dionisus1122

[quote who="Ellestar" reply="1" id="2170899"] Quoting GW Swicord, reply 22 But from my experience only two MP TBS formats may be even remotely popular - either quick games that can be finished in one session (Civ 4, Battle for Wesnoth, you may include games like Magic: The Gathering even if they're not exactly TBS) or PBEM-style games with a limited number of turns (Massive Assault Network 2 - 15 turns for a full game on a medium map, it may be played online but noone plays serious

I don't care about having a 'story campaign'... I care about a robust single-player experience. If they can do both a great multi-player and single-player, than that is great... but I am tired of the vocal multi-player drowning out the needs of a large, single-player base. I'd be disappointed if they spend all this time and money developing multiplayer features at the expense of a single-player experience. That's all I am saying.

[quote who="Wizaerd" reply="11" id="2099627"]I will most likely be in the minority, but I have zero desire for multiplayer. This goes for ARPGs, RTS, TBS, FPS, etc... If I want a multiplayer experience, I'll bring out a board game and my friends and I will all gather around the kitchen table with our beers, chips, and cigars or play an MMORPG. But when I'm at home, and looking to play a satisfying stable and fun game (either console or PC), I want only single player games.<b

I have been lurking on this forum ever since I read the article about E:WoM in Game Informer. I am very excited to get the game. That being said, my biggest fear is that the game will be too focused on Multiplayer. I prefer to play single-player, and I am growing tired of watching games focus on the Multiplayer experience, at the loss of a rich and expansive single-player. I don't have the time to excel at multiplayer, I like to relax and take my time