[Merged] Co-Op Multiplayer as some potential future stretchgoal?

[quechn1tlan]

Because it just would be waste of resources for a feature which would be pretty much pointless for game like PE.

If you ever played BG or NWN in MP you'll never say that this is "waste of resources".

 

But it is. Granted with fan-modules NWN was made into a MMO-like game. But IE games? Multiplayer there sucked. Sucked so hard that if I try to describe how much it sucked it would all be censored. It was a gimmicky function in a game where it should never have existed. How awfully fun it is to spend hours reading in a room with friends. Lets grab some beers, chips and go read. Yeah! Great. These sort of games are meant to be experienced alone and only alone.

 

And by the way: even though OP went the "politician" way and bundled together folks who want MP and those who don't really care, he still got outnumbered. So, yeah. No multiplayer in this game. Not now, and hopefully not ever.

Edited October 29, 2012 by quechn1tlan

[kabaliero]

say no to lonesome pixel worlds pls

 

bgs, iwds = success

gothics, morrowinds = fail

 

ed: ok, ^IMHO ^

Edited October 29, 2012 by kabaliero

[evdk]

gothics = fail

Looks like it's time for Operation Barbarossa Part 2

Jetzt ist es persönlich.

[kabaliero]

hey, no offense, i just wanna ppl 2 git 2gether on this

[quechn1tlan]

hey, no offense, i just wanna ppl 2 git 2gether on this

 

Yup, and after multiplayer you would want achivements, then facebook\twitter\google+ integration to share your achivements, and it's a slippery slope from there. Next thing you know we have another Project Age 3: Mass Eternity on our hands.

 

So be carefull with what you wish for.

Edited October 29, 2012 by quechn1tlan

[nikolokolus]

Co-op in a game all comes down to how action driven it is. If PE ends up text heavy then co-op just doesn't make much sense.

[Ieo]

And why people keep wanting it? Devs already said no, and no means no.

 

Those players who come in and keep asking and/or keep dismissing dev reasons for not having MP (or console or full VO or 3D rotating camera)---they failed their INT checks. So many reasons not to do it that "don't like it" doesn't even need to be on the list, all of them published in interviews/dev posts/Q&A, yet these people say "it can't be hard to add even though I have zero experience in game programming, finance, and business management."

 

Lonesome? Then play an MMO.

[Brannart]

So many people are against multiplayer. It seems like no one remember this day that most of AD&D games have it: Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale, Neverwinter Nights etc. Best of the best RPG's.

 

From what I hear you would get a co-op multiplayer game going on in BG/IWD and everybody would run around trying to kill everybody in Candle Keep and Easthaven. Meh. I remember hearing of one gaming group that went all the way through BG but it took them so long they finished just a few mothns before BG2 came out which is incredible. That is a pretty big time commitment to be a feature useful to many players.

[kabaliero]

And why people keep wanting it? Devs already said no, and no means no.

 

Those players who come in and keep asking and/or keep dismissing dev reasons for not having MP (or console or full VO or 3D rotating camera)---they failed their INT checks. So many reasons not to do it that "don't like it" doesn't even need to be on the list, all of them published in interviews/dev posts/Q&A, yet these people say "it can't be hard to add even though I have zero experience in game programming, finance, and business management."

 

Lonesome? Then play an MMO.

i'd highly recommend not to compare things like BG\IWD co-op campaign and mmo

cause it's just amazingly narrow for an actual opinion

 

if some of the present ppl had bad experience with that (or none),

doesn't mean that the rest just need a mmo to kill everything in sight

 

howcome this opinion even has so many angry people behind it?

 

people, calm down for god sakes, geesh

 

it's not like we wanna steal your precious singleplayer DEPTH or anything

we like that, too y'know! that's why we wanna share our positive experiences with friends

 

hey, no offense, i just wanna ppl 2 git 2gether on this

 

Yup, and after multiplayer you would want achivements, then facebook\twitter\google+ integration to share your achivements, and it's a slippery slope from there. Next thing you know we have another Project Age 3: Mass Eternity on our hands.

 

So be carefull with what you wish for.

