You'll need a super server equivelant to MMO kind to host such number of players and AI huh.

The lack of response from any Obsidian bigwigs leads me to suspect there is no mp support planned. Aw well, maybe with all the extra development time they can implement something equally awesome, like gigantic mutant snakes!

The game is still a very hush-hush project.

 

I doubt they'd answer even if you asked "Is there gonna be cargo containers?"

The last time I played a fun RPG (or action RPG) co-op game was never ago. If they wanted to make a compelling co-op game, they'd have to excise the RPG entirely out of it and make it a Diablo clone, unless you like sitting through somebody else choosing dialogue options.

Yes, because everytime a player in World of Warcraft wants to go on a quest, the entire world stops and waits for him to read through the quest text and click "Accept"..

 

Just make the players more independent of one another than they were in Neverwinter Nights 2 (where it felt like we were connected to the hip like Siamese twins). IF we want to play together, then let us. If we want to embark on our own little adventures, let us. Except perhaps the main quest.. would be weird if that wasn't the same for both players. Oh, and make sure the world is consistent. If I go off to kill some evil ghost haunting a house, make sure that ghost isn't there when my co-op friend visits the house later. If he doesn't want to go with me on my side-quests, than he better suffer the consequences, dammit!

Now that Alpha Protocol seems to be singleplayer, how about playing around with diversity a bit? Here's a thought: adding co-op to this game! What a marvelous idea. I'm glad I thought of it.

 

No, no, don't thank me. Thank yourself. For thinking about it too.

 

Your CEO.

Great idea, old chap!

wut

Edited March 18, 200817 yr by Nick_i_am

Gee, thanks, Mr CEO!

No, no, don't thank me. Thank yourself. For thinking about it too.

wut

Would you look at that? This "thread merge" thing actually worked

I've been thinking about this. i think co-op would indeed be more scary because you will care more about the other players than just yourself.

 

EDIT: co-op also raises the possibility of enhanced shenanigans. Imagine one of you is trapped in a survival last ditch stand, while teh other one has to get to the other end of the complex to activate the computer which will open the pod bay doors, so the other one can get out of their dead end bolt-hole.

I can't imagine them doing it without having the same problem the IE games had with multiplayer - you have one important PC and one faceless tagalong PC. The only way to rectify this would be an Army of Two-style game in which your character is never alone and your companion never dies, which is a surefire way to defuse the sort of tension that an Aliens title should have. This is the problem that Gearbox is having. Why even bother making the game co-op if the second player has to cycle through expendable characters?

 

No, the way that an Aliens game should optimally work is that the PC is in the Ripley role, the only character who you can be sure will survive. Adding more can't-die players only makes the game less RPG-y and more Gears of War-y, with incredibly tough PC1 rushing to the side of incredibly tough PC2 and administering a contrived method for saving people from facehugger attacks or overwhelming acid blood damage, lest a reload be in order, and nothing's less endemic to a fun co-op game than the constant reloading that comes along with having a weak character against overwhelming odds, as an Alien game would entail.

Edited March 22, 200817 yr by Pop

I can't imagine them doing it without having the same problem the IE games had with multiplayer - you have one important PC and one faceless tagalong PC. The only way to rectify this would be an Army of Two-style game in which your character is never alone and your companion never dies, which is a surefire way to defuse the sort of tension that an Aliens title should have. This is the problem that Gearbox is having. Why even bother making the game co-op if the second player has to cycle through expendable characters?

In Icewind Dale, it was your team that was important, not the individual. Same thing goes for Jagged Alliance 2. Your protagonist wasn't really required beyond the initial recruiting of a starting team. Unfortunately, the latter never came with a coop mode.

But man, Aliens is a horror franchise. Part of what made the fourth movie sort of a letdown in comparison to the other movies as opposed to just a loopy trifle is that it only played at the conventions that Aliens had adhered to up to that point.

 

MOVIE SPOILERZ

---

---

---

The Alien franchise up to that point adhered to the most basic of horror conventions - no one's safe, basically. All characters are expendable, except for the character at the heart of the story - Ripley. What was clever about the Aliens franchise, at least for the time, was that the person you think is going to be the greatest asset against the Aliens - Capt. Dallas in 1, Sarge in 2, the Doctor in 3, and to a much lesser extent, the pirate captain in 4 - die, in all but the first case they're the first to go. The first time you see Alien you don't suspect Ripley to be the one to survive, because A. she's a bit of an ****, and **** get it in horror movies and B. she's a rather minor character.

 

In every Aliens movie except the last one Ripley is the only person who survives (I know a lot of people think Newt and Hicks biting it in 3 was a stupid cop-out, but it doesn't really matter, 3 was an attempt to recapture the spirit of 1) Resurrection felt wrong because, what, 4 characters survived? And Ripley was a super-badass half-Alien clone. Man, what the **** was up with that movie?

