Modern console's use of the internet in gaming has allowed some games to only be allowed to be played online. One example, is the incredibly popular For Honor, a hack and slash phenomenom. As popular as this game is, what is to stop Ubisoft from shutting off the servers if a sequel is announced, to force gamers to purchase the sequel? Many classic games suffer from eventual server closing, EA's underrated Lord of the Rings: Conquest is an example. Are gaming developers giving themselves too much power over consumers by forcing games to be mandatorily online?
This is definitely worth exploring. I, for one, do not play multiplayer games (at all), so I never have to worry about the always-online nonsense. I can simply pop in my disc of Uncharted 4 and go for it without a care in the world. It certainly seems like a bully move for a company to require a constant internet connection to play their game, even the single-player campaign (as is the case with "For Honor"). It also runs the risk of alienating fans who don't want, or even can't have, a constant online connection to their console. There's also the chance of servers going down and internet connections timing out. I guess you just can't play your SP campaign in the meantime while you wait for the Ubisoft servers or Comcast to get their stuff together, which is highly frustrating. – Christina Legler7 years ago