I Wish Skyrim Had Co-op Anybody Agree?

[Steve Fidler]

I do not want Co-Op in this game for these reasons:

A) It requires development time which I would rather be spent on the actual game.
B) It is a feature that the series is not familiar with which could be handled poorly, or result in a lackluster feature which is ridiculed in reviews and may result in poor critic assessment.
C) It would likely have elements like "This quest chain can only be completed through Co-Op" which would take content away from single player gamers.
D) Not every game needs multi-player. I'm a huge advocate that games are more successful these days when designed as multi-player games, but some games simply don't need it or shouldn't have it.
E) Repeat A, which is the most important point.

 

[Johnmw]

hell, If Diablo and Baldur's Gate 2 (a game that I swear people keep forgetting had co-op) can do it, and do it well, then why not Elder Scrolls? Sure, it would need to be balanced differently, and a lot of things as a whole would need to be changed, but the potential is just too awesome to ignore.

Okay, maybe not Skyrim, but I for one am crossing my fingers for the next one.

Why do companies hate Lan? No griefers, arsehats or people out to ruin your day, just mates and a sandbox world. Honestly it seems that no one wants to play games with their friends any more, just shout at strangers on the net. (Yes I get the irony of saying that on an internet forum)


Me and my Girlfriend play Oblivion on two separate computers from the same couch, at the, same time... Yes we have had many conversations about how much we wished Skyrim would include LAN

 

[Beat14]

I would rather have it, as I can play on my own when ever I want too.

 

[binvjoh]

While I do really enjoy co-op gaming, I'm not convinced Bethesda games are the best place to put it.

Now Mass Effect, on the other hand..
Then again I guess that's what TOR is for.

 

[Sacul]

No, I like taking my time and going through the dialog, deciding how to deal with something and sometimes I can take awhile to make my mind up in a conversation with someone. Co-op is fun with something like Borderlands where you can just run around and kill stuff, getting loot, but it's not fun when you're trying to make choices and decisions and you know, playing an RPG. Leave co-op to other games and let me play my RPG by myself.

Stay calm..... ok... now, my idea for getting around that was when two players were in some place, if one player talks, he gets to decide everything. If multiple players talk then they vote and if noone wins then its a quick ingame flip o' coin and there you go. Besides, if you were to play split screen you and your mate could decide IRL. And let you play RPG by yourself? We arn't stopping you, it's just that a lot of us want to play rpgs aswell, but with friends. Again, you don't have to play co op.

Thanks,
Rimmy

EDIT: I like taking my time through dialogue too, so don't think I'm just saying that from an outside view.

Um, okay...I was calm, where in my post did I not seem calm? Thing is though, if they make the game co-op they have less time to spend on crafting a great single-player experience and more time sorting out bugs and making sure co-op works just fine. Also, having to vote on a choice in a RPG would be annoying it's an RPG I want to make MY choices in it I don't want to vote or argue about it with someone, I want to make the call. Co-op and exploring is fun but it doesn't suit an RPG.

 

[Dogstile]

Sounds like it would be fun. Why can't two people be completely immersed into one world? After all, immersion is just a step up from pretending.

However, you might at times fall into the same trap the Borderlands now does - you want to play with a buddy, but you're a level 30 halfway-there badass and your buddy's just now had his RPG cherry popped and quakes in his boots at a low-level ninja turtle*.

This is where I think they should have kept oblivions system in. Both players just have to agree to stay low level and train skills instead. Much, much simpler.

Actually, does anyone know if it'll be safe to level up in skyrim or are we going to have the same problem with oblivion where the later quests are impossible (DAMN YOU ESCORTS) because of it?

 

[Weslebear]

In Skyrim? No, it would be a waste of dev time that could be put into really ironing out everything and making one of the greatest single player games of all time.

As a spin off Elder Scrolls game? Why not, but it would have to be something designed around the co-op to make it worth it, perhaps the story revolving around a Robin Hood-esque gang, but of course it would be a game built for this, not as an extra or it would be a disappointing
mash up of both.



