This game would be infinitely better with simple co-op.

#51DarthVashtiPosted 11/24/2012 12:52:28 PM
Highpitchsolo posted...
I'm not talking multiplayer battle modes and crap like that, but just simply being able to join your friends game and play co-op story mode.. I am NOT one of those people who say "every game should have multiplayer", it's just not true. But a simple co-op option in Skyrim would be so much fun.. I know it would have flaws, if you were under-leveled everything would be impossible to kill, and of course if you had mods on PC, the other players game would have to have the same mods.. I'm not here to talk details though..

I just wish I could run amok with my friends online. Once you both get max level, it would be amazing..


Not every game needs f****** stupid ass multiplayer. It's people like you that are contributing to the ruination of single player games.I can't even play Mass Effect anymore without that multiplayer BS digging it's claws into a perfectly fine single player experience.
#52johnluke728Posted 11/24/2012 1:12:26 PM
Hey guys, what about maybe a split-screen option? We don't have to get netcode and MMO servers involved here. Like say Player 1 could summon a ghost or ancient warrior spirit, and Player 2 could control it in a separate screen until the quest is over, or the spirit dies from battle and has to be respawned. Get where I'm going with this?
---
http://shantaefanforums.tk/ <-- Huge fan of the Shantae games? Then you should check the first fan forum that's all about the belly-dancing half-genie!
#53Godly_GoofPosted 11/24/2012 1:18:38 PM
Why not Co-op even as optional? (same would apply to Split Screen or any other variations without even getting into requiring servers or online functionality.)

because wasted data on disc for it is completely wasted if you dont plan to use it? Or are you unfamiliar with the way in which data is stored? Especially since, lets use modders as an example here. The Oblivion mod for multi-player was 12 gigs and it still didnt work properly, the Skyrim one was averaging around 7-8 gigs and it barely worked at all.

So for a full proper working MP thats gunna prolly end up being give or take 10 gigs of data (OPTIONAL 10 gigs of data) now we know that the game at is core was approx. 18 gigs on its own and was maxing the disc to do so. Where does that leave us? 8 gigs of game that most likely doesnt even fit all the textures on it. Ya thatd be a great game *rolls eyes*

Saying optional without rationalizing that first is basically just sounding like a crying kid :/

and before you say "but X game has it on it" thats because X game was SUPPOSED to have it and was built with utilizing it in mind so they can compress some stuff. An ES game with its trillions if not more variables that need to be accounted for for EVERYTHING is not so simple to just plop it in and have it work flawlessly immediately.


Single Player and Multi Player games both have their places, not every friggen game should be Multi Player in the same way not every game should be Single Player, just take both for what they are ffs :/
---
"All things are about Jesus Homer .......... Except this."
#54General_TimPosted 11/24/2012 1:21:06 PM
I like The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim game as is. However I would enjoy a mmo SET in the land of Skyrim. I love being a werewolf but I am alone in that regard when I play by myself. It would (for me) be awesome to be able to team up with like eight other werewolves and just go from town to town razing them to the ground. Or having a pack of werewolves fight a group of Vampire Lords. It would have to be online because I do not think that ANY system today could handle a split screen version. Any NORD can learn to use the shouts, that is said at several points in the game. That would actually add more depth to the races, I like to be a Khajiit but my brother likes to be a Nord, that would separate who could do what. They could go back to using the wheel for shortcuts and do what Halo 3 did when someone paused during mp. ONLY THAT PERSON WAS PAUSED. Which in reality that person was not even paused just had access to the pause menu.
---
Now see what you've done. You've gone and made me immortal.
You can try to MOD me but I will come back as something else every time.
#55LeftyMFRPosted 11/24/2012 1:29:05 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't they say the same thing about Fable? I mean look how that ended up....
---
Life Rule #68: Never date a woman who owns a firearm.
#56l3erserkPosted 11/24/2012 1:29:19 PM
This is me tearing you apart.

Just imagine.
---
The Wheel weaves as The Wheel wills.
#57ValedictorianXDPosted 11/24/2012 1:55:12 PM
There seems to be some sort of misunderstanding here. Could this game have benefited from co-op? Yeah. Would it make the game better? Probably. Could it be done now? No.

In order to add proper co-op, the game has to actually be designed around that concept, not the other way around. Bethesda can't just release a co-op dlc. The game itself would have had to be designed with future co-op in mind. As it stands now, the way the menu pauses for inventory/magic management, the possibility of griefing, the current lore, and other things makes a good co-op experience impossible. It's game design 101, not rocket science.

Just look at Resident Evil 5. It's essentially Resident Evil 4 with co-op. In order to pull that off, the inventory had to be switched to a real-time system, puzzles had to be re-designed for 2 players in mind, the possibility of griefing was removed when the merchant became a simple menu system instead of a non-essential NPC, treasure collection became shared loot, and a ****load of other stuff was changed as well. If RE5 had just been RE4 2.0 with no co-op (like it was originally intended with the Chris solo campaign) then implementation of co-op would have been nigh impossible because of all of the required changes mentioned previously.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is why TES:O is being made. Almost all of the issues that prevent Skyrim from having co-op have been addressed in TES:O in order to give us not just co-op but an actual MMO.

Could TES:VI be made into a co-op experience? Sure...the developers just need to have it in mind as the game is being designed.
---
[[[[[[[[[[[[[ |||||||||||||||| ]]]]]]]]]]]]]
#58dragonkyn20Posted 11/24/2012 2:02:27 PM
Why not just wait for Elder Scrolls Online?
---
PSN and gamertag: dragonkyn20
I love it so much, it's now my universal alias.
#59cavslax209Posted 11/24/2012 2:22:48 PM
i dont have a problem with the idea of co-op, but bethesda has absolutely zero MP experience and unless zenimax gave like double the operating budget for the next game it would divert serious resources from the main game. then you end up with some bs like fable 2 and 3, where a once good RPG just becomes so dumbed down to accommodate the multiplayer that it isn't even fun anymore. it seriously dilutes the brand, and you end up with something totally different then the elder scrolls.
#60Bosniak10Posted 11/24/2012 2:49:40 PM
Skyrim only has good graphics. Everything else is horrible, from glitches to lack of coop.
---
WARNING: http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/user.php?=2426382
Is a very well known Troll! Do not feed!