Yes... Yes... I know "Multiplayer is going to screw up the game" but for me I want to play fallout with my friends so i though (Like people have already though of.... probably) but why not make the co - op with a compaionion? I think that would be awesome to run around as dogmeat. There is no point in changing the story line to make it co op like saving your husband. The compainions would have to stay with the main player or they would get teleported back. I think it would be a great way to play with my friends without screwing up the whole game

And one DLC item i think would be so usefull is window walls so i can string power without having a ugly wire.

There isn't going to be any co-op DLC. Converting a game like this to multiplayer is far more complex than most people realize.

I couldn't agree more that there should be walls with windows. And more options for doorways as well. I'd love to see some building options that look a bit less like they were built out of random pieces of garbage. I get that they really ARE built out of salvage, but if I have the resources to build a sheet metal wall, why can't I build a sheet metal wall that isn't riddled with holes or cut a doorway into it? I'd also love to see locking doors, and I'd love to see settlers close doors when they enter a building. As it is now, putting doors on buildings is basically pointless.

It's not possible to add any kind of multiplayer support to a game by slapping on the code. That kind of stuff has to be coded in from the earliest stages of the games development. If they were going to implement it, they would've done so for the games release.

The issue is that it would need to be done quite early in the game development since a lot of code would need to be added for networking and a means to deal with latency. On the consoles it might be a bit easier with adding on screen co-op.

There would be a lot of compromises made to the game engine since of all the movable objects in the game do not play well in multiplayer-lan play since they would have to transmitted to the other party.

As for buildings and walls. I believe the people would be able to build proper walls and windows. Maybe we can get a Magazine called "This Old House" If my memory serves me well they started in New England. And maybe have "New Yankee Workshop" magazines as well.

no co-op no multiplayer, ever, thanks

It would also be amazing if you could thread wire somewhere because unless you put the wires right next to the wall it looks ugly.

You know what. Honestly, for most stand alone games, even first person shooters. Co Op or Multiplayer isn't something I take part in or care about. But it would be awesome to be one of 4 people in power armor tearing the @#!$ out of a large encampment of Super Mutants.

Just sayin....

further companion customization would be nice. It be nice to give Piper, Curie, or anyone else a haircut. Maybe not facial reconstruction, but haircuts. Yeah.

good idea, sub feed power supply. just put a down and an up and "it just works".

Don't mess up my RPG by making it co-op or multiplayer. Go play another game if you want that feature and leave my RPGs alone.

It is possible, but prohibitively difficult. The only mod-added multiplayer I ever saw get to the point of a playable beta version was for Torchlight 1, and even that one was buggier than a squirrel turd. All of the Bethesda-based multiplayer mods have given up after realizing exactly how ridiculous it is to get it working on a Bethesda game.

No. Thanks. Never. Hell, no!

Fallout is fun because is single player only. Add any form of multiplayer and wellcome to grind, "efficiency," and all related crap.

Multiplayer requires uniformity on both ends. The coop / multiplayer people keep asking for *MUST* come at the expense of mods. They want to destroy the thing that makes these games last so long.

Co-op IS multiplayer

I AM Vault-tec!

You were doing perfectly up to that point!

If it comes out MP or CO-OP say good bye to the lone wanderer.

Torchlight II allows multiplayer with mods provided all participants use the same set of mods, and there's a player-made workaround for even that restriction (works kinda like a Bashed Patch). Plus, how many modders aren't using a mod manager of some sort that allows us to have multiple mod profiles? It wouldn't be a problem at all to have one mod loadout for single player and one for co-op.

Done right, multiplayer wouldn't negatively impact the game experience in any way. Problem is, that "done right" is a hell of a lot of work, which is why nobody (including Bethesda) is willing to get it working.

Arma style COOP would be fantastic. But it sounds like there are some COOP allergies among this community so I'll shut up about it

"co-op not multiplayer"

Co-op is multiplayer.

And multiplayer can go die in a fire.

(PvP is worse. It can die in a fire repeatedly. )

People that're so biased towards the game not having any form of co-op don't think about the fact that it's not mandatory. Quit complaining like its the worst thing ever to actually have multiplayer to make a good game even better. I'm not saying MMO, I'm saying co-op. It's still the same exact game but with someone else to play with who isn't a retardedly broken AI. That sounds perfect to me, idk what you're [censored]ing about.

Torchlight II was designed from the beginning to have multiplayer and it still had issues with multiplayer even without mods. TL2 had limits on the amount of mods active to 10 plugins. You could use the editor to merge mods and quite a few mods did have quite a few mods merged into one to help with the limit. The engine had some issues especially if you are behind a restricted NAT, either your router or some ISP's do use restricted NAT's

How many people here use the exact same mod layout in a Bethesda game which have a whole lot more mods than Torchlight 2 and even in Torchlight 2 many did not use the same mods since all of us have different wants and needs in a game.

As others have pointed out: It needs to be designed with co-op in mind. As such it's no longer the single-player franchise that people purchase it for. Not to mention the time and resources that are dedicated to implementing it and maintaining it after launch.

So yeah if it's in the game then it's still impacting people's gameplay whether or not it's "mandatory". I play Fallout for Fallout, or what's left of it at this point.

NOOOOOOOOO THAAAAAAAAAAANKYOOOUUUUUUUU!

The issue isn't having an optional co-op feature that many of us do not want, the issue is that Fallout is, and should remain, a game that is built from the ground up around the single player RPG experience. Co-op will absolutely take away from the RPG experience (all the time spent in dialogue, reading terminals, use of VATS, etc). Let Fallout remain an RPG and you can hope that Beth releases totally separate co-op games.

I remember during my early days of Skyrim, I would often hang out with the cute girl who got me into the game and watch her play. I prefered swords and restoration, she preferred destruction magic, and a lot of those sessions would involve watching her die pathetically to some fortified bandits and thinking about how my character could totally back her up if he were able to.

Co-op in these games needn't be a strictly dedicated thing. What I envision is a "companion" that could be controlled by a second player, with some default gear and stats, but only functions as a helper for Player 1. Player 1, the person actually playing the game, does all the dialogue and quest starting/completion, but he has Player 2's character nearby to give some general combat support. You can even have a number of generic companions to choose from with different roles and load-out.

Bam, co-op in TES/Fallout games that do not require destroying major parts of the experience or lore.