Support NeoGAF

[ecentre]

Just a couple of days ago I decided to read up on the coop mode in before a purchase. I found lots and lots of info on how good it worked, they even wrote that it worked better then coop in DS3. I decided then and there to buy it but I didnt have the time right then. Today I glanced through the NeoGAF before going to the store and saw this thread. So thanks for that. Now I can wait until they fix this or not buy it at all. Knowledge is power.!

 

[Ricker]

Tune in tomorrow for OT Nioh Co-Op is fine ;P

 

[Clarkus Darkus]

Just a couple of days ago I decided to read up on the coop mode in before a purchase. I found lots and lots of info on how good it worked, they even wrote that it worked better then coop in DS3. I decided then and there to buy it but I didnt have the time right then. Today I glanced through the NeoGAF before going to the store and saw this thread. So thanks for that. Now I can wait until they fix this or not buy it at all. Knowledge is power.!

That's the problem, The game went gold, We then got the Last chance trial complete with the working co-op feature, So many people including a few of my friends bought the game based on that trial considering it was only a few weeks ago. Nowhere before release did it state online that this feature was removed.

And their only response is because " too easy " ..........Yet allow summoning in of a randomer who's done the mission and probably the whole game who can do it with ease.

It was a feature that sold copies of the game, But now was based on false pretence.

 

[MasterMenace]

The shared life bar mechanic does make it easier than regular co-op with a visitor. They should have made it so first-timers would have to be in visitor mode or something.

Oh well.

No it does NOT. Read the OP! That co-op mode is balanced for co-op besides the shared life bar mechanic. FFS. Read.

 

[HeeHo]

That's the problem, The game went gold, We then got the Last chance trial complete with the working co-op feature, So many people including a few of my friends bought the game based on that trial considering it was only a few weeks ago. Nowhere before release did it state online that this feature was removed.

And their only response is because " too easy " ..........Yet allow summoning in of a randomer who's done the mission and probably the whole game who can do it with ease.

It was a feature that sold copies of the game, But now was based on false pretence.

I think the point is that it's random who you summon. You can't always summon the same expert player over and over,

 

[MasterMenace]

I think the point is that it's random who you summon. You can't always summon the same expert player over and over,

Doesn't matter. The player you summon is someone who has already beaten it. Knows where all enemies, traps, etc. are. Team Ninja's logic to this is that it's acceptable, but playing with your friend blind is not because "it makes the game too easy"...lmfao ok Team Ninja.

 

[HeeHo]

Doesn't matter. The player you summon is someone who has already beaten it. Knows where all enemies, traps, etc. are. But Team Ninja logic is that's acceptable, but playing with your friend blind is not.

Does not guarantee that a person who has beat it once is an expert and 'knows where all traps are'. The game is still hard and stuff can still go wrong.

 

[MasterMenace]

Does not guarantee that a person who has beat it once is an expert and 'knows where all traps are'. The game is still hard and stuff can still go wrong.

You still missing the point of the friend co-op argument...

Someone who has beaten the mission, according to Team Ninja, apparently is a more acceptable form of challenge for the host player, than going in with your friend blind, which makes the game "too easy". Hilarious logic from Team Ninja.

Also people keep disregarding that there is a ********* actual co-op mode tailored for balanced co-op play in this game that is punishing. Read the OP, but guess people don't know how to read these days. Even Team Ninja doesn't understand their own co-op mode they made does NOT make it easy.

 

[styl3s]

So you buy every coop game? There was nothing else about the game that would compel you to play it by yourself?

I only wanted this to co-op with a friend and that option was changed at retail taking away the main feature i wanted. I don't buy every co-op game i buy co-cop games that interest me and my friend(s) and this game had that feature before it was stripped down. What if Diablo changed their coop to "you can only play with your friend(s)" after they beat the act you want to co-op on? I wouldn't of bought it.

Me and my friends will spend the $60 on Wildlands instead it's no skin off our back.

 

[Clarkus Darkus]

I think the point is that it's random who you summon. You can't always summon the same expert player over and over,

But whoever you summon would be higher in level than your friend playing it blindly with you on the same level, So if anything it's making the game easier getting someone who's already done the mission, Than your friend beside you who hasn't.

