{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
10/28/2013 2:50:38 AM
7
Depends on the game. Like with Red Dead and GTA games it's all about the multiplayer for me. I don't bother with the single player. Same with like Battlefield and Cod games the campaign I just get through once and play the multiplayer for the next 5 years.
Then there are games like Tomb Raider, Skyrim, Saints Row, and such which are all about the fun single player experience.
Then there are games like Mass Effect and Halo which have both an enjoyable single player experience and multiplayer one (not counting the newer Halos of course, multiplayer is crap in Reach and 4).
English
-
Reach had great multiplayer. The campaign though... Dem feels.
-
You play RS games for the MP? Top lel.
-
I can play them however I want. I only get on to play them really when friends were on and goof off and laugh in the MP. There is nothing wrong with that, I personally find free roam single player games boring. If you don't like how I play my game you can deal with it =)
-
No, that's fine. It's just weird that someone would play MP over SP in a game like that. Especially considering they're nothing more than an afterthought to the developers that made the game. A simple bonus to keep life into the product.
-
You didn't get to experience the man god that is John Marston? FOR SHAME!
-
That's kind of awkward to me. Red Dead and GTAV, especially Red Dead, have really good stories and are primarily known for their campaigns, but you play those for their multiplayer? To each their own. For me RDR's campaign was awesome and I didn't bother with the multiplayer. Then GTAV, the majority of the time I spent with it was with the canpaign
-
yeah I just play the multiplayer with friends. I've never been into free roam type of games tbh.
