well as some information about Star Wars Battlefront's lack of a single player campaign.

Peter Moore acknowledged that sports games have come under fire for being pushed out every year with menial updates, but he also thinks that in the future there may be a place for a yearly update, but for the time being “there is still a thirst for a great, brand-new boxed game.” Looks like we’ll be forking out for a new game every year for the foreseeable future, then…
Star Wars Battlefront was also on the table during the chat. When asked why the game won’t ship with a full-on single-player experience, Peter Moore stated that “very few people actually play the single-player on these kinds of games” going on with “that’s what the data points to.”

How do you feel about this line of thinking? Are games that seem to have a primary emphasis on multiplayer content, somehow excluded from the need for a single player campaign? Especially when it comes to narrative content such as the Star Wars universe.

:arrow: SOURCE
 
  • Like
Reactions: Margen67
The campaign modes in Battlefront 1 and 2 were just revisiting famous battles from the canon, they were glorified matches against bots. This game doesn't need a story campaign, but splitscreen and fights against bots would be welcome.
 
The game has been building to look very promising and yet, EA is throwing it all away with this nonsense of theirs that folks don't want a Single Player Mode. Total bs.
 
Xrosblader: EA doesn't get money from me because EA doesn't want it.

The campaign modes in Battlefront 1 and 2 were just revisiting famous battles from the canon, they were glorified matches against bots. This game doesn't need a story campaign, but splitscreen and fights against bots would be welcome.
Except the PSP exclusives had a story that was not revisiting fameous battles.
 
I don't necessarily mind it shifting focus from single player to co-op, really. It makes sense and could be more fun if done right...

That said, people want single player, they just don't want a crappy offline mode in place of it like BF1/2. They want a tailored experience.

But yeah leave it to EA to miss the point entirely and tell us what we want while they cover their ears while screaming about the high life.
 
Battlefront and Battlefront 2 had really bad campaigns, Battlefront 1 basically just slapped movie footage intros to the multiplayer maps and battlefront 2 basically did the same and added in triggerable events. IMO neither of those 2 games actually had a REAL singleplayer mode. Unless they do a Section 8 Prejudice then I'd rather have campaign removed altogether.

As for instant action, that's just the multiplayer mode with bots instead of players, I only used it in BF2 because that game was broken online, the first game worked fine online so I never bothered with IA. If this game works like the original did, then the absence of single player instant action should go unnoticed.
 
Last edited by ,
I'd prefer a co-op SP game over MP only any day.
I think this game will a bit bare bones day 1 but in a year or so it will possibly be worth getting. It's EA though so who knows how it'll end up.
 
Who is the one to define "multiplayer game"?

Didn't even bother reading the rest of your post.
The devs.

It's incredibly obvious when a game is made for one thing or the other. It's not that difficult, really. People venomously despised singleplayer games for having multiplayer modes, like Assassins Creed or Bioshock. Most people regard CoDs singleplayer as completely worthless. So again, it makes infinitely more sense to just focus on the primary mode.
 
Plus what happens when they kill all the servers?
People will buy the next bare bones, MP only game ofc.
I find it baffling that there are so many people who are okay with a multiplayer only 60$/70€ products that will eventually fade away and become useless.
Same reason why I absolutely hate paying money in MMO's.
 
People will buy the next bare bones, MP only game ofc.
I find it baffling that there are so many people who are okay with a multiplayer only 60$/70€ products that will eventually fade away and become useless.
Same reason why I absolutely hate paying money in a MMO's.
Me to as I want a game that I will play for a while even once it stops. Like I still play kart wii, diamond, and other games with closed servers because I like the single player
 
All games need single player since I personally play them by myself sometimes (shocking)
Plus what happens when they kill all the servers?

Just take Splatoon for example, its single player mode is horrendous yet it's there just to tick that box so they can say the game had a Single Player mode. So if they're going to put 0 effort then they shouldn't bother.
 
Just take Splatoon for example, its single player mode is horrendous yet it's there just to tick that box so they can say the game had a Single Player mode. So if they're going to put 0 effort then they shouldn't bother.
Actually I heard some people having lots of fun with that mode.
 
All I get from that statement is "We're too lazy to come up with a story".
On second thought, it may be better this way.. This is EA we're talking about, I don't want another MoH2010.

Regarding Splatoon, it's single player is simple, each level is just a series of mini puzzles than anything, but is sorta fun and is good to learn some of the lore of the game (I find it very interesting, btw). Also, the bosses are fun to fight.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RevPokemon
Just take Splatoon for example, its single player mode is horrendous yet it's there just to tick that box so they can say the game had a Single Player mode. So if they're going to put 0 effort then they shouldn't bother.
Yes but I want as a gamer a single player and a multiple player.

Saying we didn't add single player cuz it would suck is just being fing lazy and not giving a shit.

Also alot of people liked splatoons single player
 
This game could have been way better, too bad they took out all the good details and features from the previous Battlefront games and pretty much made a Call Of Duty: Star Wars Edition. That is what to expect from EA I guess.
 
Yes but I want as a gamer a single player and a multiple player.

Saying we didn't add single player cuz it would suck is just being fing lazy and not giving a shit.

Also alot of people liked splatoons single player
Really? That's surprising. I found the Single Player mode boring, repetitive and dull as fuck. The final boss was extremely repetitive and uninteresting.
 
Just take Splatoon for example, its single player mode is horrendous yet it's there just to tick that box so they can say the game had a Single Player mode. So if they're going to put 0 effort then they shouldn't bother.
Splatoon's single player is there to teach people the mechanics of the game. And it does its job well. Not everyone is a jaded guy like you.
 
Really? That's surprising. I found the Single Player mode boring, repetitive and dull as fuck. The final boss was extremely repetitive and uninteresting.
Meh I mean it is thier and at least it adds content to the game which is nice.

Splatoon's single player is there to teach people the mechanics of the game. And it does its job well. Not everyone is a jaded guy like you.
Yup
 
  • Like
Reactions: Monado_III
Splatoon's single player is there to teach people the mechanics of the game. And it does its job well. Not everyone is a jaded guy like you.
Well, I expected a bit of a challenge (it was super easy) and variety but Nintendo nowadays lacks it so should've predicted it.
 

Site & Scene News

Popular threads in this forum