Rocksteady co-founder Sefton Hill's said he can "absolutely guarantee" that adding a multiplayer mode to the brilliant-looking Batman: Arkham City would've taken away from the core game experience.
Speaking to CVG at E3 last week, Hill acknowledge that the choice is "a bold decision", but says it has been justified by the reaction from players and fans.
"We looked when we were making the game at what's important for the game... what's really important for the story we wanted to tell. And the thing we wanted to do, the thing that got us really excited was taking Batman in to this huge district of Gotham City and telling that story.
"So really that's the filter by which we looked at what we were going to do. We looked at multiplayer and said, 'is that essential to tell that story? It's not'."
Hill went on to admit, "It would've been an easier decision" to include multiplayer in the game, but "you wouldn't have got as good a Gotham City and you would've had an average multiplayer".
He added: "I think it would've looked good on the box but at the end of the day as a studio we're all about gameplay, we're a gameplay driven studio.
"We firmly believe that what you do with your hands when you're playing the game and your interaction with the game is king. We just didn't feel that multiplayer was adding anything to that - it was taking away from that.
"It is a bold decision, but the thing I've been really happy with is how the fans and the players have come back to us and said, 'it's the right decision. If I want to play multiplayer, I can buy a multiplayer game. If I want a great story and a great single-player game, I can buy Arkham City.'"
The Rocksteady man concluded by stating: "This game wouldn't be the game it is now if it had multiplayer in. I can't absolutely guarantee that."
Hill also told us Rocksteady would consider other superhero adaptations. Hear the full interview in the video above.
Comments
11 comments so far...
splitter on 13 Jun '11 said:
Thank God at least one studio is listening to fans.
monkeyd_93 on 13 Jun '11 said:
and never change that, devs need to realise this such as the AC franchise
G00N3R on 13 Jun '11 said:
I wish more developers had this attitude, because I've had this opinion for years. Decide what kind game you want to make - single player, multiplayer, or co-op, and then focus all your resources on making that one element as good as it can possibly be.
Bioware, are you paying attention re: ME3?
YCshinobi on 13 Jun '11 said:
God bless you, sir.
davidkaneda on 13 Jun '11 said:
Completely agree, and I'm delighted they've taken this approach. Drake's (:AT) multiplayer was not even a factor in picking up that game, and felt more like bonus content. This also works both ways, in the case of Brink tacking single player onto a multiplayer game gives false expectations. Rare to find a game that works as well as a single player and multiplayer experience, the main reason COD enjoys such huge success.
But enough of this, tell us how AC will be released 6 months later on WiiU, and why we should wait to play it on the new console!
TheLastDodo on 13 Jun '11 said:
Multiplayer guaranteed for the next Arkham game then.
This must be the fourth time in the last year that Rocksteady have talked about not putting multiplayer in City to detract from the SP, I think they're just slowly planting the idea in peoples heads so it won't be as bad when multiplayer is announced for the next Arkham game.
JD_Method on 13 Jun '11 said:
It's because everyone keeps asking them about it.
wwinterj on 13 Jun '11 said:
I admire this guys honesty. Multiplayer would have taken away from the single player and not been that great.
I also admire rather than adding multiplayer to extend a games life they have chosen to add more side missions. This along with the challenge mode is a great way to go.
Co-op could work for the challenge mode but anything other than that seems pointless.
k-mysta on 13 Jun '11 said:
i agree someone should have told bioware.
Multiplayerking on 13 Jun '11 said:
It isn't black and white; SP good, MP bad.
Look at Uncharted 2, the single player was great and the multiplayer was just as good.
TheLastDodo on 14 Jun '11 said:
That may be true but c'mon the game is released in four months time, it would have been announced or at least leaked by now with how "bad" developers are at keeping stuff secret these days.