surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
I think we can all agree, that if Bethesda implemented Co-op into their games, they would have the greatest game of all time.
Imagine Oblivion with Friends, I'm getting hard just thinking about it.
Imagine Oblivion with Friends, I'm getting hard just thinking about it.
Sad. I wanted to see co-op in Skyrim so badly!
Multiplayer is totally unnecessary, but co-op would have been so awesome...
Multiplayer is totally unnecessary, but co-op would have been so awesome...
Yeah... I really wanted co-op in Skyrim. I became very bored of the emptiness of Oblivion and honestly, I would have been able to stomach it if I could have tagged along with a friend.
Totally spot on. A ton of games are awesome in their own right without needing multiplayer just because some people expect it. Those people still have plenty of multiplayer games to enjoy. I'd rather have a solid single-player gaming experience, like LA Noire or The Saboteur.
So... I hear EA, *cough* I mean Bioware, is slapping some kind of multiplayer mode into Mass Effect 3.
Agreed. Makes me wonder if they mean competitive multiplayer or multiplayer in general. That would eliminate my dream for Co-Op.
I would only support multiplayer in an Elder Scrolls game if it were some kind of super-secret hidden feature that let random people from the Internet control Mud-Crabs in other peoples' games.
I'm ok with this. I'm glad to see more people in the industry realizing that a half-assed multiplayer =/= replay value, and Elder Scrolls V looks like I'll have plenty to go back to without mutliplayer.
Multiplayer would be a little silly. Maybe a PC mod, it could be fun. Like manhunt or something.
Co-op though... that would be awesome.
Co-op though... that would be awesome.
Oh okay then people. Let's all agree with the article, but when llort het complains about how he literally can't play 50% of portal 2/splosion man because he can't play online, he is clearly trolling/has no friends, then let's all go and buy games that are pretty much 90% multiplayer with a short single player campaign thrown in as an after thought
I completely agree.
However...Fallout 3, Oblivion, and NV would be pretty badass with a two player sandbox mode, hahahaha.
It would have to be coop. But it could easily be doable, and fun.
However...Fallout 3, Oblivion, and NV would be pretty badass with a two player sandbox mode, hahahaha.
It would have to be coop. But it could easily be doable, and fun.
Why's everyone gotta hate on the bioshoc 2 multiplayer? I enjoyed it, id still rather play halo or cod
@llort het: Haha, you're right. I remember some of those past statements. Don't know if any specific person who commented here has said any of them though.
As for the article, the man's correct. Single player games are great. All of them don't need multiplayer.
I'm a sucker for split-screen multiplayer as opposed to online. In that area, TimeSplitters is still king.
As for the article, the man's correct. Single player games are great. All of them don't need multiplayer.
I'm a sucker for split-screen multiplayer as opposed to online. In that area, TimeSplitters is still king.
@Magnalon: I agree, but I generally don't include co-op when I hear "multiplayer". To me, co-op is co-op whereas multiplayer is ego-seducing scores, ranks, perks, and the required swearing-like-a-sailor-behind-a-cloak-of-anonymity. There are a lot of games that have no need for a multiplayer mode but would be just as enjoyable with a co-op mode as they would a single-player mode.
Gabe Newell, I hope you're reading this.
Also, to people hoping for Skyrim co-op, I remain unconvinced that a human player would be less likely to wander in front of a lethal sword strike/poisoned arrow/fireball than an AI ally.
Also, to people hoping for Skyrim co-op, I remain unconvinced that a human player would be less likely to wander in front of a lethal sword strike/poisoned arrow/fireball than an AI ally.
Gabe Newell, I hope you're reading this.
Also, to people hoping for Skyrim co-op, I remain unconvinced that a human player would be less likely to wander in front of a lethal sword strike/poisoned arrow/fireball than an AI ally.
Also, to people hoping for Skyrim co-op, I remain unconvinced that a human player would be less likely to wander in front of a lethal sword strike/poisoned arrow/fireball than an AI ally.
I dont think co-op would work all that well here with the game being build up for single player and all I've seen a lot of games that tried co-op but failed because the game wasnt made to be played like that with only one player getting progress
I dont think co-op would work all that well here with the game being build up for single player and all I've seen a lot of games that tried co-op but failed because the game wasnt made to be played like that with only one player getting progress
I'm with John B on the sentiment that co-op is not MP technically. When I think Mp I think something that's 16-60 players, not just four friends.
