TL;DR at the end

A lot of people do not want Skyrim to be an MMORPG game, and I am one of those people. However, I think it would be cool to have co-op multiplayer. What I mean is you could invite up to four (or more) friends to play Skyrim with you online. Everything will be the same as in single player, except with more people. I was thinking about it one day while playing Oblivion, and I thought it would be awesome if your friends could join your game and help you through quests, loot stores, search for valuable items, ect. But, the more people you have in your game, the more enemy NPC's there will be in quests, bandit camps, and so on, so that the game doesn't get too easy. The same goes for valuable items, or just items in general. For example, if you are playing with two people, and you both find a really good sword. When you pick it up it will be given to both of you so that it is fair. Or say you and four other people are looting a house. Whatever you steal from the house will also be given to the other player(s), and then they will be able to drop it if they choose. Also, I think regular items should eventually respawn in their original spots (This doesn't mean that it will be taken from your inventory, but simply that another identical item will spawn in its place). For example, you pick up a bottle of wine off of a counter. Another identical bottle will spawn in its place without taking it from your inventory. Well, what do you think? A good idea or a bad one?

P.S.

I saw a thread a while back suggesting matchmaking for the arena. I think that's a pretty good idea! And there should also be a rank system where you can only fight people with the same rank as you so that a brawler isn't going up against a gladiator. And there could also be different types of matches:

1v1
Team 8v8
Players vs. NPCs and so on.

TL;DR:

You have the choice to play co-op with up to four different friends.

It would break immersion. So it could be in there for those who wanted it, but I would never want to use it. If I want to play with friends then I'll play a FPS.

Just my opinion.

For me the TES games have been special because they are so immersive without the need for other humans. I think that adding any sort of online element would detract from this and change the game into something very different.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lffwR5-U0YE.

Well, it is optional.

This thread again.

I am against it. I like to have games that are online that I can play with friends and I like games that don't have online. If they did give the option I really don't think I would use it anyways. :shrug:

We must have been writing our ideas at the same time spooky!

It could work if done effectively. I especially like the Arena being a matchmaking tool for pvp. I think that the immersion would definitely get hindered as far as the single player mission direction and all that. I think if anything, let zenimax online handle a multiplayer version of TES:1

Ah, history repeats. I still remember this topic appearing constantly when Oblivion was still in development.

I realize that the concept of a truly single player experience has fallen out of favor these days, but there are some of us left who don't want to face swearing 12 year olds in a multiplayer arena or split loot and XP with other adventurers. Sometimes, we just want to lose ourselves in another world, by ourselves.

I wouldn't want to see it in an Elder Scrolls game, period.

Short answer: No.

Long answer: Nooooooooooooooooooo.

No, you play with your friends. I guess there could be matchmaking but I don't like that idea, really, unless it is in the arena (as long as you have the option to mute).

I get sick of hearing the, "I don't want to deal with people" excuse for not wanting it. No one forces you to invite people, if it were co-op it would be completely optional and you would probably invite the people yourself. So once again, if you don't care for it you don't invite anyone.

First, co-op is lame. Always. If my friends are over to hang out and play some games, where's the fun in having a few competent human players up against a horde of enemy AI? Kinda one-sided, me thinks.



All of the hostility to a multiplayer option in this forum reminds me of the complaints about fast travel. It was completely optional, yet a lot of people had to literally edit it out of the game (for those with the PC version, anyway) to keep themselves from using such a convenient option. Are people afraid they won't be able to restrain themselves from using the multiplayer option? Or what?

Since when has 'fun' taken a backseat to everything else? Come on, Bethesda. I have friends. We'd love it if come November we weren't experiencing the game from over each-others shoulders.

EDIT: I'd like to hear how multi-player would ruin your Elder Scrolls game.

http://ojezap.posterous.com/instant-no-button-star-wars-funnies-ftw

To quote my video on fast travel:



Followed up by

This is a false anology. Fast travel hardly effects the game at all. Multiplayer, optional or not, would change the way the game is designed. They'd have to develop it with both single AND multiplayer in mind. Chances are, they'd stick on the multiplayer side, making it a rather unbalanced and strange single player game. You just couldn't do it unless you made two separate games, which is silly.

A short list of things it would effect:
Loot
Gold
Monsters
NPCs
Dungeons
Quests
Stability

That's more than enough reasons to not make this a multiplayer game.

I thought the landscape was beautiful. I usually chose to go by foot just to take screenshots.



lol. Yeaaaaah. Hopefully they'll get better with mounts, this time 'round...



And miss out on discovering a new dungeon? Or capturing a spectacular shot of Frostcrag framed by the forest canopy and bathed in the red glow of morning's first light?