Just swiping it out like that without notice after getting peoples money is shady.

Is what it is, I'm done talking about it now. Gonna go devour a peanut chunky kitkat.

 

[NullPointer]

Their reasoning doesn't make any sense.

Yeah, why allow co-op at all if they're worried it makes the game too easy?

And how is it not even easier when the person who joins up has already beat the mission and knows all of its ins and outs, traps and secrets?

 

[Hoho for breakfast]

Well they can make design decisions and I can make purchasing decisions so whatever.

The really shitty thing is that it was apparently a feature of the beta? They should have specified that "last chance" meant last chance for decent co-op.

 

[HeeHo]

Is what it is, I'm done talking about it now. Gonna go devour a peanut chunky kitkat.

lol. Made me laugh.

I guess the only thing I can come up with is that they want some sort of guarantee that at least one person solo'd it. It doesn't bother me but the more I try to defend it the less it seems to make sense to me too. I like it but I cannot deny it roadblocks some peoples enjoyment.

 

[Chaos2Frozen]

Team Ninja: *Wins the hearts of gamers everywhere by unexpectedly listening to fan feedback, changing many things about the game for the better due to poor or unfavourable responses*

Team Ninja: *Decides to change a fundamental element of their game with zero warning or feedback and then responds with utter BS in response to fan backlash*

Something doesn't really make a lot of sense, here.

Calling it a 'Fundamental element' is over selling it.

 

[NullPointer]

Calling it a 'Fundamental element' is over selling it.

The co-op was a major selling point for me, as I'm sure it is for others.

Luckily I had no intention of running through the whole game in co-op for my first run-through, having more personal interest in the co-op side missions, so I'm not crushed by this news. I can fully understand the disappointment though.

 

[Hades Hotgun]

I partially agree. But I also think saying Team Ninja had deceiving intent isn't right as well. They're perfectly in their right to have things change from the beta and the trial.

What people should be angry at are kind of the reviews who's job should be to inform people about these things but apparently generally didn't? I've not read too many of them.

I don't see any intent to deceive and I don't feel like I implied that. This just seems like a poorly thought out decision, which consumers should not be expected to have foreseen. It is something that Team Ninja should change, rather than something that customers should suck up and deal with.

I don't think complaining to or about reviewers helps anything in this circumstance. This is something people should bring up on social media so the devs see it, and presumably it may get changed if they do so.

 

[Chaos2Frozen]

The co-op was a major selling point for me, as I'm sure it is for others.

Luckily I had no intention of running through the whole game in co-op for my first run-through, having more personal interest in the co-op side missions, so I'm not crushed by this news. I can fully understand the disappointment though.

Sure people can have their personal selling points I won't try to argue that.

But it's like say... fishing mini games in some RPGs, there might be someone out there who views it as selling point to them and it's well within their rights, but it's not really fundamental to the overall game right? Same thing.

 

[Clarkus Darkus]

I don't see any intent to deceive and I don't feel like I implied that. This just seems like a poorly thought out decision, which consumers should not be expected to have foreseen. It is something that Team Ninja should change, rather than something that customers should suck up and deal with.

I don't think complaining to or about reviewers helps anything in this circumstance. This is something people should bring up on social media so the devs see it, and presumably it may get changed if they do so.

Yeah it really does seem poorly thought out, Their logic of here it's fine having this experienced player be summoned to help you, But not your'e similar levelled friend in our more challenging tori gate way of playing the mission is bizarre.

I thought i was buying the last chance trial version of the game from a mere 3 weeks ago, But was then sold something different without notice.

 

[Vexii]

Sure people can have their personal selling points I won't try to argue that.

But it's like say... fishing mini games in some RPGs, there might be someone out there who views it as selling point to them and it's well within their rights, but it's not really fundamental to the overall game right? Same thing.

Comparing full story co-op to a fishing minigame. You are joking, right?

 

[Fireflu]

Yeah their excuse is completely backwards bullshit.

