Those who wax poetic about how easy it would be to shove a multiple player function (and co-op is a multiple player mode) into a solidly designed single player world system such as the Elder Scrolls obviously have never attempted to code such, and may never have touched a line of C++ in their lives. Or designed -anything- that involves play balance issues. Oh, and gamesas -did- have a go at multiple player, once. It was called Battlespire. Took the 2nd patch for the online system to stop crashing the game consistently, as I recall, and the slowdowns from mismatched packet transmissions were lethal (this was in the days when command line e-gods had honking expensive 14.4 modems, while the dabbler has 4800 down to 1200 baud modems. No broadband save for the T1 collegiate level). They designed a single player game with an online aspect, and as tends to happen, the online svcked and the single player suffered. As it does to this day, since single player balance and design is fundamentally different from multiple player balance and design. Shooters get away with it due to lack of many of the things that make CRPG's what they are.

Personally, I play TES to -get away- from organics. I avoid online and MMO for the same reason; I have to deal with rudeness and idiocy at work 6 days a week. WHY would I want to get anywhere near a game (re: entertainment) where I would have to deal with exactly the same, save for the fact that anonymity brings out the juvenile snot in far too many people who otherwise would have at least =some= manners?

Well said, Dale. TES is very much a "getaway" for me as well.

Thanks for the explanation you two.
As soon as F3 gets out for PC I'll see for myself how does it work.
Am really interested since it sounds to me that it can give you a nice MP/Co-Op experience without ruining SP experience.



Sweet mother of a... :facepalm:



Some people have friends that they wish to play with, you know.

And your completely missing the point Lithary......

Dale, I didnt bring up Battlespires crap shoot at Co-op or rather elaborate on it because it wasnt open world, and Pro multiplayer peeps would say technology is better etc etc and completely bypass the point....like Lithary :confused: none the less your points are solid and still apply to this day in regards to the Multiplayer/Singleplayer divisions additions and the -getaway- aspect.

How many people when they think about multiplayer foolishly think it means some juvenile brats will come spoil their game? When was the last time a juvenile brat came to spoil your SINGLE PLAYER game of CoD or anything other?

When was the last time you player a co-op game and NEVER were given the option to play only with people you choose yourself? When was the last time a game that proposed a co-op mode to play the single player campaign in co-op with a friend did completely REMOVE the single player option in the process?

Can someone post an educated thought process on how Co-Op or multiplayer could be implemented? I have yet to see anyone with really concrete ideas.

It would be very hard to have this implemented in a way, that was interesting and unique enough to make sense in the long term. Like I have said, GTA4 and RDR multiplayer were failures. Yes they provided short, quick, bursts of fun, but in the long run they lacked any real entertainment value. Even Rockstar will admit these facts.

Multiplayer isnt something that should just be thrown on a game because "I wanna play with my fwiends". I ALWAYS said that GTA would be great as a multiplayer game, and when GTA4 came out it was a breath of fresh air. But that fresh new breath soon became stale, and lifeless. Im sorry if you guys dont see it, but read some of Rockstar's comments about those parts of the game. People simply didnt play either game(GTA,RDR) ONLY because of the multiplayer, and the amount of people that played the game vs. the amount of people that played continuously online.....well lets just say the numbers werent impressive.

The problem is, there isnt anything to do after a short period of time. Death match modes fail, because these games are NOT made for death match game modes. Objective games fail even worse for this reason. Free Roam is the best option for open world games, but even these get worn thin quickly. The problem is, after a while, wondering around aimlessly gets boring, even if your friends are with you. Now, RDR and GTA had more room to include a Co-Op version, because of the style of gameplay and the somewhat linear worlds they had. TES on the other hand is very unique, and tailored to a single player experience. For this reason, I dont want to share quests, loot, or exploration with anyone. I like the fact that this is my own little world, and call me selfish, but I dont want to share any of it with another player. All the missions, factions, and every intricate detail is tailored around one person gameplay.

With that said, multiplayer isnt something that should be rushed into, and thrown on a game just for the sake of having multiplayer. It needs to be carefully crafted and designed specifically for that purpose. A LOT of thought has to go into this. Equally just as much that has to go into an entire Single Player portion of a game this large. Otherwise, it will simply be a dud like the games mentioned above.