 

dude, that's just paraniod

chillax, srsly

 

i, for one, am a great fan of the original IE 2d stuff and sprites, and ****

the only feature i'd like from Steam is to be in touch with my playmates, that's all )

achievements are the dummest thing invented in gaming history, IMHO

Edited October 29, 2012 by kabaliero

[Amentep]

I think IWD probably made the most sense, but the BG games were horrible (IMO) multiplayer because of the heavy PC centric story. I tried playing it with a friend and it took us multiple sessions to get through the opening of the game.

 

Anyhow out of the scope of what they're looking for in this game.

[kabaliero]

I think IWD probably made the most sense, but the BG games were horrible (IMO) multiplayer because of the heavy PC centric story. I tried playing it with a friend and it took us multiple sessions to get through the opening of the game.

 

Anyhow out of the scope of what they're looking for in this game.

 

most of the time took generating characters and getting started

plus, some dialogues were forced onto all session members,

and u couldn't walk around freely while other dude was chattin' with npcs

that was really a holdback sometimes

 

and, well, not just that

other little pesky thingies which weren't even excluded from IWD

like general trading, gee

Edited October 29, 2012 by kabaliero

[Amentep]

Trading was a pain in any of the games from what little I MPed the IE games. It seemed to take a long, long time to do.

[Kalriva]

I'm posting this whilst Baldur's Gate is Alt+Tabbed in another window. That being said it should be fairly obvious I am heartily throwing my vote to multiplayer/co-op. I confess that I'm not a game dev nor had any experience in the matters but I enjoy LANing BG 1, 2, their expansions and now BGEE rediculous amounts and I can't fathom how difficult it could be to allow us to control three players each, dungeon crawl to our hearts content and kill some creeps!

[Ieo]

I'm posting this whilst Baldur's Gate is Alt+Tabbed in another window. That being said it should be fairly obvious I am heartily throwing my vote to multiplayer/co-op. I confess that I'm not a game dev nor had any experience in the matters but I enjoy LANing BG 1, 2, their expansions and now BGEE rediculous amounts and I can't fathom how difficult it could be to allow us to control three players each, dungeon crawl to our hearts content and kill some creeps!

Since you can't fathom, read the interviews and posts in my sig.

 

No.

[FlintlockJazz]

With 40% of responders wanting multiplayer it's a must at this point. The next stretch goal, mac porting, caters to ~10%, and a later one, linux ~5% of potential customers. For those complaining about development time, why complain about multiplayer when porting will take up more development time anyway? Go rage against that.

 

Look if this is done anything like the IE games, multiplayer will be awesome and seamless from the singleplayer.

Bull****. The poll has been rigged by having both 'yes' and 'possibly' lumped together into one. How many of those 'yes' votes were actually 'I don't care for multiplayer but not against it'? 40% do not want multiplayer, they just don't give a toss, and yet even with the blatant rigging of the polls the 'yes' campain is still losing...

[Kalriva]

 

I'm posting this whilst Baldur's Gate is Alt+Tabbed in another window. That being said it should be fairly obvious I am heartily throwing my vote to multiplayer/co-op. I confess that I'm not a game dev nor had any experience in the matters but I enjoy LANing BG 1, 2, their expansions and now BGEE rediculous amounts and I can't fathom how difficult it could be to allow us to control three players each, dungeon crawl to our hearts content and kill some creeps!

Since you can't fathom, read the interviews and posts in my sig.

 

No.

 

I'm just saying it would add a lot to the game, I know at least two people who are going to get it off pirate bay rather than buy it because of the lack of multiplayer.

Edited September 6, 2013 by Fionavar
Play Nice in the sandbox ...

[FlintlockJazz]

 

 

 

 

I'm posting this whilst Baldur's Gate is Alt+Tabbed in another window. That being said it should be fairly obvious I am heartily throwing my vote to multiplayer/co-op. I confess that I'm not a game dev nor had any experience in the matters but I enjoy LANing BG 1, 2, their expansions and now BGEE rediculous amounts and I can't fathom how difficult it could be to allow us to control three players each, dungeon crawl to our hearts content and kill some creeps!

Since you can't fathom, read the interviews and posts in my sig.

 

No.

I'm just saying it would add a lot to the game, I know at least two people who are going to get it off pirate bay rather than buy it because of the lack of multiplayer.

