Jump to content
  • Advertisement

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

OrangyTang

The neglected gamers..

This topic is 5849 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

Looking at most modern games now, it seems that theres a neglected area - that of decent co-op game modes. Back in the 16bit era there was plenty, as both players often played though a game and worked together as a team. But since then it seems that multiplayer gaming is purely vs. modes, be it standard head to head or team vs team. Is it just that co-op is less popular, or are the companies too focused on single player mode and deathmatch modes? Sure decent co-op takes more effort, but when done well (say, Time Crisis 2) the scripting and level design can be much more rewarding and interesting. Anyone else feel the same, or is decent co-op becomming a dying breed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advertisement
I recently read an article, cant'' remember if it was PC Gamer or Computer Gaming World, but it was about this very topic. Someone wrote in to the magazine saying that when it says MultiPlayer it means MultiOpponent because the only option you have is do you fight everyone or just half the people in the game?

There are a few games out with multiplayer campaigns that are a lot of fun, Rogue Spear comes to mind. I know it''s old but a friend and I beat every map together in a few hours. That was a lot of fun.

I think one problem with coop campaigning is the length of games. How long does it take to go through a single level of Ghost Recon? Now multiply that by all the missions, I think there''s 13 (been awhile since I played it) so it''ll take a long time to beat it all the way through. Of course it would be nice to have the option of doing individual missions together.

Just my 2cents.....

Anaton
Flying Tigers CFSG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IIRC, Half-Life on console (either DC or PS2, don''t remember which) was going to have a co-op mission called ''Decay.'' It was somehow related to Blueshift, though, so I don''t know what happened about it.

I completely agree about the need for more co-op stuff in general, though. The only problem is that it''s quite a bit more difficult to make levels for - the whole ''player can''t reach high ledge'' thing gets kinda solved by ''here, stand on my shoulders.'' As usual, two heads are better than one; so you''d have to think extra-devious to come up with good puzzles for them.

Superpig
- saving pigs from untimely fates
- sleeps in a ham-mock at www.thebinaryrefinery.cjb.net

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The funny thing about cooperative play back in the days of Doom and Doom 2, is that everyone played it, but no-one would admit it. All the magazines mentioned that cooperative was ''for girls'' and so on, but everyone you spoke to in private played coop at least as much as deathmatch

Today, it''s likely that team-based games with a degree of cooperation are the most popular form of multiplayer play.

[ MSVC Fixes | STL | SDL | Game AI | Sockets | C++ Faq Lite | Boost | Asking Questions ]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I actually made a couple co-op duke nukem maps which i thought ROCKED! me and two of mates playing as a recon group basically being dropped into ugly situations and having to get out of them working as a team, some of the problems involved having to have somebody distract a great big evil looking thing guarding an entrance, flicking a switch so somebody could just jump in and start room clearing, and one part involved the team splitting up to go and reactivate two generators to power up this rail system(sounds so much like ''On A Rail'' - HL real team work is such a huge buzz.. ah.. the days when CounterStrike wasn''t full of cheating n00bs.. but real teamwork only seems to appear within clans, else its just two groups of people against each other cs_militia.. to storm the place as an all SAS strike team and kill all the T''s with near military precision and lots of "GO GO GO" radio messages

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by OrangyTang
Is it just that co-op is less popular, or are the companies too focused on single player mode and deathmatch modes?



I actually haven''t heard a decent excuse from companies yet as to why they can''t do co-op. I was amazed that, before going out of business, Looking Glass seemed to just *drop* multiplayer right into System Shock 2. The common excuse I hear is that the single player game would be too easy, puzzles would be subverted, players might get trapped... etc. I don''t buy it, though. You can always crank up the difficulty level on enemies, and the other two problems are a matter of level design.

I think they can do it, but, honestly, I think young male testosterone and bravado typically get in the way of their vision.

quote:
Original post by Kylotan
All the magazines mentioned that cooperative was ''for girls'' and so on...


FEH!!!!

quote:

...but everyone you spoke to in private played coop at least as much as deathmatch



My best memories were of 4 player co-op on my company''s LAN: Leading the pack in somebody''s custom WAD and being blasted backwards while my buddies shouted, "Holy crap Wavy! Was that your carcass I saw flying??!?! Guess there''s an Arch-vile up there!"


--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by Wavinator
I actually haven''t heard a decent excuse from companies yet as to why they can''t do co-op. I was amazed that, before going out of business, Looking Glass seemed to just *drop* multiplayer right into System Shock 2. The common excuse I hear is that the single player game would be too easy, puzzles would be subverted, players might get trapped... etc. I don''t buy it, though. You can always crank up the difficulty level on enemies, and the other two problems are a matter of level design.

Well, I agree, but only to a point. I think it was a wise and courageous move on their part to reject any kind of multiplayer aspect. It''s obvious the marketing people would have preferred it, but they chose to drop that part of the game to concentrate on a higher quality single player game. I''m sure they were capable of adding cooperative play before release, but unfortunately time and budgets are limited. Therefore in my opinion they made a good decision to focus their resources on making the main gameplay method as good as they could. There were obvious pressures to get products on the shelves.

Of course, it did get patched in the end.

[ MSVC Fixes | STL | SDL | Game AI | Sockets | C++ Faq Lite | Boost | Asking Questions | Organising code files ]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In the Deus Ex mod community, the main problem we''ve heard postulated is that co-op isn''t a feature with good return on investment. Audiences enjoy it, but for the time and resources it takes to do decent co-op play you might as well just concentrate on good single player action.

Having said that, modders *have* done coop for a bunch of different games: Svencoop for Half-Life, Rune coop for Rune, The Coop Project for Deus Ex, X Coop for AvP2, and so on. Unfortunately, IME coding for a coop mod consists primarily of hacking around the base code, and in the case of Deus Ex at least this is not very pretty. Nevertheless, the presence of this type of dedicated resource to test the waters may pose a stumbling block to professional efforts to do the work.

ld

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ever try coop in serious sam ???
Loads of fun, but a bit stale after awhile.

but i for one love to play coop modes. I would love to play a coop like medal of honour with all human players.. that would be cool..



Its my duty, to please that booty ! - John Shaft

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cooperation eh... I say once they get a game that is realistic (where jumping on players shoulders is a common task, but not dreadful) and other realistic stuff can be done (destroying anything...you know) then I say make everything cooperative and don''t worry if someone gets stuck... sure it might be bad while -you- are playing the game, but it could happen in real-life so I see no reason why it shouldn''t happen there (besides the whole fact of games, and their supposed fun factor, I myself see fun in realism). After having said that, I must say... First person shooters haven''t taken a large step in a long time... not since doom... I mean... run around, shoot anyone with a weapon, pick up stuff lying around...sure some have fancy stuff, or mission objectives, but its still the same game. I am disappointed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Advertisement
×

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

We are the game development community.

Whether you are an indie, hobbyist, AAA developer, or just trying to learn, GameDev.net is the place for you to learn, share, and connect with the games industry. Learn more About Us or sign up!

Sign me up!