Im not saying that Im completely against multiplayer in TES, because it is an amazing concept that if done correctly could potentially be an incredible experience. Im just saying this would require a completely new game system in able for a co-op to work, whether that meant changing the game completely, or just adding a completely different, co-op experience. Either way.......Ive got much bigger worries than this. It would simply take TOO MUCH time and effort, and the results are very unclear. You dont know if your going to get it right, of if you are going to follow in the footsteps of broken multiplayer games before you.

So in closing, even though I love the 'idea' of multiplayer, Im going to have to side with reason and say Im against it. It could be the most amazing thing to happen to TES. And it could just as easily be an embarassment and waste of time, and mar the beauty and reputation TES has.

Just my two pennies

is confirmed that we won't be able to play coop, isn't it? todd says somethingt like "no, we want to focus more in 1 single player experience" or something like that in an european magazine

I think it is.

Yes, because they know what they are doing. Multiplayer will not be in Skyrim, dont worry folks, I promise. As for the next ES in 5 years??? Maybe.

Well the GTA4/RDR part is certainly debatable. I have never been a big GTA guy, but I thought RDR did multiplayer quite nicely. Failure is a strong word. I would love to see a co-op system, but I don't see how it could be everything we have come to expect and love from Bethesda, in only 9 months, unfortunately. I would like to see, and certainly think its feasible, to add some kind of duel arena. One of my buddies always brags about his character in Oblivion and it would certainly be nice to knock him back to Daggerfall with my character :tongue:

I think even if they released this as DLC, many people would enjoy it, though it would not be close to a substitute for a good co-op system. I don't pretend to be a dev or coding expert in any way, shape, or form, so my knowledge and ideas are limited, but I think this is a possible option. Its limited in its scope, certainly, but it would provide entertainment, if only a small side to the main single player game.



I can't claim to have seen any numbers for this but I know that many people--myself included--have played and many continue to play the multiplayer, of RDR at least. There might not have been as many playing single player, but that's not the point. If multiplayer was implemented, I would still probably play single player more. But I would play with friends some times, as would many, many others. The choice is a big part of the allure of adding multiplayer. Just another option, another way to play the game.


The problem of wandering becoming boring is not one that multiplayer would have any effect on. You would probably be more likely to become bored if you wander aimlessly by yourself. Friends can only help alleviate that dilemma.

And I agree that I wouldn't want to share the majority of my game with someone else. They can have their own game. But, you don't have to play with anyone. No one is forcing you to, and no one would presume to. I would play with friends sometimes, and by myself sometimes. You don't have to sell any part of your experience for this.


While I don't quite agree that those games are duds, I can agree with the majority of this. Quality is essential to a good multiplayer experience. Rushing it is probably not a good idea. Is it realistic that a multiplayer system be implemented in 9 months? Begrudgingly, I admit, no, I don't think it would be enough time to add a good co-op. But can I hope? Yeah :liplick:


I can't argue with most of this, but it would not be up to us to ensure the quality of the multiplayer experience and meshing with the rest of the game, that would be up to the devs. And so far, they haven't often disappointed us.

Those are quite shiny pennies!

So I just went through all of these "Multiplayer/Co-op" posts. I get the sense that more are for multi than are against it.
That being said, I would like the Single player experience to stay single-player. However, I would like to see multiple venues of multiplayer added. I would like to have the option to enter into a co-op experience with my friends or randos, that is just outside of the main story setting. I would also like to be able to have a large dungeon or 2 that would require 4 or more people clear with massive bosses and crazy loot. I would also like an arena setting to fight against other players.
And if the items I wanted came in the form of DLC, I wouldn't be mad.

My only question is why does this thread still exist? Bethesda has made it clear ever since Oblivion that they don't do multiplayer. They like to make the best single player experience possible, and they won't let multiplayer hinder that experience. We know multiplayer/co-op won't be in Skyrim. So why discuss it here?

Because if there wasn't one thread for this topic, there would be dozens of them, even though it has been confirmed to not be in Skyrim. Because everyone is going to be in the Skyrim forum right now, and pay little to no attention to directions to take multiplayer discussion to the series forum. The very first paragraph in the opening post:

Not to mention, that IS what forums are for. Discussing things that you like, care about, or hate.

Im still against the MP. Nobody is reading the posts in this thread, other than maybe the first three before commenting....so it is a bit of a waste of time. But still, people gotta discuss it somewhere!!!

Well, I'm totally AGAINST ONLINE multiplayer, as far as Fable 3 did it (random players droping in the game? in a game where your decisions matter? bad decision...)

