Eight years ago, Max Payne exploded into the action genre in a frenzy of shiny bullets and slow-motion acrobatics.  It was a triumph, startling gamers worldwide with its phenomenal attention to narrative detail.  It was a true, forward-thinking solo experience.  It was also only 10 hours long.

It's a fascinating case-study.  Max Payne begat a shift in the single-player game in two directions.  It lifted videogame storytelling into astonishing new realms with its effortless cinematism and arresting characters, but it also marked the start of a trend for shorter campaigns.  Max Payne had no online component, but now, with Call of Duty 4 and Killzone 2 delivering minimal solo game time yet vast multiplayer components, it seems we are expected to make do with only a few hours of single-player battling.  Is it true that multiplayer increasingly rules the roost?  Are we experiencing a demise in the traditional, single-player game?

Leigh Alexander, News Director of leading industry site Gamasutra, isn't too sure, but is aware of something resembling a shift.  "I'd say there's not so much a demise," she muses, "but there's definitely a trend favouring the multiplayer component in the core console market. The best-selling core titles are ones that nobody really buys for the single-player campaign: your Halos, Call of Dutys and Left 4 Deads, for example."

Today's media products are increasingly focusing on social components.  We live in an age where not having Facebook, Myspace and Twitter accounts raises eyebrows.  The Xbox 360 is preparing to make the move into social networking.  World of Warcraft has more players worldwide than viewers of the UK's top television shows.  Like it or not, we are a culture that is being indoctrinated with the belief that digital socialising is of paramount importance.

And it certainly seems that there is something intrinsically enjoyable about an event shared with friends.  Is the experience of playing an exemplary shooter online significantly better than that of playing a mediocre one?  There are perhaps differences, but the heart of the event - the social interaction with other human beings, people with whom you share an important interest - remains defined by those who partake, not the code from which these virtual warzones are constructed.

With the popularity of the Wii and Rock Band-alikes, social gaming is on the rise.

Social Instinct

This, then, could well go some way to explaining the shift towards multiplayer gaming.  It is, in some ways, an easy option.  The proverbial pass mark is lower.  Create a foundation that's "good enough," then it's down to the players to instinctively create their own entertainment.

But perhaps we're getting ahead of ourselves.  It certainly seems there is indeed a multiplayer trend in the hardcore gaming market on the 360 and PS3.  But what about elsewhere?  "I think to say the single-player game is on the outs is a little narrow-minded," says Leigh. "It focuses solely on two market outliers: the one-percent hardcore gamer, and the party-game casual gamer."

There's certainly no denying that Nintendo's efforts with the Wii have been poured into the creation of enormously social experiences.  But it seems there is a relevant difference between Nintendo's methods, and those on display elsewhere.  "A major part of Nintendo's strategy is to encourage in-the-living-room, social play," notes Leigh, "which means local multiplayer and group experiences.  That's part of why the Rock Band/Guitar Hero juggernaut is so successful as well. My guess is that most people who play Smash Bros Brawl play it at home with friends instead of online."

This is a whole new breed of gaming - or, perhaps, simply a return to more traditional gaming habits: families sitting around a Monopoly board is the example that immediately springs to mind.  It seems to exist away from the mere desire to shoot strangers over the internet.  Instead, it's a purist, typically healthy, social activity.  They're videogames in the literal sense, but they are perhaps more akin to other forms of competitive human interaction, like sports or board games.

So, ultimately, we're really only talking about a shift within a tiny portion of the gaming world.  And a glance at the figures seems to show that the claim of single-player components being on their way out may be pushing it.  Though Call of Duty and Killzone are making the move towards multiplayer focus, the charts suggest it's not necessarily a widespread thing.  The Sims 3 is number one.  The remainder of the top five is irrefutably single-player focused.

"We're seeing increased investment in multiplayer for games that historically didn't need that kind of mode - Resident Evil 5, Grand Theft Auto IV and BioShock 2, for example - since keeping up with the needs of the hardcore audience is crucial to maintaining core marketshare even as franchises aim to attract wider audiences," says Leigh.

"But when the best-selling games of last year - GTA IV and Wii Fit, basically - are single-player games primarily, I think it's hard to make the case that multiplayer is going to wholly supplant strong single-player games."

Does BioShock 2 really need a multiplayer mode? The debate continues...

Mods and Rockers

That's the consoles dealt with.  But we're missing one key element of the debate.  The PC is historically renowned for its multiplayer importance.  Quake pioneered deathmatch gaming, both online and via local area connection, in the mid-nineties; MMO gaming and virtual worlds had premiered on the big beige box some time before that.  Though multiplayer has been available on home consoles essentially since their birth, through the magic of multiple controllers, such machines are relative newcomers to the online world.

It is surprising, then, that the PC seems to be experiencing something of a resurgence of strong single-player campaigns.  Though multiplayer remains popular as ever, the independent development scene in particular has begun to spectacularly revive the single-player game.

The scene isn't exclusive to the personal computer, of course - the popularity of Braid on the 360 and World of Goo's Wii port are proof of that - but it does appear to be the format that most supports small-time developers.  And one area of independent development, away from the financial restrictions of full-scale releases, is the mod scene.

Once a haven for multiplayer dreams, with the likes of Counter-Strike, Team Fortress and Natural Selection pioneering the movement, the mod scene has recently experienced a huge influx of single-player adventures - not least in the form of Off-Topic Productions' mammoth The Nameless Mod, a sprawling epic for Deus Ex that, astonishingly, clocks in at not far shorter than the original game.

The mod's lead designer, Jonas Wæver, is surprised.  "It's interesting that so many unique and remarkable single-player mods are cropping up now that the costs and difficulties of game development seem to be skyrocketing," he says. "Years ago, it was possible - or, at least, it seemed possible - to gather a nice big team and then churn out a ten-hour campaign. Now you're forced to dial down your aspirations even if you have a big team because of the astounding detail level in modern games."

The Nameless Mod: evidence of a movement on the rise?

So why the return of exemplary single-player content on the scene?  "With the apparent rise of independent games of an artistic or experimental nature," says Jonas, "modding has become a great way to make yourself a part of that trend without having to create your game from scratch. Since you can't make money from mods either, due to copyright concerns, mods are a great venue for experimental game design and just plain doing things that commercial constraints wouldn't allow."

"With regards to The Nameless Mod," he continues, "Deus Ex was always a single-player game. It was an incredible single-player experience, and we wanted to replicate it, extend it and deepen it. We're also a group of passionate world-creators and storytellers, so we have little interest in creating multiplayer games. The Nameless Mod was never actually meant to be as huge as it ended up; it just kept growing as the ideas came to us, and the mod's scope is clearly reflected in its ridiculous seven-year development cycle."

Perhaps length isn't what we should be aiming for.  Though value for money is clearly a positive thing, it would be a stretch to claim a mediocre forty-hour game holds more worth than a refined, imaginative and affecting five-hour experience.  And if the future of games lies in the hands of these talented amateur developers, perhaps seeing short, snappy, creative ideas through to completion could be the way forward.

"I strongly believe that the strength of modders is not to be able to spend seven years working on a game to make it twice as long as commercial products, but to make shorter and more unique single-player experiences that take chances the big studios can't," says Jonas, "even more so than independent professionals, since modders can even make design decisions that defy good design practice, just on the off chance that they might work."

One thing's for sure: we might be seeing a shift towards multiplayer within certain markets, but passionate single-player developers still exist, and still have an abundance of imagination to work with.  And while that's the case, we're unlikely to see the strong single-player game eradicated completely.