Support NeoGAF

[John Master Lee]

Agreed. Co-op was so shitty in RE5 that it left a sour taste.

Just because Co-op was badly implemented, doesn't mean that it shouldn't have been in the game. It should have been improved so that it was as good as the single player experience. Wouldn't that make you happier as a gamer?

 

[Walshicus]

WRPGs for one. Imagine Mass Effect 2 with 4 player co-op, who the hell would decide what happens? Rock paper scissors over who gets to change the fate of the galaxy? :lol

Mass Effect would be great with Co-op. One player gets Shepherd, the others get side characters. Shepherd makes the big decisions, side characters still get access to conversation trees, even with Shepherd himself.

Sure, most people would solo it first time around, but I think it'd be pretty cool to see how some of my friends tackle the game.

 

[Nfinit]

Single player = Masturbation

4 player co-op = Orgy

holy shit

 

[duckroll]

This is where you get it wrong.

I don't want all games to be action RPGs.

I want games to offer up more than the standard package. A music game can still be a music game. A puzzle game can still be a puzzle game.

The key is that more elements can be added to the game to provide more variety to play.

So basically you want every single game regardless of genre to expand out to be more than they are, which means at the potential benefit of appealing to more people (like you), there is a high chance that the game itself ends up poorer and less polished because of the divided attention in design and production? Is that it? Sure sounds like it.

In world populated with perfect developers and unlimited budgets/time schedules, it would indeed be a good idea to have as many features which people want in every single game as possible. Realistically, it is a terrible idea and people demanding more of such features are shortsighted and ignorant because all these features would be pointless if the game itself is not of quality.

What is most important is how good a game is, and how successful the game is at being fun to the primary audience of the game. Extra bullet points and features are not as important, and should only be explored when there is the time and space for it in a development schedule. Even then, such ideas should only be explored if they can benefit and enhance the game design itself, without ruining balance and focus.

It is very clear that you have no idea how game development or a good creative process works. Maybe you should take this thread as a learning point, since it appears you are interested in the subject. More != better. And even if more = better in certain cases, it is only better if the "more" that is added, is of the same quality as everything else. If it cannot be, then it is better to leave it out entirely, and the final work will be stronger for it.

 

[Jocchan]

This is where you get it wrong.

I don't want all games to be action RPGs.

I want games to offer up more than the standard package. A music game can still be a music game. A puzzle game can still be a puzzle game.

The key is that more elements can be added to the game to provide more variety to play.

In an ideal world where development resources and time are infinite, I would agree with you.
But in the real world shoehorning stuff just for the sake of completing a bullet point list is often the worst way to go.

EDIT: beaten by the rolling duck, with a much more detailed post.

 

[Vercingetorix]

Mass Effect would be great with Co-op. One player gets Shepherd, the others get side characters. Shepherd makes the big decisions, side characters still get access to conversation trees, even with Shepherd himself.

Sure, most people would solo it first time around, but I think it'd be pretty cool to see how some of my friends tackle the game.

That would only increase development time of the game of the game by maybe three times for next to no benefit. Remember when Fable II tried to do that and failed? Yeah. Nobody wants to be the no-name sidekick who can't decide anything.

 

[robox]

4 Player Co-op
RPG Elements
Unique Character Choices

ctrl+f "monster hunter"

- has 4 player co-op. pretty sure that's the main reason for selling.
- some even call it a straight up rpg. i call it an action game
- 9 weapon classes, each one handling differently. but then, what's the point of having choices that are not.

 

[Haunted]

Just because Co-op was badly implemented, doesn't mean that it shouldn't have been in the game. It should have been improved so that it was as good as the single player experience. Wouldn't that make you happier as a gamer?

Things don't work like that in the real world.

In an ideal world where development resources and time are infinite, I would agree with you.
But in the real world shoehorning stuff just for the sake of completing a bullet point list is often the worst way to go.

EDIT: beaten by the rolling duck, with a much more detailed post.

I also said that.

 

[-tetsuo-]

I want Borderlands badly but this thread makes me not want it. Yes, it's that bad.