Off topic: Rimmy, your "witty" signing off at the end of each post is really aggravating and a waste of page space. There is a reason The Escapist has signatures turned off.

 

[Odbarc]

Co-op griefing.
Join, kill partner, die/kill & quit.
Or wanting to do other quests than what's being done.
Loot not being shared/ninjaing.
One guy's stealth, the other is an obnoxious spell caster in heavy armor.
The guy that joins has Merchantile/Speech and power levels increasing the difficulty for your slow paced min/maxing stats build.

Do you want co-op still?

 

[nuba km]

Ever stop to think that hey, not every series needs co-op. Not every single series needs to be mutilated just to appease every single minor group out there who do not understand what the series is even about. Who just want to cram it into their own little genre just to say that they have it.
RPGs are one of those groups.

you do realise RPGs spawned from DnD a game that would be nothing wihtout Co-op. RPGs spawned from something that needed Co-op and the best selling RPG of all time survives on Co-op World of Warcraft, why wouldn't RPGs benefit from Co-op?

 

[nuba km]

Co-op griefing.
Join, kill partner, die/kill & quit.
Or wanting to do other quests than what's being done.
Loot not being shared/ninjaing.
One guy's stealth, the other is an obnoxious spell caster in heavy armor.
The guy that joins has Merchantile/Speech and power levels increasing the difficulty for your slow paced min/maxing stats build.

Do you want co-op still?

easy solution, play with people you get along/make your Co-op game private.

 

[Desert Tiger]

Actually, I'd much rather have co-op in New Vegas. I think that would work well with that game (asides from VATS...) but I'm not altogether sure how it would work with a TES game.

 

[hazabaza1]

So long as it's not mandatory a la Demon's Souls, it'd be fine I guess. I'd never play it though.

 

[Saviordd1]

Looks like noone really noticed what i posted. Its all just singleplayer this singeplayer that. I gave a good reason and thought it would be great.

heres my real question, what could it hurt to add it?

Yes, it would take time from a no doubt already packed programing schedule and have them devote time to a system that would break the game

 

[TilMorrow]

Co-op griefing.
Join, kill partner, die/kill & quit.

Don't have friendly fire? It's usually an option in CO-OP included games.

Or wanting to do other quests than what's being done.

If the host wants to do a quest and other people don't want to then the best option is to kick them.

Loot not being shared/ninjaing.

Have a loot system similar to WoW either A)Set up loot rules before setting out or B) Roll on who gets what.

One guy's stealth, the other is an obnoxious spell caster in heavy armor.

1. I don't see this happening. Spellcasters wearing heavy armour? They usually only wear Robes. 2. Rogues and Spellcasters can work well together. (Rogue distracts and Spellcaster deals damage). 3. Obnoxious Spellcasters are usually more fun to play with.

The guy that joins has Merchantile/Speech and power levels increasing the difficulty for your slow paced min/maxing stats build.

I don't quite get this point but wouldn't having an option to allow players of the same level or lower to join and search for players of the same level games fix this easily?

Do you want co-op still?

Yes and the more I think about it, the more I want this game to have that option.

and

I want to be immersed and directly affect the world. Multiplayer lessens both of those. I never needed help.

Not necessarily. I've played plenty of multiplayer RPG games and things become more immersive if done well. And you can still directly affect the world, it wouldn't be any different from having companions that you hire and have follow you around. I am assuming that you have done this before of course. Also since I'm assuming you have used companions before then you have had help when playing just from NPCs not fellow gamers.

 

[UnderCoverGuest]

Yes, co-op would be a brilliant thing to have. A lot of folks here don't seem to realize co-op isn't forced on you, and many don't seem to understand the concept of Saints Row 2's co-op. It was a single-player story but with two players. It was a world in which the action was reserved for one person, but a second person was able to join in on the fun, and together the two of them would romp about in a world of happiness and explosions.

