A game doesn't have to have multiplayer to be great and have long lasting appeal. Skyrim for example.

 

Also don't forget that Microsoft doesn't like companies putting in multiplayer achievements anymore. Some companies do it, but they are not encouraged to do so.

 

Even in its wildest dream, the Transformers video game franchise would never even be mentioned in the same breath as Call of Duty.

 

I do not care about copies sold I care about the quality of the game, WFC/FOC were good games and if Activision put more production money and time in these games people will support it. Tf movies grossed over a billion dollars people will supprt it.

 

You said it and I said it. Developers can only have a successful game/franchise if they invest in the long term viability. Love it or hate it, DLC and continual updates are the only way to ensure a consistently high number of players. High Moon/Activision abandoned FoC way too soon and gamers returned the favor.

 

From the May 2014 Game Informer on ROTDS:
"One of these new features is a Unified Leveling System where experience and unlocks are universal between Campaign and the returning Escalation mode and will feature new items, characters, weapons and upgrades."

There isn't a single mention of PvP. It seems fairly certain that the "Reach Level X" and "Prime Mode" trophies are referencing the new Campaign and Escalation leveling system identified above.

While I enjoyed Escalation in the previous games, I found little replay value. Personally, I don't find any satisfaction in defeating sprites. The joy of online competition is always about facing real opponents. Especially when you are part of a team of friends facing another team of talented opponents. As such, for me, the lack of PvP is a huge hit for this game.

Despite the criticism in earlier comments, I found the PVP in FOC to be incredibly fun. The mix of classes/vehicle modes far outstripped the boring experiences in any Halo game. (Shoot - hop - repeat)

Considering the fact that the new developer had full access to the previous games PvP systems, their failure to include all of the previous games features is indicative of an utter lack of interest by Activision in releasing a quality game.

 

HAHAHAHA!!!!  
If that were true, KoTOR and the Metroid Prime games (except Hunters) would be absolute shit today, but they're not. They're still awesome, and they don't have any multiplayer.

Well, Metroid Prime 2 has 4 way multiplayer, but that's only a tiny little bonus. All the focus is on the single player.

 

Mach is right to a certain point. For better or worse some genre of games need to have MP to sustain long term play. Specifically, strategy games, shooters, racing games, and sports games, just to name some.

In the games like Metroid and KOTOR, they're games that clearly aren't built to have MP components. They're single player focused games, and really, people don't expect MP out of those kinds of games.

For example, Halo redefined mulitplayer for console shooters, and without MP Halo would never have been as successful as it is today. Hell, Halo became the blueprint for how console matchmaking was done. It's an instance where yes, multiplayer ultimately made the game better. Likewise, a fighting game is awful without multiplayer, but that is a matter of course. Racing games are great with multiplayer components as it makes it a real race and what not, and naturally sports games are a lot better with a MP component than strictly single player.

 

A game doesn't need multiplayer to be good. Grand Theft Auto is as successful as Call of Duty and it doesn't lag in sales because it's only for Xbox like Halo. Companies will make any game as along as they can make a profit. The only reason Halo always supports multiplayer is because microsoft wants to push Halo to the top of the most played games chart. What I love is that everyone would still be playing Call of Duty til 2016 even if Activision never releases another Call of Duty game again

 

GTA has multiplayer.

People will still be playing Call of Duty, Halo and Battlefield because the multiplayer experience is second to none. Single player games are great, one time experiences. Great multiplayer games define generations. Cheesy? Maybe. But it's true.

 

I dunno, believe it or not some of my fondest memories are from trying to earn the special multiplayer trophies in WfC and FoC (to date, the only two games I have gotten the Platinum trophies for). The trophies were pretty attainable after some practice and specializing characters, and having to put the effort into it made them all the more satisfying. That's not to say they were easy, in fact I can pretty clearly remember the day I spent in match after match capturing only 2/3 of the flags before some 10-year old snaked me on the last one. The frustration made it all the more sweet to earn that bad boy though.

In FoC, I think I played pretty much every MP mode a fair share when all's said and done, and only really lingered in Conquest to gain experience quickly (to reach Prime mode). It encouraged me to develop characters specifically for certain maps, certain play styles, and to counter certain other players.

Limiting multiplayer to Escalation mode doesn't really appeal to me, though I did have some fun playing through those when my teammates were coordinating well (nothing worse than the medic/ammo guy not pulling their weight). I'd be quite disappointed if this game completely eschews the PvP elements, but if the story is exciting I hope to still enjoy the SP campaign.

 

I'm not completely understanding this.....so allow me to ask:

Will It have regular online multiplayer like FOC did?

 

Foc multiplayer was broken you could fire a missile at point blank range at a scout they would have enough time to turn into a car reverse and kill you in half the time it would take for the missile to get to wear they where.

Only way i found to play foc was fly and snipe or car and bullets

 

Such a shame if true, but wouldn't be cool if there were about 10-16 players in an escalation game where you would have half of the players Decepticons and other half Autobots fighting waves of enemies on opposite sides of the map until the final wave where the gates/doors would open and would end uo versing the other team and drones.

One can dream.  

 

It may be like a few games where there simply aren't any trophies for the PVP multiplayer.

Many people don't like these kind of trophies especially with escalation where getting a match is difficult unless you have a team of friends playing the game. This makes some trophies when connected to PVP Multiplayer impossible to attain.

Considering the pre-order bonus is skins for the Multiplayer I find it hard to believe there won't be one.

 

Updated Rise of the Dark Spark website - NO PvP Multiplayer

I just noticed that Activision has update the Transformers: Rise of the Dark Spark official page: Transformers: Rise of the Dark Spark

Completely absent from this update is any mention of PvP multiplayer. Instead, the site states: "Epic Multiplayer Battles - Play the expanded four-player co-op online escalation mode with new upgradeable defenses and challenging Power Foes."

This all but confirms that Activision has axed PvP.

 

Even if pvp is gone with escalation upgrades and over 40 characters it will still be fun for awhile. Maybe they even put the select a character back in mission select like wfc had with a good chunk of those 40 selectable for campaign that should still add to replay value between that and upgrades, while it might be a let down if pvp is gone all is not lost. It may even be they assume people will know or figure pvp is there but are just focused on bragging about the changes they have made to escalation when it comes to mp.