 

[Nfinit]

Just because Co-op was badly implemented, doesn't mean that it shouldn't have been in the game. It should have been improved so that it was as good as the single player experience. Wouldn't that make you happier as a gamer?

What would make me happier as a gamer would be a 3d Moon Patrol.

 

[Haunted]

I want Borderlands badly but this thread makes me not want it. Yes, it's that bad.

See, see what you've done, OP? This is exactly the shit I'm talking about.

 

[Tobor]

This is where you get it wrong.

I don't want all games to be action RPGs.

I want games to offer up more than the standard package. A music game can still be a music game. A puzzle game can still be a puzzle game.

The key is that more elements can be added to the game to provide more variety to play.

If I wanted to make a single player game, I'd work as hard as I can to make the best single player game possible. Being forced to leverage resources to add features that aren't intended or can't be completed in time is ruining games.

And how wishy washy and obvious is that bolded statement? You're wasting all of our time with this discussion.

 

[Jocchan]

I also said that.

Also beaten by the Champion of the people :O

Just because Co-op was badly implemented, doesn't mean that it shouldn't have been in the game. It should have been improved so that it was as good as the single player experience. Wouldn't that make you happier as a gamer?

No.

 

[CSampson]

God you people make me hate that I play and enjoy video games. Everyone's a cynic here, fun is BANNED.

For the record I agree with OP.

 

[darkwings]

To be fair the CO-OP was really good, it was the single player with AI that suffered as a result.

Well yeah that's true, though I played it co-op with my brother on the second run, and it still wasn't that fun. But it could been because I first finished it with the AI.

 

[UntoldDreams]

4 Player Shenmue Incoming!

 

[MoxManiac]

The OP is horribly wrong in his assertions of what gaming should become, but he is defintely right about one thing; it being bullshit to have to do single player stuff to unlock multiplayer stuff (FUCK YOU CAPCOM)

 

[Relaxed Muscle]

Agreed. Co-op was so shitty in RE5 that it left a sour taste.

Damn, RE5 must be one of the games that receive more irrational hate on GAF.

You can say a lot of things about RE5, but co-op wasn't shitty by any means, get better players next time...

Regarding borderlans sure it looks interesting, but the OP surely did a bad job, the game will be in the neogaf blacklist for some time....

 

[megachao24]

So Super Mario will also have 4-player co-...

Oh wait.

 

[John Master Lee]

So basically you want every single game regardless of genre to expand out to be more than they are, which means at the potential benefit of appealing to more people (like you), there is a high chance that the game itself ends up poorer and less polished because of the divided attention in design and production? Is that it? Sure sounds like it.

In world populated with perfect developers and unlimited budgets/time schedules, it would indeed be a good idea to have as many features which people want in every single game as possible. Realistically, it is a terrible idea and people demanding more of such features are shortsighted and ignorant because all these features would be pointless if the game itself is not of quality.

What is most important is how good a game is, and how successful the game is at being fun to the primary audience of the game. Extra bullet points and features are not as important, and should only be explored when there is the time and space for it in a development schedule. Even then, such ideas should only be explored if they can benefit and enhance the game design itself, without ruining balance and focus.

It is very clear that you have no idea how game development or a good creative process works. Maybe you should take this thread as a learning point, since it appears you are interested in the subject. More != better. And even if more = better in certain cases, it is only better if the "more" that is added, is of the same quality as everything else. If it cannot be, then it is better to leave it out entirely, and the final work will be stronger for it.

And how do my points take away from your point? No one is saying that every game should have an infinite budget. Every developer has to make choices of what to cut. That's a given. The point is that certain features today should be part of the overall game package, and shouldn't be cut.

 

[duckroll]

The OP is horribly wrong in his assertions of what gaming should become, but he is defintely right about one thing; it being bullshit to have to do single player stuff to unlock multiplayer stuff (FUCK YOU CAPCOM)

Oh I definitely agree with this. In fact, I won't stop at just multiplayer stuff. I feel that any feature which does not have a reason to be locked, should not be locked. Things which would make a game more enjoyable even the first time around, has no reason to be only unlocked after a play through. This also includes a harder difficulty level beyond "Normal". I don't have a problem if you have SUPER HARD or CRAZY HARD unlocked when I beat Hard, but there's no reason why a Hard mode should be locked until someone beats Normal. There are players with a broad range of skill levels in the user pool, and there's no reason to exclude players who want more challenge the first time round.