I want Skyrim to have co-op because Oblivion and Fallout and a dozen other role-playing games out there should have co-op as well. It increases the life-span of games to the nth degree when you can enjoy the experience with a similar-minded friend. Digitally walking through Oblivion's forests, or crossing the wasteland of Fallout 3 is an experience in and of itself, and that experience can still be easily had. But having the option of having a partner beside you--not some silly AI contraption that measures your exact speed and situation and responds with accuracy only a computer can provide, but rather a traveling partner with their own style, personality and skill, the two of you doing things no computer partner would be able to...

My point is, co-op is a brilliant inclusion in any game. It doesn't ruin single player games, it doesn't force multiplayer games. It's an addition that is optional and accessible, and it would be great to see. It's flabbergasting that so many folks here don't want to see an optional add-on that wouldn't in any way be an essential part of their gaming experience, but would be a terrific addition for other people; keyword being 'optional'. It's almost like saying "I hope Skyrim doesn't come with mod support because I can't mod," or something. Or hell, I'll just go all out and boldly claim that maybe some of these folks against co-op don't have any friends--or at least friends who similarly enjoy adventuring together. Or maybe the Escapist is filled with just that, Escapists. Escapism from their lives, friends included.

Meh, whatever, now I'm just filling my inbox with messages from crusading English-dictionary infused dorks misinterpreting my social observations for petty insults and ridicule. Joy for the internets. But yes, Skyrim should have co-op. If people don't want to play with co-op, they don't have to. Their game will still be great. For people who want co-op, they'll have it, and the game will be great. Time to eat this wonderful breakfast I've made while typing.

**Edit: What?!? Co-op isn't "multiplayer", in the sense you should be thrown in with a bunch of random teenagers running about! It's joining your friends and people you know on your adventure! Sure you can go online and pair with someone you don't know, and you might make a friend, but that's a risk you can decide either to take or not to take--you don't need to remove an entire game-play element based on having friends! Or, not having them.

 

[Insanity72]

hmm...i don't think that it should have a Co-op feature, the only type of multiplayer i would enjoy in a Elders scroll game would possible be an online arena

like you use your character from the single player to vs other peoples characters to gain gold and ranks and maybe buy some equipment that could only be gained from online battles

 

[Eggsnham]

I didn't read the OP in it's entirety, but I just have to say this:

Bethesda games are (for me, at least) better to play by yourself. Like somebody else already said, the immersion in the worlds that Bethesda has created is too awesome to spoil with a twelve year old screaming "n00b ******!" everytime he manages to fuck something up in your game.

On the other hand, if Bethesda were to make a FREE TO PLAY Elder Scrolls MMORPG, I'd probably play it.

 

[The Apothecarry]

Co-op in Skyrim would be amazing until you get to the issues of level adjustment and loot division. Not to mention all the hardcore players who game the numbers system for the best possible stats at the lowest levels.

I just hope they fix the leveling system for Skyrim. Finding a bed isn't so bad, but nobody cares that much about skill balancing. Most of us just want skills that match the character we're trying to build. Heavy armor skill shouldn't affect how well an assassin does.

 

[Legion IV]

I didn't read the OP in it's entirety, but I just have to say this:

Bethesda games are (for me, at least) better to play by yourself. Like somebody else already said, the immersion in the worlds that Bethesda has created is too awesome to spoil with a twelve year old screaming "n00b ******!" everytime he manages to fuck something up in your game.

On the other hand, if Bethesda were to make a FREE TO PLAY Elder Scrolls MMORPG, I'd probably play it.

Why are you playing with a 12 year old? Whyed you invite him or let him join? Am talking playing with good friends. Have you ever role played with a friend or someone else, its really not that hard to be immersed with someone as long as they have the same idea,

 

[imnot]

It would be nice I guess, as long as it was on a seperate save game.