But still, if they just made it so that we had a free-roam, co-op mode, it would be awesome.
Just the idea of tearing up some dungeon with my friend... I'm getting goosebumps!

Please, at least make a DLC out of it! that way, people who want it can have it, while closer-minded people those who don't want it can keep themselves from having it

Oh man I already set up for a LAN party come release but if they put in a co op feature Iam gong to [censored] my pants. Me, my sister and her BF could just cruise around and level together and fight an actual fight with one of us casting one shooting arrows and one slashing away. It would bring battles to another level but it would effect how strong they are because three or two on one would be to easy unless they substantionally increased its health and damage.

I have no desire for coop or multiplayer in a main TES game (meaning one that follows the evolution from Arena-Daggerfall-Morrowind-Oblivion-Skyrim. There have been other games in the TES series that weren't designed as an open ended game like the 5 I just mentioned; if a new TES game was made along the lines of Redguard or Battlespire or something and multiplayer was included, then by all means. But the core TES games are meant for single player. The series might evolve at some point to include this in the main games, and I doubt it will turn me off from them, but I honestly have no need for it.

My 2 centorinos.

I already made my standpoint clear in the last iteration of this same thread.

A resounding NO.

They can make an Elderscroll MMO for MP and Co-op, instead of destroying the original Elderscrolls game.

Adding Co-op to this game is NOT necessary at all and it is mostly a console fad, this is a single player game and the stories always reflect this, Co-op trivializes a game in my opinion.

So yet again, please stop asking for Co-op and Mp in all games, I've seen so many good games end up half-assed cause of split-focus from the developers, so instead of getting a full SP or MP you get half of each.

I'm not posting this to debate, I already did that before, but I just like to add my post to show that NO, everyone doesn't want a Co-op.

Actually, they have made is clear since Daggerfall (and Arena was originally intended to be just that; an online battle arena. Never got anywhere, and so became the Arena we know), as the tech at the time did -not- permit them to shove so much data through phone lines (Battlespire's Xngine was more developed, modems had a bit more speed, and the Battlespire world was interlinked dungeons (ie: levels), instead of free roaming worldspace). Most of it these days is being driven by the console crowd, who just can't stand the thought, apparently, of having that 2nd controller unused. To be fair, most PC gamers with CRPG loves use it as an escape from the annoyances of the workaday world.....but they also tend to bother to -find- other games that have what they want, not fuss about altering or outright destroying one game's unique features.

And this is the spam trap thread. By shoving all the MP/Coop stuff here, they keep it out of all the other threads.

And trust me. If they didn't have it, you would have this stuff appearing in nearly every other thread out there......

While a co-op mode where you can complete quests and factions would be awesome. I think a solid first step if BGS wants to try their hand at MP would be to have a free roam similar to GTA and RDR. It could have small missions (taking over forts, clearing out caves), but without the conversational NPCs and quest givers. It would basically be a place for friends to explore and have fun completely separate from the SP experience. If you would create a MP character (same char gen, skills, items, XP, etc) then take this character into the world where you could basically do whatever you felt like at the moment. I would be very basic and maybe even just be a DLC. Then if this is successful and well received, then they could maybe start working towards more in depth MP modes and possibly incorporating co-op that would include SP quests, factions, etc.

Basically ever since I first played Oblivion, I always dreamed of how fun it would be to explore the world, take on quests, defeat or become evil, etc all with a good friend by my side. Now some may say that's not what BGS is about and that I'm missing the point of TES games, but so be it. I know that I am a fan of TES. I will continue buying Elder Scrolls games even if they never add MP, but I will continue to hope that they try their hand at it and hopefully come up with a great implementation.

Lot of people talk about team questing and stuff, but for starters, I would be satisfied just with arena battles with my friends or just an ability to join his world (or that he joins mine) so we can simply mess around and stuff.
Maybe they could make that to be a DLC or something.

A recent thread came up on mutliplayer and was locked, however the links lead to a closed version of this discussion, bumping for the the masses

sorry i was new to the forum and didnt realise the system in place

I still stand by my argument that it costs money to implement multiplayer and unless the multiplayer is an optional DLC everyone would be charged for it even though most people will not use it. I say that most people will not use it because TES has been a single-player franchise and most buyers will think of it as such. I think people should be arguing for a multiplayer DLC instead of trying to rationalize the addition to the original games. If it is successful and shows that enough demand is out there to offset the cost then BGS can expand their studios to implement it, but just throwing it in is not a viable option.

agreed.