CO-OP

[FreeMayk]

Any chance for co-op in future? 

I really would like to playing with friends new cRPG games.

Larian works good on that field. 

 

All best

[Regggler]

For your reference: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/92159-duel-multiplayer-pvp-poe-ii-deadfire

 

tldr: co-op is massively expensive to implement, almost 90% of people would rather see those resources spent on content.

Edited March 29, 2017 by Regggler

[FreeMayk]

For your reference: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/92159-duel-multiplayer-pvp-poe-ii-deadfire

 

tldr: co-op is massively expensive to implement, almost 90% of people would rather see those resources spent on content.

 

 

ooo

Tnx m8 for information, 

But anyway, i would like to see content but also and co-op.

I have no interest in pvp, just in pve.

But ok.

[gogocactus]

Seconded. I would absolutely love Coop in any new Obsidian CRPGs, including Pillars of Eternity.

[Amentep]

If it was there, I'd never use it. My biggest memory of BGII co-op is waiting for the other players to finish shopping.

 

The best co-op rpg games I've played are action rpgs that are loot drop games with minimal need to spend a lot of time in a store.

[FreeMayk]

If it was there, I'd never use it. My biggest memory of BGII co-op is waiting for the other players to finish shopping.

 

The best co-op rpg games I've played are action rpgs that are loot drop games with minimal need to spend a lot of time in a store.

 

M8, if u wait for someone, that is not that.

I have frp-rpg friends. Played many crpg games together. Start with BG`s, Neverwinter`s,  Orginal Sin...

We knows each other. There is no any useless waiting`s on game.

We like to know game lores, discover stories together...

Like i said, i am not for pvp`s, arenas or something like that. Just PVE, with one living companion its enough for me.

[Ninjamestari]

Any chance for co-op in future? 

I really would like to playing with friends new cRPG games.

Larian works good on that field. 

 

All best

 

While I do find the co-op option incredibly interesting, I have to agree that developing it isn't worth the opportunity cost. Now if they'd figure out a way to make co-op happen easily, like if they make some side project that requires multiplayer components and the project is similar enough that the co-op portion could simply be implemented  without much of a hassle, then hell yeah, but I wouldn't start developing that feature just for this game.

[White Andromeda]

Any chance for co-op in future? 

I really would like to playing with friends new cRPG games.

Larian works good on that field. 

 

All best

 

I don't think CO-OP is suitable for the game like this. You must understand that Divinity: Original Sin is not the game about quests and stories, which game tells, not about strong storyline or interesting characters, not about themes for reflection. It's about Non-standard and some crazy cool ideas which nobody done before(or done but not well). Very good turn-based combat system which uses their own unique rules, some strange but unusual solutions for quests, etc. I'm not fan of D: OS, i didn't finish it, but i undestand that Larian's cool ideas created for CO-OP and Obsidian didn't create their game for CO-OP. They need change too much to make PoE 2: Deadfire comfortable for playing CO-OP.

Edited March 29, 2017 by White Andromeda

[Amentep]

 

If it was there, I'd never use it. My biggest memory of BGII co-op is waiting for the other players to finish shopping.

 

The best co-op rpg games I've played are action rpgs that are loot drop games with minimal need to spend a lot of time in a store.

 

M8, if u wait for someone, that is not that.

I have frp-rpg friends. Played many crpg games together. Start with BG`s, Neverwinter`s,  Orginal Sin...

We knows each other. There is no any useless waiting`s on game.

We like to know game lores, discover stories together...

Like i said, i am not for pvp`s, arenas or something like that. Just PVE, with one living companion its enough for me.

 

 

I was playing with one other person.  We'd still stop and check every store in Athektla.  My memory is you couldn't do much while another player was in the store.

[Malaghost]

Definetly for coop. My best memories from BG2 are duoing the game modded to insane difficulties with my friend. Sad there is no  MP in PoE I/II.

[SonicMage117]

I am going to give an answer that I suspect many will disagree with or won't like but has very valid reasoning behind it so I'm going to say it anyway.

 

I think both PoE and Tyranny should remain single-player focused, the design seems tailored for a single-player experience. Of course they could force a fierce multiplayer option but it would just be a tack-on or even a dlc mode but who can name a game that has had a successful mp mode added through dlc? Nobody.

 

"But they could easily tailor it to allow for a good multiplayer expected" NO. They really can't.. everything would basically have to be redone and that would take alot of resources from the fund-raiser. More trouble than what it's worth actually.

 

I know alot of people really want multiplayer for Deadfire but multiplayer wasn't the initial vision and when something so drastic is added when it wasn't part of the initial vision, it ruins the game, it dilutes it. It will dilute it.

 

For a muliplayer experience, I'd recommend stuff like Divinity Original Sin 1 or 2 - rpg's that were developed with MP in mind. Wasteland 3 will be amazing for multiplayer.

 

I agree that BG2 had some great multiplayer moments but I don't think PoE would offer those kinds of moments because it's way too different. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe it could if they implemented it but I'd rather not. Better safe than sorry?

[basic_hitler]

I think the games should be built with a solo experience in mind, but I also think that building in a robust co-op OPTION would be cool.

 

So, Divinity: Original Sin handles co-op really well.

 

Command And Conquer Red Alert 3 handles co-op very poorly. all the campaigns assume a co-op setup and as such you're forced to deal with a dumb AI in its absence.

 

I know it's a different genre, but co-op would be a cool idea as an optional addition to the game, but not as something the game is built from the ground up to be focused around.

 

I want to be able to host a game on my save, and invite a friend to jump in and allow me to assign control 1-3 of my party members or something. I don't want a story to be written around the conciet of playing a game with someone else. That's where modern games fall apart to me. 

