Imagine that you have a huge outdoor environment in a cooperative game for two to eight people. What mechanics might you use to keep players together? Mutual defense is an obvious one (separation = suicide); but what if the environment isn't drenched in enemies? What about forcing the team to be somehow dependent on the party leader (game host) for some vital resource, such as energy/mana/fuel/health/etc.? (You'd have to assume that there's some good game world explanation for this) If the players were vehicles, for instance, and being near the leader provided power, the party would need to stay near him and possibly even protect him. But on the other hand, this could get annoying. You couldn't be tethered too tightly. And what do you do if you don't want to go where the leader's going?

Quote:What mechanics might you use to keep players together?
Mutual defense is an obvious one (separation = suicide); but what if the environment isn't drenched in enemies?

Survival, perks/bonuses, and accomplishing a goal that is otherwise impossible to reach going solo.

I would consider survival (from enemies) one of the weakest ways to keep players together. To truly destroy player independence, you would need a situation such as player 1 has the gun and player 2 has the bullets. With far less restrictive rules, players will eventually find a way to solo.

Perks and bonuses have worked well for many mmorpg's. Clerics/Priests/Paladins/Shamans provide healing/buffing/aura support, warriors can tank/damage, and mages/wizards provide damage support. Another system is the elemental damage system. If I do lightning damage and you do water damage, then together we can defeat anything that is not immune to both lighting and water. I could go on with more examples but I think most multiplayer games fall into this category for cooperation.

Accomplishing goals in a group that are not achievable solely can be done in several ways. One way I see it is that the group is more powerful than a single player and can defeat the more difficult enemy (ex WoW 40 man raids). Another more simple route is where player 1 pushes and holds a trap door open via floor or wall switch while player 2 is able to continue through the trap door. I see this method of keeping players together more controversial because of the players who do not wish to be forced to play cooperatively in order to fully experience the game.

Quote:What about forcing the team to be somehow dependent on the party leader (game host) for some vital resource, such as energy/mana/fuel/health/etc.?

I think this question requires a deeper explanation of what a party leader is. In MMORPG's there are usually specific classes which provide benefits to the group. Having a desirable resource to the group doesn't necessarily make you the party leader (unless of course you threaten to disband otherwise). Now if you take this concept to the other extreme, where the party leader is chosen and enforced by the game rules and they have all the vital resources, then you may end up with several one man parties. For this reason, I think the 'I scratch your back if you scratch mine' approach is more appealing and to just let the party leader emerge from the player who wishes to do so.

Quote:And what do you do if you don't want to go where the leader's going?

Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicals (as previously mentioned) is a good example. It has been awhile since I played it but I thought I remember the consequences being either taking damage or being forced to move.

There are lots of examples of old 2 player console platform games where both players were forced onto one screen and when the leading player advanced, the screen would move forward and force the lagging player to follow. Sometimes the lagging player would fall into a pit, the platform they were standing on would disappear (vertical scroll), or they would miss time an action (such as jumping a projectile); all of which ways felt like punishment for not following the other player. The results can end up in either the lagging player playing more closely to the leading player (cooperation) or a sadistic meta game of trying to kill the lagging player (uncooperative).

Quote:Original post by Wavinator
Imagine that you have a huge outdoor environment in a cooperative game for two to eight people. What mechanics might you use to keep players together?

Mutual defense is an obvious one (separation = suicide); but what if the environment isn't drenched in enemies?

What about forcing the team to be somehow dependent on the party leader (game host) for some vital resource, such as energy/mana/fuel/health/etc.? (You'd have to assume that there's some good game world explanation for this) If the players were vehicles, for instance, and being near the leader provided power, the party would need to stay near him and possibly even protect him.

But on the other hand, this could get annoying. You couldn't be tethered too tightly. And what do you do if you don't want to go where the leader's going?

Command control areas has been used in other game to prevent forces from spreading out too much. Im not sure how that could be adapted for the forces being made up of independantly thinking players (perhaps if you dont keep withing easy communications range you wont get map updates/positions of opponents/signals pf coordinated actions.

Many obstacles might require direct assistance or the players movements might be severely impeded.

With enemies about, an isolated player becomes an easier target (where that enemy(s) might not attempt anything when the player is supported)