Let's not allow two players that are on a completely even playing field, that don't know what to expect or how to deal with the enemies or bosses while also sharing a very limited life bar between them and removing the ability to use checkpoints. But instead let's let players summon in other random players whenever they want that have already beaten the stage and have mastered the tactics of dealing with each enemy and boss using overpowered gear and let the player completely steamroll right through the stage with little to no challenge. Great idea.

It's honestly one of the most moronic last minute changes iv'e ever seen for a game...

 

[web01]

Playing the co op blind in the revive mode definitely was not too easy.
You had to play through the entire stage with no checkpoints at all.
IF both players died the stage was restarted from very beginning.
Time wise I found it took longer than playing the game solo, especially on the twilight stages.

 

[MasterMenace]

Yeah their excuse is completely backwards bullshit.

Let's not allow two players that are on a completely even playing field, that don't know what to expect or how to deal with the enemies or bosses while also sharing a very limited life bar between them and removing the ability to use checkpoints. But instead let's let players summon in other random players whenever they want that have already beaten the stage and have mastered the tactics of dealing with each enemy and boss using overpowered gear and let the player completely steamroll right through the stage with little to no challenge. Great idea.

It's honestly one of the most moronic last minute changes iv'e ever seen for a game...

Playing the co op blind in the revive mode definitely was not too easy.
You had to play through the entire stage with no checkpoints at all.
IF both players died the stage was restarted from very beginning.
Time wise I found it took longer than playing the game solo, especially on the twilight stages.

People who finally understand what I'm saying.

 

[Chaos2Frozen]

Comparing full story co-op to a fishing minigame. You are joking, right?

Surely you realize it's not a 1:1 comparison beyond making the point. And the point being that people can have different selling points to them that would not be a 'fundamental element' to the game.

Its fine if you want to get angry that co-op changed I'm not going to say you're wrong, I'm just pointing out that blind co-op isn't what the developers and marketing have call a fundamental element, more like an optional feature.

 

[Clarkus Darkus]

Exactly, It was alot more difficult doing it the Tori gate way, 1 revive bar, Extra tough enemies of which there was more of also, Especially those that appear out of the fog thing, No check points and back too the start if you both died, Both being at the same level.

To me that was way more challenging than using the summon method, Such a cop out excuse.

I'm more annoyed it wasn't mentioned beforehand, And it took until the game was bought under false pretence to notice.

 

[Holundrian]

I don't see any intent to deceive and I don't feel like I implied that. This just seems like a poorly thought out decision, which consumers should not be expected to have foreseen. It is something that Team Ninja should change, rather than something that customers should suck up and deal with.

I don't think complaining to or about reviewers helps anything in this circumstance. This is something people should bring up on social media so the devs see it, and presumably it may get changed if they do so.

I was saying people should be angry at reviewers for not informing because people here are blaming Team Ninja for changing something from the beta/trial that was done for testing purposes, which honestly should be something that is completely fine. Every developer should have that right and they also don't have the responsibility to inform people in cases like this of the change. Nioh isn't something like dota or for honor where I think the case for informing players is way stronger. This should really be something reviewers should do. Inform potential buyers. Like if they don't do that what else are they good for?
This part is only about the people blaming Team Ninja for the change.
------------------------------
For trying to get it changed though yes everyone should try to bring it up through social media, but be reasonable in the tone.
I already said I support them patching it because I believe what the game gains with that has more value than what it loses on "difficulty". That said I still strongly disagree with a lot of how the complaints are brought up in this thread and am quite baffled at the masses that don't understand the intent/explanation and just write it of as nonsense. Honestly their explanation is perfectly reasonable people should make the case on why it is better to allow people to coop that way instead of only decrying the design decision "omg makes no sense whine whine whine".

 

[Velikost]

What a poor official response. Gonna do a social media blast and hope enough people do the same to make Team Ninja/Tecmo Koei see the error in their ways.

Surely you realize it's not a 1:1 comparison beyond making the point.

...