Then they are pathetic. There is no reason to cater to people who will look for any excuse to pirate a game, especially a kickstarter game. Just because a game does not have a specific feature does not mean they get to pirate it nor use the threat of piracy to get what they want over others. Tell them that I think they are dickless liars please.

[Kalriva]

 

 

 

I'm posting this whilst Baldur's Gate is Alt+Tabbed in another window. That being said it should be fairly obvious I am heartily throwing my vote to multiplayer/co-op. I confess that I'm not a game dev nor had any experience in the matters but I enjoy LANing BG 1, 2, their expansions and now BGEE rediculous amounts and I can't fathom how difficult it could be to allow us to control three players each, dungeon crawl to our hearts content and kill some creeps!

Since you can't fathom, read the interviews and posts in my sig.

 

No.

I'm just saying it would add a lot to the game, I know at least two people who are going to get it off pirate bay rather than buy it because of the lack of multiplayer.

Then they are pathetic. There is no reason to cater to people who will look for any excuse to pirate a game, especially a kickstarter game. Just because a game does not have a specific feature does not mean they get to pirate it nor use the threat of piracy to get what they want over others. Tell them that I think they are dickless liars please.

 

Wait a sec, I get told to play nice in the sandbox and this so and so comes back with this vitriol and mods dont bat an eyelid?

 

Well Sir you are entitled to your opinion, I don't see why you call them liars, it's out of context, but thats just me.

In reply to your other point, it's not a threat, if a game doesnt have the features you want then you dont have to buy it. If you download it and delete it rather than purchasing it you've created interest where there was none before but not enough for someone to part with their dollars/euro/yen/rupees.

[Osvir]

 

 

 

 

I'm posting this whilst Baldur's Gate is Alt+Tabbed in another window. That being said it should be fairly obvious I am heartily throwing my vote to multiplayer/co-op. I confess that I'm not a game dev nor had any experience in the matters but I enjoy LANing BG 1, 2, their expansions and now BGEE rediculous amounts and I can't fathom how difficult it could be to allow us to control three players each, dungeon crawl to our hearts content and kill some creeps!

Since you can't fathom, read the interviews and posts in my sig.

 

No.

I'm just saying it would add a lot to the game, I know at least two people who are going to get it off pirate bay rather than buy it because of the lack of multiplayer.

Then they are pathetic. There is no reason to cater to people who will look for any excuse to pirate a game, especially a kickstarter game. Just because a game does not have a specific feature does not mean they get to pirate it nor use the threat of piracy to get what they want over others. Tell them that I think they are dickless liars please.

 

Wait a sec, I get told to play nice in the sandbox and this so and so comes back with this vitriol and mods dont bat an eyelid?

 

Well Sir you are entitled to your opinion, I don't see why you call them liars, it's out of context, but thats just me.

In reply to your other point, it's not a threat, if a game doesnt have the features you want then you dont have to buy it. If you download it and delete it rather than purchasing it you've created interest where there was none before but not enough for someone to part with their dollars/euro/yen/rupees.

If the game doesn't have the features you want then why do you want the game? Sorry mate, it sounds very controversial. "I don't like the texture of this candy, but I'll steal it anyways because I don't want to spend money on it".

 

I agree with Flintlock here, it's just an excuse, some sort of... what's it called...

 

@everyone: Help me out.. that thing when you try to tell yourself that you are doing something right but you really aren't? Addicts to it a lot. Is it just "excuses"?

 

But whatever really, it's everyone's choice and you can't direct anyone else's life. I used to pirate games a lot when I was younger because I didn't have the money and it was so simple and so accessible. But today we have Steam, GoG and other services that provide the same accessibility, and it is usually cheaper than buying in a real store to get a physical copy.

 

One thing I can say 100% for sure, 8 out of 10 games I've bought I've played to completion. 2-3 out of 10 games I've pirated I've played to completion. So, in my own experience, pirating a game doesn't really give more "interest" or "attention". Not genuinely. I stayed away from forums when I was a pirate, didn't discuss the games to the same extent because it felt morally wrong. But hey, that's just me. If I were to work for something I felt passionate about for months and people would just steal my work and I'd get less paid for it I'd be happy that people hopefully enjoyed the product, but I'd be kind of sad too. 