 

In a nutshell, if we naturally assume that an RPG based on a franchise were to retain the basic thematic elements of that franchise, then we have a serious problem implementing tried-and-true RPG party mechanics to this game. That's leaving aside any question of permadeath or any other problems endemic to a realism-leaning RPG.

 

Perhaps it's just that I'm hostile to the idea of an IWD-style approach or even a JA-style to an Aliens game. Every Alien movie has the same basic outline - group of people trapped in a situation with xenomorphs, limited resources, desperate scramble to find a way out. When a character dies there's nobody to take his place (if there was, where would the tension be?) It's preposterous to imagine going through an Aliens game and having your character die, and creating a new character who magically pops up to fill in the gap. Where did that character come from? Do we really want to think of characters as that expendable? No, Aliens shouldn't be party-based. It should be individual-based. I want to feel like I'm hitting a huge setback whenever somebody dies, and I want to feel the heat when somebody's in danger.

 

Again, I firmly believe that the only way to do Aliens justice is to focus on one character, the PC, on whose shoulders the game will ultimately rest. If we want to stick to the spirit of the original (well, the original 3) movies we can't have the kind of comfort that comes with knowing that there's always going to be someone who's got your back and who's never going to let you down. Let alone 3 or 4 people. There has to be a point where it's all down to one person.

Edited March 23, 200817 yr by Pop

In that case, I suppose coop is out of the question for the main game

 

I agree for the most part with what you are saying, although I wouldn't be disappointed either if it wasn't survival horror, but squad based missions.

That's a possibility, but I'd be pretty surprised if Obsidz went that direction. They didn't exactly come from a strategic tradition.

Perhaps it's just that I'm hostile to the idea of an IWD-style approach or even a JA-style to an Aliens game. Every Alien movie has the same basic outline - group of people trapped in a situation with xenomorphs, limited resources, desperate scramble to find a way out. When a character dies there's nobody to take his place (if there was, where would the tension be?) It's preposterous to imagine going through an Aliens game and having your character die, and creating a new character who magically pops up to fill in the gap. Where did that character come from? Do we really want to think of characters as that expendable? No, Aliens shouldn't be party-based. It should be individual-based. I want to feel like I'm hitting a huge setback whenever somebody dies, and I want to feel the heat when somebody's in danger.

 

Well they could do something like multiple players starting in different places thus having to find one another. This would then lead to a new character starting in some place and having to find the remaining party, thus allowing the idea that the new character has managed to survive alone until they "randomly" meet up with the party.

 

Might also allow the player to explore independently if they chose to by not forcing them into a party that follows a leader.

 

Dunno if that sort of thing is even possible though.

 

Again, I firmly believe that the only way to do Aliens justice is to focus on one character, the PC, on whose shoulders the game will ultimately rest. If we want to stick to the spirit of the original (well, the original 3) movies we can't have the kind of comfort that comes with knowing that there's always going to be someone who's got your back and who's never going to let you down. Let alone 3 or 4 people. There has to be a point where it's all down to one person.

 

Of course you now have created the annoying situation for the player if they do everything they can to protect the NPCs only to have them die horribly in an uncontrollable scripted sequence. Personally, while I understand why that might be worth doing with a single character, I know I'd be rather ticked off if I managed to keep a group alive, against odds, using up resources to keep them going, and then they just die...whooo, that'd probably be it for me and the game.

 

Maybe there won't be an option for parties (although the idea of not having NPCs to travel with would bug me a bit)? Just the single player PC in a ship vs the xenomorphs?

It's Aliens. If you're going through the game expecting to win everything and save everyone, you're doing it wrong.

It's Aliens. If you're going through the game expecting to win everything and save everyone, you're doing it wrong.

 

Its an Aliens Game; therefore the game should theoretically act like a game. And games should be "winnable" within the limitations and establishment of the game parameters, IMO. This may include saving NPC characters if they exist in the game.

Edited March 23, 200817 yr by Amentep

I agree with Pop's sentiments. You should certainly not be able to save anyone

I'm not against character deaths; I am against scripted auto-deaths for all party members if the game supports parties (I personally doubt it will, as I think a single player RPG with a single character and not a party makes the most sense for an Aliens setting).

 

But, again, if they do go with a party system, I think that whoever is in your party should be "savable" and not autokilled at story points.

Effectively, though, if the players know he/she is saveable, they will mostly just reload until they do it.

And if they don't know they aren't savable won't they waste their time reloading thinking they can save them?

 

And frankly I tend to dislike stories in which you can kick the villains rear game-wise and STILL have them kill people despite you whaling on it. It tends toward taking me out of the game and feeling a certain degree of futility in playing it.

I'm not against character deaths; I am against scripted auto-deaths for all party members if the game supports parties (I personally doubt it will, as I think a single player RPG with a single character and not a party makes the most sense for an Aliens setting).

 

Nope, it will be:

 

- 3rd Person, GAME ENGINE, R&D / New Technology, RPG, Sci-Fi, Squad Based

 

source