 

I like isometric RPGs a lot, and I like playing them alone, but I think the experience can work with a friend. I don't think it would work with a pubbie/stranger at all though. PoE is a style of game that requires good communication and cooperation if you were going to have a good time with co-op. If you just had a rando drop in and start playing above or below your skill level, or merely with a different playstyle, that would suck and it would be pointless.

 

I'm getting long-winded but the point I want to emphasize is how it would be cool as a little bonus feature. Something that works completely from a gameplay standpoint, but things like story and dialog remain unaffected by.

[Heijoushin]

I am going to give an answer that I suspect many will disagree with or won't like.

I think both PoE and Tyranny should remain single-player focused.

 

Actually, if you'd checked the other thread, you'd know that 70/80 players fully agree with you

[Bestanbul]

It's incredibly satisfying to get a few people together and just run through BG2 murdering every single NPC you encounter as you move from map to map. Not the main way I'd play the game but fun. But I can understand why we wouldn't be putting resources into it.

[alexis13]

For your reference: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/92159-duel-multiplayer-pvp-poe-ii-deadfire

 

tldr: co-op is massively expensive to implement, almost 90% of people would rather see those resources spent on content.

Somehow I feel that isn't the reason you hold in your heart, more like some kinda spite you don't have pals.

 

If they asked us for extra cash to pay for it we would.

[alexis13]

It's incredibly satisfying to get a few people together and just run through BG2 murdering every single NPC you encounter as you move from map to map. Not the main way I'd play the game but fun. But I can understand why we wouldn't be putting resources into it.

Holy **** you don't hide your bias well.

[Stephen Unsworth-Mitchell]

Sorry but for me I have to say I don't want MP.

 

Even friends can be jerks at times especially when they decide do things there way or for laughs go on murderous rampage. I don't like idea of spending money on MP at the cost of SP.  I have seen so many games where they opted to go for MP and everyone complained about SP campaign been short boring feeling like it was dulled down due to MP.

 

So sorry but tyranny and POE should remain single player.

 

Lot people said POE 2 feels short so imagine how short POE 3 with MP might feel as lot budget would be spent on MP.

 

I don't think it would make more money in backers by asking for backers to pay for MP.

 

Even if could get backers pay say $25 each for just MP as example and it made enough money you then got next issue team is set size and if part that team working on MP then there not working on SP. Therefore no matter what you do SP campaigns going lose out. Look at POE 2 on release still some bugs/issues. Imagine how many bugs and issues they have on release with POE 3 with MP.

[DarkJS]

Just to throw in my 2 cents, co-op for this game would be two purchases for me (one for me and one for my wife) but I think we're gonna get divinity instead.  I don't expect my voice to be the tipping point by any means, but if those of us who want it don't say anything...

[Manveru123]

 

For your reference: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/92159-duel-multiplayer-pvp-poe-ii-deadfire

 

tldr: co-op is massively expensive to implement, almost 90% of people would rather see those resources spent on content.

Somehow I feel that isn't the reason you hold in your heart, more like some kinda spite you don't have pals.

 

If they asked us for extra cash to pay for it we would.

 

Okay then go ahead. Contact Obsidian and offer them funding for developing and implementing co-op. I'm sure they won't mind doing it if you're paying them. What's the problem.

 

Alternatively, I heard World of Warcraft has some co-op features, and is also a fantasy RPG game. Might be worth checking out.

[Karkarov]

I am going to give an answer that I suspect many will disagree with or won't like but has very valid reasoning behind it so I'm going to say it anyway.

 

I think both PoE and Tyranny should remain single-player focused, the design seems tailored for a single-player experience. Of course they could force a fierce multiplayer option but it would just be a tack-on or even a dlc mode but who can name a game that has had a successful mp mode added through dlc? Nobody.

 

"But they could easily tailor it to allow for a good multiplayer expected" NO. They really can't.. everything would basically have to be redone and that would take alot of resources from the fund-raiser. More trouble than what it's worth actually.

 

I know alot of people really want multiplayer for Deadfire but multiplayer wasn't the initial vision and when something so drastic is added when it wasn't part of the initial vision, it ruins the game, it dilutes it. It will dilute it.

 

For a muliplayer experience, I'd recommend stuff like Divinity Original Sin 1 or 2 - rpg's that were developed with MP in mind. Wasteland 3 will be amazing for multiplayer.

 

I agree that BG2 had some great multiplayer moments but I don't think PoE would offer those kinds of moments because it's way too different. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe it could if they implemented it but I'd rather not. Better safe than sorry?

Never thought the day would come.  Sonic hit the nail on the head.

 

Why does Original Sin work as multiplayer?  Because it was literally designed to be multiplayer from the ground up.  I wonder how many people ever play it single player, cause you find it isn't nearly as fun a game that way.  In fact, I have never gotten past chapter 2 in either Original Sin game in single player, because the lore/story/world/etc is just kinda boring.  What keeps you playing is your buddies, not the game.

 

Eternity on the other hand was designed from the ground up to be a great single player experience.  You know what single player experiences are not that good at?  Multiplayer, because they were not designed with two players in mind.  I have seen plenty of posts complaining about how bad fully exploring Neketaka was (just don't do it in one shot people), imagine how bad that would be with 1-4 other players exploring it at the same time you do?  How much fun is real time with pause when you can't pause cause multiplayer?

 

If they want to make a multiplayer Eternity, it needs to be built that way from the ground up.

[Hulk'O'Saurus]

Nothing like dying 60 hours in on an iron man run because of your team mate... or yourself. 

[Tick]

I feel the same way about Co op as voice acting and some similar features. It's a nice touch, but it is *not* worth making the developers' lives hell or taking away the quantity and quality of the content in the rest of the game.

 

 

On a complete side note : I would still support a PoE or Obsidian game without any or only partial voice acting.