Gogogic CEO Says Single-Player is a "Gimmick"

[Ermm]

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/120358-Gogogic-CEO-Says-Single-Player-is-a-Gimmick

The CEO of social gaming company Gogogic says that games are naturally meant to be played with others.
Reykjavik-based Gogogic specializes in casual and social gaming, so it does have a certain bias about how people play games, but even so these comments by CEO Jonan Antonsson are a little extreme. In a recent interview, he effectively dismissed single-player gaming, saying that while there's a "strong audience for hard and unrelenting games" like Demon's Souls, games are meant first and foremost to be played with others.

"The single player mechanic is a gimmick - games are meant to be played with others and it doesn't matter if it's in-person or online," Antonsson said. "The first games were designed as multiplayer experiences, but when computer and console games became a thing there was a need to construct an antagonist and/or a protagonist for commercial purposes. You couldn't depend on people coming together to have a synchronous experience over a game. That would have simply stifled sales. And since there was no reasonable way to connect people in other ways - the arcade was the only serious attempt - it became an industry need to project the game as the other player."

"Playing a game is a multiplayer activity and can easily be seen as such when you watch young toddlers play by themselves," he added. "They invent someone to play with, someone that they talk to and interact with."

I can see where he's coming from - historically, especially as children, people have played with others - but videogames have changed the definition of "play." You don't read multiplayer books, after all, and listening to music or watching television isn't an inherently social activity either. Antonsson hedged his bet somewhat by stating that even something as simple as a high score list is enough to make a game social and "transform it to an asynchronous multiplayer experience," but he then went on to restate his belief that single-player experiences are becoming largely irrelevant to anyone outside a very niche audience.
"Now we can connect people in and around a game through real time PvP and PvE mechanics and the need for pure single player games had gone down. We have multiple plots and stories and build the meta-experience for the entire audience. The premise for making games has changed - reverted back to building multiplayer experiences that are true to the game form," he said. "This doesn't mean that we have run out of room when it comes to great single-player titles or games that make you sweat and curse every couple of minutes. It means that those titles have to be very appealing and cater well to the hardcore audience."

 

[SCO]

A understandable viewpoint that doesn't deserve the effort expended reading the article (much less writing it).

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

So, Andahaira, could we finally get that Thermonuclear war that you were promising?

 

[Baron]

Gogogic... Our AI is shit.

 

[Wirdschowerdn]

Social gaming is for the asocial.

 

[MadMaxHellfire]

a bit like when horse trainers said that the car was just a gimmick. they had no interest in cars to take their place, so spread their own propaganda against the enemy.
the difference here is that social games are a plague which has to be sent back to the hell it came out.

 

[Lubulos]

I think he's half right and half an asshole. The problem is that we use the word "game" not only with things that are effectively games, but also with things that are not games at all. For example, Planescape: Torment isn't a "game", it doesn't involve a challenge like in your usual game, it's more of a book, an experience, a piece of art. Same for a lot of other titles. Japan understood immediately this problem, hence why they call their graphic adventures "visual novels". The problem is within the words. So, if we give the word "game" its usual meaning, then I agree with what he's saying, and games like, say, Fifa, would benefit immensely from a fusion of both singlep. and multip.

But he is clearly stating that ALL games don't need singleplayer anymore, so I assume he's just a stupid ignorant who's trying to justify his company's greed and streamlined game design.

Burn him.

 

[Angthoron]

Fuck that loser, it's faggots like him that have bankrupted the once-awesome land of geysers and vikings and sagas.

Also, they're observing toddlers? Target audience of mentally retarded Generations X and Y detected.

 

[laclongquan]

CEO of *social* gaming company? That right there is disqualification.

 

[Excommunicator]

I'm pretty sure the Codex would have enough people on hand to invade Iceland

Shall we start a fundraiser for the war effort?

 

[DalekFlay]

Social gaming is for the asocial.

Seriously

I get enough social interaction in my life. I have my wife, my family, my co-workers and those few remaining male friends who do something outside their homes. Games are something I do in my office with headphones on as a BREAK from social interaction.

 

[Icewater]

Reykjavik, isn't that close to a volcano?

Let's hope it explodes all over them.

 

[Kane]

Antonsson's face is a gimmick.

 

[Chuck Norris]

The CEO of social gaming
Stopped reading there. No joke. What were you thinking posting this hsit here

 

[LeStryfe79]

 

[Curious_Tongue]

Would it be safe to say that piracy would be most rife among the demographic that likes single player games? Angry, socially isolated males?

Single player would be seen as a gimmick when you see gaming as a business, as the money comes from the casuals and socially minded players.

 

[mediocrepoet]

I'm pretty sure the Codex would have enough people on hand to invade Iceland

Shall we start a fundraiser for the war effort?

Yeah I'm sure it'll go well. "Roll for initiative, bitch!"

 

[laclongquan]

Would it be safe to say that piracy would be most rife among the demographic that likes single player games? Angry, socially isolated males?

Single player would be seen as a gimmick when you see gaming as a business, as the money comes from the casuals and socially minded players.

You mean the bucketomoney MMORPGs? The private pirated servers? The untold number of torrents, warez sites, etc...?

Social gaming company's CEO? Bah. what do he know?

If it's out, people will crack it. The ultimate downvote action of a game is that noone ever bother or care about it to crack it.

 

[Papa Môlé]

Who cares what this idiot thinks? For my part, I don't really give a shit if the whole industry goes this way anyway. All the good genres (RPG, strategy, adventure, etc.). were never really about the tech (if anything, new tech is ruining them) and there is a backlog of good titles larger than any single individual could play in a lifetime anyway. It's not like you really need new stuff.

That said, his argument is inane. Some of the most popular ways to play MP are co-op and in a co-op experience the computer is still "the other player", or rather the other team. Just because you add more people than one to the mix doesn't mean the game itself never needs to be the opponent. How would co-op mission based-type experiences work in competitive MP only where everyone does their own thing or mini-maxes? What about bots for that matter, even if competitive games? Can't have that, it's just a gimmick. Automated turrets? Calling in air strikes, etc.? Nope, that's the computer being the other player, derp.

 

[Weierstraß]

If looking at games as a whole and not just those ran by computers, he's kind of right, I guess.

 

[Morkar Left]

The reason most games are (outside of videogames) intended to play in a group is because you had no proper input-device that could judge your efforts. Basically it was just you and your mind. Therefore groupgames have a lot more appeal by default because they have interaction with you and put your interaction with the environment into context.
Videogames are a lot more complex and can provide the same satisfaction like reading a book or watching a movie besides "just" letting you advance towards a defined goal.

 

[waywardOne]

I kick ass at every game I play, so single-player is the only way I can get a challenge. Fuck those social losers.

 

[DragoFireheart]

That's funny, I happen to think the same thing about social games: they're a gimmick.

I thought the two biggest factors of a game was to entertain you and challenge you (ala a goal). Social games are neither fun nor challenging. Are social games actually games?

 

[sea]

Gogogic: you know their games are gonna be good when their primary inspiration is cribbing from impromptu games played by 2-year-olds.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

Would it be safe to say that piracy would be most rife among the demographic that likes single player games? Angry, socially isolated males?

Single player would be seen as a gimmick when you see gaming as a business, as the money comes from the casuals and socially minded players.

Gamers of melancholic character would be least likely to pirate due to their high conscientiousness.