 

Metaphor: It's much more satisfying to grab an after-work beer rather than smooch of your friends when you are unemployed.

 

P.S. Your post might not be a threat, "I won't buy this game because it doesn't have Multiplayer. But I'll download it!", is so full of BS. It's like you are crying for a reaction mate, you don't say "IF" but it fits really nicely in there in-between the lines. Because you would buy the game IF it had Multiplayer? Correct? Right. So:

 

"IF you put Multiplayer into the game, I will buy it. IF not, then I'll pirate it" is exactly what your sentiment is saying. Don't pretend anything else, and that is also exactly what a "threat" looks like.

[kgambit]

 

Well Sir you are entitled to your opinion, I don't see why you call them liars, it's out of context, but that's just me.

In reply to your other point, it's not a threat, if a game doesn't have the features you want then you don't have to buy just do not play it. If you download it and delete it rather than purchasing it you've created interest where there was none before but not enough for someone to part with their dollars/euro/yen/rupees committed theft.

 

FIFY

 

Liars?  No, thieves is a more accurate term.

 

@Osvir, the term you are looking for is rationalize:

 

rationalize, verb:

 

 to think about or describe something (such as bad behavior) in a way that explains it and makes it seem proper, more attractive, etc.

 

 to create an excuse or more attractive explanation for

[Osvir]

Thanks kgambit

[UpgrayeDD]

I'm confused. I was under the impression that the necromancer was not going to be in this game. Yet some people seem to be trying to raise the dead. Also Osvir is right.

[Juneau]

Seen this thread a few times now and it was something I commented on very early in the whole kickstarter process.

It's the one thing I* feel the game is lacking although I understand why it is not in the game. I still wish it were and I would hope, at some point it happens.

Both me and the wife really like the sound of this game, ALOT, the problem is we can't share our experience outside of our single player choices... No arguing over weather to do it this way or that. This is my opinion.


*my opinion, it is not open for debate

[FlintlockJazz]

 

 

 

 

 

I'm posting this whilst Baldur's Gate is Alt+Tabbed in another window. That being said it should be fairly obvious I am heartily throwing my vote to multiplayer/co-op. I confess that I'm not a game dev nor had any experience in the matters but I enjoy LANing BG 1, 2, their expansions and now BGEE rediculous amounts and I can't fathom how difficult it could be to allow us to control three players each, dungeon crawl to our hearts content and kill some creeps!

Since you can't fathom, read the interviews and posts in my sig.

 

No.

I'm just saying it would add a lot to the game, I know at least two people who are going to get it off pirate bay rather than buy it because of the lack of multiplayer.

Then they are pathetic. There is no reason to cater to people who will look for any excuse to pirate a game, especially a kickstarter game. Just because a game does not have a specific feature does not mean they get to pirate it nor use the threat of piracy to get what they want over others. Tell them that I think they are dickless liars please.

Wait a sec, I get told to play nice in the sandbox and this so and so comes back with this vitriol and mods dont bat an eyelid?

 

Well Sir you are entitled to your opinion, I don't see why you call them liars, it's out of context, but thats just me.

In reply to your other point, it's not a threat, if a game doesnt have the features you want then you dont have to buy it. If you download it and delete it rather than purchasing it you've created interest where there was none before but not enough for someone to part with their dollars/euro/yen/rupees.

If a game is worth playing then it has the features you want. The lack of multiplayer is just an excuse, a lie used to try to justify their actions, hence they are liars. You don't get to choose whether you pay for a game dependent on the features it has... Osvir and others have explained better I'm on a phone so awkward to write more indepth. Edited September 17, 2013 by FlintlockJazz

[Kalriva]

Justifications and english lessons aside, I believe my point can be best wrapped up by this, Baldurs Gate 2 is always mentioned as one of the greatest RPG computer games of the past 20 years. Dragon Age and all its derivitives were heralded as the spiritual succesors to this genre and are a largely forgotten footnote (personally I thought they were terrible but there are those out there who enjoyed them).
Now in the context of this thread, what was the significant difference between these games?