Not Feasible
Applies to:Website
Status: Not Feasible

Implementing this feature is not possible now or in the foreseeable future
BYOND can you add a Single Player Feature to every single game created on BYOND.
That's up to the developer.
Think about what you're asking. If a game requires multiple users to interact, then it needs AIs to handle those players. In a board game for example you'd need an AI that could understand the rules and take actions accordingly. There is not only no way to automate this, it isn't even an easy problem to tackle on a case-by-case basis.
Well, if you're going to bring that up as a specific example, then I agree with this request. Games shouldn't be released in some half functional, multiplayer only version, where you have to collect a hoard of people just to get a basic game started.

Its still generally up to the developer to include something like this (basic AI...?), but games that CANNOT BE PLAYED alone (Decedance, Ultimatum) should not be publicly listed.
I disagree completely, because a game can be perfectly awesome (think Lode Wars) but not have good AI because the AI is too difficult to implement. And even with AI, a game can suck if the AI is crappy.
If I'm not mistaken, I can still play Lode Wars by myself. Decadence and Ultimatum are literally just title screens unless you have a handful of friends ready and willing to play the game with you at all times.

Most commercial FPS games don't necessarily make use of AI bots, but if you just happen to join an empty server, you can at least run around and get a feel for the game while waiting for other people to join. You're not just stuck at the title screen.

Most commercial games also have much larger player bases, and can pretty much guarantee a game at all times. That is hardly the case for any game on BYOND, and implementing single or lower-player count based mechanics should be a high priority.
I agree being stuck at the title screen sucks; even before I implemented AI in SotS II, you could join a team mode and just be the only one playing, and there were non-team modes that still served as challenges.

Still, when a game that doesn't do this is live, it shouldn't be punished for how it behaves when it isn't.
Lummox JR wrote:
Still, when a game that doesn't do this is live, it shouldn't be punished for how it behaves when it isn't.
That is more or less the problem. These games being live is just as bad, if not worse than them being offline.

If a player logs into a game and is just stuck at a title screen, I doubt they'll have much interest in ever checking it out again. If they could even just run around, and see how the mechanics work, they would probably be interested in waiting around for somebody to play against, or maybe even going through the trouble of inviting friends. I think this goes even further if there are bots available.