Same thing.

lmao bruh

 

[komorebi]

Just a couple of days ago I decided to read up on the coop mode in before a purchase. I found lots and lots of info on how good it worked, they even wrote that it worked better then coop in DS3. I decided then and there to buy it but I didnt have the time right then. Today I glanced through the NeoGAF before going to the store and saw this thread. So thanks for that. Now I can wait until they fix this or not buy it at all. Knowledge is power.!

You're missing out on a hell of a game. That goes for everyone else!

 

[vg260]

This logic is extremely flawed. Those messages are in all betas. If they flat out removed coop completely from the game would it be okay because it was "covered" by that message? When you play an alpha, a beta, and a demo of a game, you expect the full retail release to work in the same way.

If you expect (i.e. assume) the features are the same, that's a risk you're taking with that assumption, especially if warned they might change. Yes, it would be "ok" if they removed something, on the condition they warned of the possibility. "ok" meaning not intentionally deceptive or under false pretenses, but not related to how good of a design choice it is.

The is no flawed logic in acknowledging the fact that there was a very visible warning that the demo/trial was a product was in development and the final retail release may differ.

I'm more annoyed it wasn't mentioned beforehand, And it took until the game was bought under false pretence to notice.

That claim is a bit much. Did you play the demo? This is the screen after selecting to start a game. You had to hit confirm to continue:

It seems pretty conspicuous to me. They warned people features might change, and they did. Just because most of the time features in demos don't change doesn't mean it won't ever happen. That doesn't invalidate the warning that they might. Things get cut and change in development. That's the whole reason for the warning.

Whether it's disappointing or a bad design decision is a separate argument. I totally get being disappointing and wanting it changed back, but if you're claiming deception or false pretenses, you simply don't have much of a case.

 

[arcticice]

i co-oped Bloodborne and Dark Souls 3, and co-op was the only reason me and my pals bought them in the first place. A lot of people like playing cooperatively, so stop commenting that these games SHOULD be played alone. Let people play however they want.

As far as Nioh is concerned, tried the demo, didn't enjoy it at all, didn't even knew about co-op features either.

Having played DS3 and Bloodborne, i don't think i am missing much by not playing Nioh.

Sucks for those who pre-ordered though.

 

[Stimpack]

This is just like how people would complain about those who use cheats in single player games. Doesn't hurt your experience.

 

[dili]

Statement from Team Ninja, as reported by Kotaku: http://kotaku.com/nioh-devs-say-they-changed-co-op-so-it-wouldnt-be-too-e-1792142225

TL;DR: Team Ninja thought co-op made the game too easy, and they only allowed players to blind co-op in the demos so that players could try out features in the limited time frame and scope the demos had.

Fully expected. It doesn't seem likely that co-op will change either.

thisisbullshit.gif

Fuck them so bad.

 

[FingerBang]

I read the first post OP, I am not really a big coop player for this kind of games so it won't affect me much, but they way they have done it feels like they took something from the game that could have stayed there. It wasn't making the game too easy, on the contrary, it sounded much more challenging. They left the "invoke a random player" function that is pretty much what happens in any Soulsborne, making the game supereasy mode most of the times (at least in my experience).

I really hope they put it back in.

 

[Burgess_101]

thisisbullshit.gif

Fuck them so bad.

Then why on earth is there coop at all?

 

[Kolx]

So regular co-op still works the same as souls, but the new mode isn't? at least one works here. Still, changing it makes no sense.

 

[Sparrowhawk]

Judging from how much they listened to the community during the alpha and beta, I'm sure they'll end up patching this in eventually.

 

[Abandapart82]

I haven't read the entire thread. Can randoms still help defeat bosses or is that only in souls?

 

[GHG]

I haven't read the entire thread. Can randoms still help defeat bosses or is that only in souls?

Yes randoms can help at any time in this game.

 

[MetalliCabombination]

Im gonna be honest.
If it weren't for this thread i wouldn't even know this game has co op. And i played all the betas.
Its also something i despise in souls games so eh. Im okay with it.

 

[Dunkley]

I mean it's their game, so it's their decision. If they think coop screws with the difficulty too much then I guess more power to them for requiring at least one person to have finished the mission before being able to engage in co-op with the other.

