Is Blizzard too focused on multiplayer gaming?

by Matthew Rossi

Right now, it's fair to say that there isn't a single Blizzard game that doesn't at the least contain a strong multiplayer component. Diablo 3 is probably the closest we get to a single-player experience from the studio, and even that has multiplayer as a component and it's fair to say that being able to play with your friends in Diablo is part of the whole reason that the franchise became so popular. The growth of Battle.net in the 2000's was tied to Diablo 2 and Warcraft 3, as well as the growth of StarCraft and Brood War online as well.

But with World of Warcraft as the dominant MMO, we're left with Hearthstone, Heroes of the Storm, and Overwatch as purely multiplayer experiences. Now, the argument could be made that multiplayer online play is Blizzard's wheelhouse. It's what they do — it's what they do well — and there's no reason they should change. And with the glut of multiplayer games that came out of E3 this year, frankly, I have to wonder if they're right.

It seems the future of gaming lies in multiplayer. Studios are rushing to put out the next big multiplayer game -- even former single player story driven powerhouses like BioWare are looking towards multiplayer and open world exploration. Is this the world Blizzard helped make with Hearthstone and the runaway success of Overwatch? And if it is, should Blizzard just battle to maintain dominance in the always on multiplayer world... or should they try and strike where everyone else isn't?

There's a reason multiplayer has become so popular lately: it's a way to provide evergreen content.  PVP gameplay doesn't get chewed up the way a classic single player or even MMO gameplay does. There will never be a walkthrough or breakdown on how to win against other players, because while certain tactics will rise to prominence there's always that human factor. Humans do things that can't be easily predicted and learning to counter other people on the fly is a skill all its own. In essence, it's a lot easier to keep a multiplayer game current. Sure, you still need to design new content -- new places to go and fight other people, for example, and the current trend towards open world exploration demands a lot of design time. But Blizzard has eschewed that -- only World of Warcraft has anything like that kind of design. Diablo 3, Heroes of the Storm, and Overwatch rely on either procedurally generated content or maps that can be rolled out and used as platforms to kill other players and achieve objectives.

In essence, multiplayer allows you to use your development time to give players the means to innovate in terms of their own emergent gameplay. Give them a new map with a feature like Horizon's lower gravity, then . see what they do with it. Compare this to the way the WoW team could spend six months (or more) designing a dungeon that no one will be running in two years.

But there are reasons to get back into the single player market. Story in games is important, and we're seeing a future where it might go on the back foot. Blizzard has made great strides in its storytelling in World of Warcraft and while Overwatch doesn't have that much story in the game world, a lot of it is told in other media, and people are clearly hungry for it. They don't just like the characters that are the mathematically most effective at any given time, they actually like the characters. The sheer volume of investment you see in the community over which characters are or have been in relationships, the fan speculation about their pasts, the Sombra fans pouring over her conspiracy chart -- Overwatch is a game that has been embraced because of those story hooks as much as for its gameplay.

And Diablo 3 is, at its heart, a very successful single player game. Multiplayer here is just to assist people in having fun together,  but it's not the beating heart of the franchise. When I play it, I either play it alone or with my wife, and that's what makes the game evergreen for me -- not seasonal characters, not trying to do anything but play at my own speed. Diablo 3 owes much of its success to the soothing rhythm of its monster mashing, but the story is what that gameplay hangs off of, and when elements like the Ruins of Sescheron or the upcoming Necromancer pack are added they enrich the game.

I would not and absolutely am not arguing that Blizzard should back away from what is clearly successful for the company. Overwatch proves they have their multiplayer formula down, I believe. But I would definitely say that the current state of gaming is a reflection of what Blizzard has done and is doing. It would be beneficial for the game design world as a whole to see Blizzard actually stretch those narrative muscles.

Yes, Blizzard exists to make fun games for people to play, and story comes second there. But I think it's obvious that people who love Overwatch love it for the characters and their backstories as much as they do for the Play of the Game videos. (Well, okay, almost as much.) You wouldn't hear about so many people's favorite fanon if they didn't. Blizzard has it in them to make a fun game for people to play alone or in small groups that also tells a good story. And I think it's time for them to get back to the days of the original Diablo when they did just that.

It's not like Blizzard doesn't have a franchise or two begging for this kind of treatment. StarCraft saw the Nova Covert Ops missions, and those seemed to be pointing towards a more personal narrative. The long-stalled Ghost game was a prototype for exactly this kind of storytelling. The more space operatic turn the franchise took in StarCraft 2 in my mind is designed more for a story like that -- a classic single player RPG, maybe even one with a party aspect.

Maybe it's time for Blizzard to revive the single player genre with Warcraft, StarCraft, Diablo, or Overwatch. (Or heck, bring black Blackthorne. It was a fun game.) Any of Blizzard's games could support a story mode, and Blizzard has the storytelling skills to make it work — even if it doesn't look like they're planning on using them.