At first I used fast travel when I only had a short time to play the game and I wanted to get something accomplished. Now I only use it to test out my new mods...

The landscape is beautiful, but it gets really boring after a while. At least in my opinion.

Yeah, the generated landscape is really lame, IMO. It was nice for the first couple hours, but it just got bland quickly. I could drive 10 miles and see that kind of landscape. Now, Nehrim's landscape, on the other hand, was GORGEOUS. All hand made, sculpted beautifully, naturally. It used the same kinds of trees as Oblivion, but it is such a vast map that you can walk around and notice when you're in a different place, and admire each area for its beauty. And that's just on the roads- I haven't left the roads yet I'm too afraid I'm gunna die if I leave the roads.

Lol, were you writing the same thing?

Two great minds think alike :foodndrink:

Why?


Why?

And... really, as a general response to people who are against this kind of thing: why? I always, always see people saying that a co-op or small-scale multiplayer component would ruin immersion. How? How does being able to play with other people ruin immersion for you while you play alone? How does actually playing with other people ruin immersion in the first place? Alternatively, I think the response is usually "I don't want to deal with 12 year olds". So... don't? Don't play with 12 year olds. Play with friends. Hell, play alone.

The only argument I can buy is that it'd influence the design of the game, but even that's... well, a bit of a stretch, and one that really needs better justification. Having a co-op mode that treats a single player as the "main character" and has the others just follow along with him isn't going to influence the design in single player, because the multiplayer is tacked on as something that simply uses the single player content. A multiplayer mode that just removes quests entirely and allows players to roam freely and maybe engage in a couple of diversions (like how Rockstar's been handling it with their recent games) wouldn't influence the single player design either. Really, in general there are a lot of ways to handle co-op without changing anything about how the game is played in single player, so this isn't really a valid excuse. Well... maybe if you're talking in terms of development resources having to be shifted toward multiplayer, but Bethesda is a big company with a lot of cash and a lot of employees. If Bethesda decides that they'd rather focus on something else instead of devoting the resources to it, or that it isn't worth the extra time and effort to implement, then so be it... but I don't think anybody on this forum is in a position to make that judgement for them.

In general, I really don't care if the games have co-op or not. I don't imagine that it'd play very well if they did, so I'd probably ignore it anyways. That doesn't change the fact that I have yet to see a really compelling reason as to why it can't be included, or that most of the reasons given seem to boil down to either "I don't like other people" or "because the other games don't have it" (even though two of the TES games actually do).

If you play the game enough, I guess. Or any game. Perhaps the industry needs evolving landscape technology? It would be amazing to see landscapes change according to non-player-centric events as well as player-inspired actions. Of course, mods are always nice too. :goodjob: Those options excluded, I don't see many options on what Bethesda can do to get around this.

:thumbsup:

(I really ~really liked the old 'thumbs up' better :confused: )

I've never understood the aversion to any form of 'Fast Travel'; I understand the reasons given... but I still don't understand the aversion. It makes no sense to me at all.

As to multiplayer ruining my (or anyone else's Elder Scrolls...)... That is at least definable.

If you ever played Diablo Multiplayer, you know that multiplayer gaming done right is possible in a non first person shooter. If you ever played multiplayer Baldur's Gate (1, 2, IWD), then you've seen why coop/multiplayer fails (or is at least inelegant) in any kind of complex RPG. TES [IMO] is a hair step past Diablo2 in first person ~but its enough to be a problem. The first problem is that the game stops dead when you talk to someone ~what does the other player see while you are talking? (what if they are in a different cell; or inside of a building while you are outside having the conversation). Do both players get to initiate dialog?

Now... I'm not saying that it can't be done... but I will say that it would seem totally unrelated to the intents of the series, and would add unnecessary complexity (and complications) ~as well as demanding design changes that would affect my (and everyone else's Elderscrolls).

You can't just 'tack it on' to a single player game, and I certainly don't want the internal framework and engine changes that come with it; not to mention the format changes that will affect quest design to accommodate multiple players.

I consider the idea as being a [very] bad one; and would hope it never gets seriously considered.
*(except perhaps in a spin off product)

It would take valuable time away from developing other, single player aspects of the game. Multiplayer cannot just be thrown in on a whim, it takes time and resources.

Plus it just doesn't fit with the way Elder Scrolls games are set up, if that makes any sense.

Hmmm, well all of these points of veiw are pretty interesting but I have to say that something co-op would be an interesting addition. For example take grand theft auto 3 it was single player just like every other gta game. then gta 4 came out and it was just as amazing but they added a multiplayer element to it. And if i recall the multiplayer was awesome and it didnt take anything away from the single player at all. If Rockstar can do it then im pretty sure that Bethesda could accomplish it