Another article explaining what should already be easily deduced by the lowest level of intelligence. Well done.

"There is simply no proof/research that has solidified those opinions as facts."

Well...the proof isn't what the publishers say, but there is certainly data available to the publishers and investors that MP games can indeed make a much bigger return, with much less investment. SP games themselves generally have a certain budget. A few exceptions aside, the average AAA game cost about the same to make. There are low end to high end AAA games all dealing with budget. At the same time, most SP games are known to sell about a certain amount.

That doesn't mean that SP games don't make a return on investment, just that they aren't as likely to make as much as a MP game with MT that actually does reasonably well, and certainly not as much as one that is a run away success.

None of this data is available to the public unfortunately. There have been some statements where one can draw reasonable conclusions.

What is usually left out of such statements that like to downplay SP games though is that a MP game is just as likely to fail as a SP game. Loss of investment is loss regardless of the amount.

"maybe not 100s of hours like multiplayer games"

Funny thing. Most people don't play MP games any more than the average SP game. However, the people that do invest time in MP games, tend to invest a lot of time in them.

Otherwise, you're right. SP games aren't a dying breed, and so long as a market exists, there will be games made for it. Since the gaming market is constantly expanding, chances are that more people will buy SP games.

(And will never die)

Lol. Keep up the fight, kid.

So basically people over reacting about SP games dying even though there was never any proof of that and then some SP games sold well and now people are celebrating something that was never in any danger in the first place.

***If this is not enough to prove that single-player games are not going anywhere then go have fun playing CoD26, Gears 7, Battlefield 6 (do you get the point?)***

Prove what? Who was trying to disprove this? Can we also list all the very successful MP games that also prove that MP is just as popular as ever?

I am late to this topic but I think you have to define what "dead" is. For example if you look at pixel art sprite style games like you have on the NES and SNES they still exists but they have been largely relegated to indie and smaller budget games.

Now if you look at single player games in that light while obviously single player games will never stop being made but it's entirely possible that single player games will be relegated to low budget/indie games. The unfortunate fact of the matter is that as time has gone on reality is that many studios have in fact stopped making single player games and it's hard to deny the profitability of multiplayer games loaded with MT's and such.

If you look at God of War yes it will absolutely be profitable enough to fund the next game if not two. But if you compare that to Fortnite which makes more money in a few months than God of War will make in it's lifetime it's not hard to see why multiplayer is so desirable by companies that only look at the bottom line.

God of War took what 4-5+ years to make in that time a game like Fortnite will make 10x much money as God of War will. If you look at it as an hourly wage Fortnite makes so much more per hour than God of War, 100's if not 1000's of times more.

And don't think I am defending it or happy about it, I am just explaining my view of the situation.

As someone who grew up in the arcades in the late 70's early 80's and have been addicted to playing video games for 40 years now . Single player campaign focused video games are absolutely my favorite !!!