And how do my points take away from your point? No one is saying that every game should have an infinite budget. Every developer has to make choices of what to cut. That's a given. The point is that certain features today should be part of the overall game package, and shouldn't be cut.

I don't think you completely understand me then. Because if you consider those features to be an essential part of every game package, then many games WILL suffer as a result. You are adding additional burden onto design specs which don't really require them.

Maybe you don't understand how hard it is to balance a normal game without RPG elements or 4 player co-op, period. But I think the evidence is clear considering how many games even without those features, don't exactly shine. If you added the pressure of including those features into the game, and given the same budget and development time, don't you agree the game will turn out worse?

Think about what you're saying for a moment. Then again, maybe you don't care at all, since you haven't even played Borderlands and you made this thread to promote how adding these features into every game would be a good thing. Would you still think it's a good thing if you play Borderlands and you're disappointed at the game? Seriously...

 

[Barrett2]

I haven't played this game yet, buuuuuuuuuuuuut I do have a wall of text you might be interested in.

 

[Grecco]

1.Im Excited as fuck about Borderlands
2.I certainly like Co op

3.This thead does a diservice to the game, look at how many people are saying "i wont buy borderlands because of this"


Anyways theres a shit ton of things that all games should have that they actually should have instead of just being borderlands. (Geometry style leaderboards/achievemnt/trophy tracking) Like GeoWars/ShadowComplex/OrangeBox/Gears of War 2/ TRIALS HD do.

 

[Y2Kev]

Diablo + Halo, with a nice hint of escape from bug island

 

[DR2K]

This is about as annoying as those god damn Bayonetta threads.

 

[John Master Lee]

That would only increase development time of the game of the game by maybe three times for next to no benefit. Remember when Fable II tried to do that and failed? Yeah. Nobody wants to be the no-name sidekick who can't decide anything.

Again, my point is: Don't strip out that gameplay element which failed. Improve upon it so that it works.

It seems that Fable II was pretty close with getting the multiplayer working in the way that people wanted.

 

[Solo]

Every game should have 4 player co-op and RPG elements? Oh yeah, that would work well on a Silent Hill game. Eat a dick, theory.

 

[Jocchan]

Every game should have 4 player co-op and RPG elements? Oh yeah, that would work well on a Silent Hill game.

And character classes with different abilities as well! God, they would be so awesome!

 

[Nfinit]

Again, my point is: Don't strip out that gameplay element which failed. Improve upon it so that it works.

It seems that Fable II was pretty close with getting the multiplayer working in the way that people wanted.

So basically, don't do bad things, do good things!

 

[duckroll]

Again, my point is: Don't strip out that gameplay element which failed. Improve upon it so that it works.

It seems that Fable II was pretty close with getting the multiplayer working in the way that people wanted.

You are really not making sense. Please, can you express yourself better? Not stripping something out and improving on it takes time and time costs money. So your point is essentially that every single game should have triple the budget and development time now.

 

[Vercingetorix]

Again, my point is: Don't strip out that gameplay element which failed. Improve upon it so that it works.

It seems that Fable II was pretty close with getting the multiplayer working in the way that people wanted.

Is that the way it seems to you? Because it certainly isn't the way it seems to me. And the critical response was overwhelmingly negative.

Rather than spend huge sums of time and money trying to make a broken concept work, developers should focus effort elsewhere.

Traditionally, its best to expend effort where you're experiencing the most success, not where you're experiencing failure.

 

[John Master Lee]

1.Im Excited as fuck about Borderlands
2.I certainly like Co op

3.This thead does a diservice to the game, look at how many people are saying "i wont buy borderlands because of this"


Anyways theres a shit ton of things that all games should have that they actually should have instead of just being borderlands. (Geometry style leaderboards/achievemnt/trophy tracking) Like GeoWars/ShadowComplex/OrangeBox/Gears of War 2/ TRIALS HD do.