Glad FROM Software sees things different on that regard since Soulsbourne co-op can be amazing fun.

 

[Coda]

I feel like the bosses are excruciatingly annoying to endure without a co-op partner. So this is quite a bummer.

 

[Smooth Operator]

Statement from Team Ninja, as reported by Kotaku: http://kotaku.com/nioh-devs-say-they-changed-co-op-so-it-wouldnt-be-too-e-1792142225

TL;DR: Team Ninja thought co-op made the game too easy, and they only allowed players to blind co-op in the demos so that players could try out features in the limited time frame and scope the demos had.

That's a valid reason, i hope they'll stick to it.

I feel like the bosses are excruciatingly annoying to endure without a co-op partner. So this is quite a bummer.

Well, you can ask for help. I killed a boss with a perfect stranger yesterday, and i learned a lot during the fight because he knew the patterns.

 

[J 0 E]

The game's creative director has responded to the matter

”You cannot co-op through the entire game because that would make it too easy for players to beat the game," said Tom Lee, creative director at Team Ninja in an emailed statement. ”We want players to experience Nioh in how it was intended to be. We allowed players to co-op anytime in the last trial demo only because of the limited stages and time to try out the demo."

 

[GHG]

I feel like the bosses are excruciatingly annoying to endure without a co-op partner. So this is quite a bummer.

Well good thing you can still do that.

 

[myco666]

That's a valid reason, i hope they'll stick to it.

Can you explain why that is a valid reason? You can still summon randoms and your friends making it "too easy for players to beat the game". Wouldn't you think they would have removed coop entirely until you yourself beat the level if it was too easy with coop?

 

[Smooth Operator]

Can you explain why that is a valid reason? You can still summon randoms and your friends making it "too easy for players to beat the game". Wouldn't you think they would have removed coop entirely until you yourself beat the level if it was too easy with coop?

There's a difference between asking help for a specific part and finishing the whole game with the same person.

That's how the game was intented to be anyway, according to the creative director, so i'm cool with that.

 

[myco666]

There's a difference between asking help for a specific part and finishing the whole game with the same person.

That's how the game was intented to be anyway, according to the creative director, so i'm cool with that.

But you can still do exactly that. You can use passwords for summoning so you get a specific player in your game. Just that the other player has to beat the level first.

 

[Vexii]

Every single person who keeps saying "I hope they stick to it" is pretty bold-facedly saying that "I hope someone else's enjoyment is ruined by something that doesn't even affect me."

Seriously, it's the shittiest thing that you can contribute to this thread. I could understand if the mode somehow affected how you guys wanted to matchmake (or just not to co-op at all, like forced, mandatory co-op bosses) but it seriously doesn't.

At this point you're just being totalitarian in your belief that something should be one way when the variable you're trying to overrule is completely invisible to you. That seems to be a big problem in the world lately.

 

[Clarkus Darkus]

Well they could have at least mentioned the change before release, It was shady to give us the last chance trial 3 weeks before the games release, Giving the impression that was the game and features we was getting, Even tho they disclaim saying things may change. At no point would you think it's a big feature like coop. And since they did change it, Why wasn't it made aware of, People bought the game for that specific feature of coop.

Iv'e asked Sony for a refund, Probably won't get anywhere, But no harm trying.

It's fine to change things, But to do it after the game went gold, And to do it within 3 weeks of the last demo is shady, And to not even notify anyone of the change, Making us find out for ourselves.

 

[WiseSplinteR]

It's not a deal breaker, but it is a bit disappointing.
Their explanation does not make any sense: they say they did this to make sure the game is "not too easy", but they literally made the game easier by ensuring that any summoned player already knows the map and has beaten the boss... Very odd.
Was there something lost in translation here? Did they mean to say "we wanted to make the game easier" perhaps?

Still getting it. Still going to play it. Just won't have as much fun now is all.

 

[Hyun Sai]

LOL. So blind coop would make the game too easy, but summoning someone who already beat the stage wouldn't ?

That must be the most idiotic thing I hear a Dev say this year. Congratz, I guess ?