Glad to see more devs saying this though. We need less MP games and more games like Enslaved that are focused on story. Enslaved still my current favorite console title of this gen lol. Catherine might change that though, looks so fucking good :D.
Glad to see more devs saying this though. We need less MP games and more games like Enslaved that are focused on story. Enslaved still my current favorite console title of this gen lol. Catherine might change that though, looks so fucking good :D.
Thank god someone in the industry actually feels this way. Maybe he can clue in the rest of these fuckers.
Also: Giants herding mammoths!? It'll be like playing a scene right out of 'Song of Ice and Fire' and that's badass!
Also: Giants herding mammoths!? It'll be like playing a scene right out of 'Song of Ice and Fire' and that's badass!
Agreed to hell and back!
Buuuuuuuuuuuut, it would be nice if Bethesda took all that time and resources they don’t waste on multiplayer and put it into making sure the game is free from gamebreaking bugs and glitches. I can’t help but fear that every time a dragon shows up in Skyrim it’ll slow to a crawl or freeze.
Buuuuuuuuuuuut, it would be nice if Bethesda took all that time and resources they don’t waste on multiplayer and put it into making sure the game is free from gamebreaking bugs and glitches. I can’t help but fear that every time a dragon shows up in Skyrim it’ll slow to a crawl or freeze.
Is this not just repetition of what everybody has been saying for ages? This is a long line of statements developers basically repeat for gamer popularity points. It's similar to certain developers saying "There are too many first-person shooters.".
It's been said before many a time but the minute it escapes the lips of a developer, we see over-enthusiastic responses of "These guys GET it!".
It's been said before many a time but the minute it escapes the lips of a developer, we see over-enthusiastic responses of "These guys GET it!".
@Wee SK: IDK about you, but I don't see to many devs saying MP is not necessary and there are to many FPS are on the market. Just because one or two devs say something doesn't count for the who knows how many other devs out there.
"Who needs multiplayer when GIANTS are herding MAMMOTHS!" Truer words were never spoken.
Also, Pete Hines could school the entire marketing industry.
Also, Pete Hines could school the entire marketing industry.
Skyrim obviously, I would be curious on the other however since Prey 1 *did* have multiplayer. Of course if the sequel is as different as it's looking then it makes sense.
@Wee SK-You also get responses of "Multiplayer should be limited to mud-crabs and mud-crab accessories and mud-crab derivative products(like pre-packaged crab-cakes and crab-forks)".
Yes, I reserve the right to misquote myself.
No matter how many times anyone has spoken the post-colon part of the headline, it seems that Lionhead never got the memo.
Yes, I reserve the right to misquote myself.
No matter how many times anyone has spoken the post-colon part of the headline, it seems that Lionhead never got the memo.
I dunno Multiplayer Co-Op is one thing that a decent number of games could benefit from. However I agree that a majority of games don't need multiplayer and in fact multiplayer even detracts from them.
Essentially taking the time out of development on a good story driven game to slap in 4v4 or 8v8 deathmatch for the soul purpose of saying your game has multiplayer ...... diminishes the game. *cough*bioshock 2*cough* Of course the Oppressive DRM didn't help it either >.>
Essentially taking the time out of development on a good story driven game to slap in 4v4 or 8v8 deathmatch for the soul purpose of saying your game has multiplayer ...... diminishes the game. *cough*bioshock 2*cough* Of course the Oppressive DRM didn't help it either >.>
Now if Bioware could just get these simple concepts through their sellout skulls...
Give us real RPGs, in all their stat-heavy, multiplayer-less glory!
Give us real RPGs, in all their stat-heavy, multiplayer-less glory!
Coop would be badass though =/
I would love to see coop in NV, which is currently what I'm mostly playing ATM
I would love to see coop in NV, which is currently what I'm mostly playing ATM
I'm guessing the answer to most forced multiplayer options was to make it so people wouldn't sell the game back after finishing it.
Indeed. I have played DS2's multiplayer, and it's not terrible, but it's really just unnecessary.
Brotherhood got it right though...
Brotherhood got it right though...
I agree with this completely. Very few exclusively single player games offer good multiplayer. Uncharted 2 got the multiplayer perfect along with AC Brotherhood. Bioshock 2's was just...bluh...and Dungeon Siege III's was mediocre. Dead Space 2's multiplayer is a good scare with friends but otherwise useless.
THANK YOU someone speaks the truth. Why waste time with either multiplayer or singleplayer if its going to be garbage. Reading the Fear 3 reviews it sounds like they should've just scrapped the single player and expanded the multiplayer.
follow