While I like to believe I have the kind of pull to change people's minds about buy the game from this one post... It seems certain people already had their mind made up that they didn't want to buy the game. Or they are simply using typical Gaf hyperbole in expressing themselves. Sort of like what I did with the post.

I'm sure that it wasn't just one post that brought them to a certain conclusion. And you have probably picked up that I don't actually believe that 100% of all games every made should follow my exact formula. We both did what we needed to get people to talk about the issue.

 

[duckroll]

And you have probably picked up that I don't actually believe that 100% of all games every made should follow my exact formula. We both did what we needed to get people to talk about the issue.

Oh? I see, so it's deception. We don't take kindly to that here...

 

[EviLore]

"WHAT WE DO

What we do is help enrich your current outreach efforts with community programs that develop a two way dialogue with gamers. We engage gaming fans on a deeper level. We help convert awareness into interest. And we are darn good at it, with results as much as 150% better once our programs have been implemented."

I think your website needs an update after this thread. A simple "-" mark before the percentage would suffice.

 

[Keyser Soze]

What, what happened here? Viral marketing, I hate that shit... Don't turn me off a game I just started liking you fuckwit!!

 

[Tiduz]

"WHAT WE DO

What we do is help enrich your current outreach efforts with community programs that develop a two way dialogue with gamers. We engage gaming fans on a deeper level. We help convert awareness into interest. And we are darn good at it, with results as much as 150% better once our programs have been implemented."

I think your website needs an update after this thread. A simple "-" mark before the percentage would suffice.

:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol

 

[elrechazado]

:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol

+1

haha

 

["God's Beard!"]

To be fair, I don't think John Master Lee was a viral marketer. I think he's just a hyped up kid like that brandon guy that was streaming the game earlier. Unless they work for Sony, most viral marketers at least try to be less conspicuous. Otherwise it's a waste of money. There's probably dozens of marketers on this forum, and I doubt many of them would act like this.


The master here is definitely a dumbass either way.

edit: I always wondered what crow tastes like

 

[EviLore]

To be fair, I don't think John Master Lee was a viral marketer.

He's a confirmed viral marketer. I was quoting from his viral marketing company website. Try to keep up.

 

[Raging Spaniard]

This turned out pretty great

 

["God's Beard!"]

He's a confirmed viral marketer. I was quoting from his viral marketing company website. Try to keep up.

Oh shit. My bad, man. I give these guys more credit than they deserve.

 

[elrechazado]

He's a confirmed viral marketer. I was quoting from his viral marketing company website. Try to keep up.

We want to see the site for more lulz link!

 

[TheGreatDave]

I'm going to cancel my preorder and buy it used. Sorry Take 2, I can't support this ;_;

 

[XxBigP123xX]

Why all games MUST be like Borderlands (because I'm a viral marketer for Borderlands)

Saw that coming from a mile away.

 

[FFChris]

3.This thead does a diservice to the game, look at how many people are saying "i wont buy borderlands because of this"

Lets be honest though, they weren't going to buy it in the first place.

 

[Prezhulio]

lol

 

[Davidion]

"WHAT WE DO

What we do is help enrich your current outreach efforts with community programs that develop a two way dialogue with gamers. We engage gaming fans on a deeper level. We help convert awareness into interest. And we are darn good at it, with results as much as 150% better once our programs have been implemented."

I think your website needs an update after this thread. A simple "-" mark before the percentage would suffice.

This sure is a good way to develop a "two way dialogue". :lol :lol :lol :lol

 

[Papercuts]

We want to see the site for more lulz link!

No need to give them more hits from something like this.

 

[Technoob]

I'm going to cancel my preorder and buy it used. Sorry Take 2, I can't support this ;_;

Oh god, just because someone made a stupid thread. Great logic

 

[Grecco]

Lets be honest though, they weren't going to buy it in the first place.

You never know.