Quote Originally Posted by Maeda Toshiie
MP wil foreverl last longer than SP. The main reason being that another human player will be a better opponent than the AI. Of course, that is IF the game is good enough, and not get tossed into the bin a few weeks after the player gets bored.

However, the MP side is not the profitable side of things. Maintaining multiplayer games require tech personnel, servers band bandwidth. All that is an ongoing cost. If the initial profits go to the dev of the game, what is to pay for the support of the multiplayers?

Starcraft is a very good example. I can imagine few would play for SP, but MP is still very much ongoing, even long after the release of WC3. Starcraft on BNet is bleeding money from Blizzard. It can hardly expect much current sales of such an old game, even when sold at rock bottom prices in bargain bins. Most of the profits come from the initial sales years ago. Tens of thousands are still playing it online. Seriously, many have really gotten their money's worth in that sense.

So basically, MP, if it truely becomes popular, reduces the profits. What they want are people to be suckered in to buy the game, play for a short while and ditch it for the next new release. So basically, flashiness is part of the business, because it suckers people to buy it. All that hype about the graphics. Wow, I can see glint from the armour! Whats that if the AI is stupid and the gameplay sucks?

Personally I am a believer of the KISS principle and also, if it aint broke, dont fix it.

Prior to the release of RTW, I had great respect for 3 companies: Blizzard, Valve and CA. Now it has gone down to 2.

CA might as well move off to the console market and sell its games there. No multiplayer to worry about.
Is a small thing called e-mule bleeding the companies?
CD copying?
$5 for a *cough* ill-legal *cough* copy?
Why Blizzard focuses on MP?
Cause they are mazochists and want to lose money?
Who is more successful CA or Blizzard?

The answers are up to you...

Hellenes