Official: Discussion of Multiplayer/Co-op in Skyrim

Post » Tue May 17, 2011 6:30 am

@DCDeacon Just so I know whether or not to get my hopes up - any chance on co-op in Skyrim?

@mattLefevre 0.0 percent chance. Sorry.


There...i see no reason for this topic to remain open
User avatar
JLG
 
Posts: 3364
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 7:42 pm

Post » Tue May 17, 2011 12:38 pm

I still think, the best way to make everybody happy is to make it a DLC... I mean, the cheap people (like me) won't be THAT happy with it, but I would pay for it :) eventually lol.

Reason for this:
Some people say that if they add multiplayer to the game, it will take away from the single player game. Less time and resources. Makes sense. Unless they hired extra people for the multiplayer, which would just come out of Bethesda's money.

Other people say, multiplayer is an option, so if you dont like it, dont use it.

My solution is DLC. Bethesda will just have to make it possible for multiplayer to be implemented. I dont know much about all this, but I'm sure they could make it possible, and it wouldnt use as much time and manpower. And Bethesda gets more money from whoever gets this DLC.

Personally, I don't ever want to see more than 10 human players in the same world. I just want co-op. I'm fine with 2 player co-op, but 4 would be better. Also adding a competitive version would be nice. Like the Arena, but with other players (making it part of the co-op would be fine, and they wouldnt have to add any matchmaking or anything).

I think one of the bigger problems is, how would the other player join my game? Would he have to make a new character? Would he just get a pre-made or random character, with very few options (gender, race, class)? Or would they be able to load their character from their own game? I think loading your own character would be the best way. But at the same time, I think there should be an option for both players to be about the same level (maybe a 2 level difference). The way this would work, would probably cause some extra save-game bloating, if you want to call it that. This is kind of how I imagine it to work, assuming leveling is similar to Oblivion/Morrowind:

Everytime you level up, the game saves what your skills were like at that level. Then when you join a friend's game with that character, it bumps you down to a level close to your friend's. Or if your a lower level, you can just level up like normal. So lets say I'm level 12, and my friend Bob is level 16 with his character. I invite him to my game, he selects the save from his game, the game sees that im level 12, then it looks at what his character was like at level 12, then it bumps him down to my level. It could save the data every other level also, so that if I were level 11, and he was a higher level, he would be bumped down to level 12. just so the save games dont get quite as large in size. Obviously, theres not much we can do about equipment. Except maybe the game keeps a record of what all items you had at level 12, or whatever level. Then you can pick a few items from your records. So if you had Steel armor at level 12, then got Dwarven at level 13, you wouldnt be able to get that Dwarven, but you could get the steel and everything you had before. This way if you got a unique item, you could get it again. If I got Umbra at level 10, then joined my level 12 friend's game, I would still have my Umbra.
By the way, when I was typing this I kept thinking of Xbox Live, so thats why I kept saying "invite a friend" ;) Obviously PC would work differently, but I'm sure Bethesda could figure it all out :)
I hope I explained this in an understandable way.

edit: just thought about it, but 'resting' would cause a differene in time of the game. So my solution, make it so you cant 'rest'. you can only sleep in a bed. Both players, in the same interior cell, then one puts in a request to sleep, for a set amount of time, the other clicks to accept, and pow. I guess this could also be done outside, but I think it would be easier inside. Inns, or the player's house.
User avatar
Stefanny Cardona
 
Posts: 3352
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 8:08 pm

Post » Tue May 17, 2011 1:16 pm

Personally, I think multiplayer should stay away from this game. BUT, if mp were to be in, I wouldn't mind something like demons souls mp. Although, I don't know how you could implement something like that in a game this massive.
User avatar
James Rhead
 
Posts: 3474
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 7:32 am

Post » Tue May 17, 2011 12:03 pm

@DCDeacon Just so I know whether or not to get my hopes up - any chance on co-op in Skyrim?

@mattLefevre 0.0 percent chance. Sorry.

This is good news IMHO, better that they focus on a fantastic single player experience over anything else.

Can't wait! :goodjob:
User avatar
Penny Courture
 
Posts: 3438
Joined: Sat Dec 23, 2006 11:59 pm

Post » Tue May 17, 2011 4:17 am

As long as there are no online achievements, and the single player gamyplay isn't compromised (shortened) in any way, i'm happy.
User avatar
Beat freak
 
Posts: 3403
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 6:04 am

Post » Tue May 17, 2011 10:17 am

What about team daethmatches/Demolition/FFA matches?
User avatar
Del Arte
 
Posts: 3543
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:40 pm

Post » Tue May 17, 2011 8:42 am

What about team daethmatches/Demolition/FFA matches?


I hear Dark Messiah, the Halo series, Nearly all Console games, Tribes, UT 200--- 3 do this quite well.
User avatar
Richard Dixon
 
Posts: 3461
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2007 1:29 pm

Post » Tue May 17, 2011 3:11 am

I say...if it's optional, and doesn't influence in any way the Single Player experience or the existing lore....why not?

Remember, guys....the keyword is OPTIONAL. You know, like Fast-Travel, which is also OPTIONAL.



Brilliant, and I thought the same way. I think it would be nice to have an arena, similar to Oblivion, where players can compete. It does not interfere with the story or the singleplayer-centric game, and it gives the community a tangible way to compare character builds.

A few notes:

-The thread is a little long, and I'm still reading it

--This is my first post in the official forums, so play nice

The following is an unedited email I sent Bethesda regarding this topic. Reply, folks; I want to know what everyone thinks:

Dearest Bethesda,

Where do I begin? I know you, but you do not know me, so I'll tell you a bit about myself, and hopefully you'll be interested in what I have to say.

I am twenty years old and a veteran gamer from whence I could hold a controller. I'm sure you've heard the rant about the Golden Age of Gaming plenty of times, so I'll digress from what I suppose is the norm of the feedback you receive.

What's different about me are the reasons that gaming is my passion. I am an artist of all trades; a musician, actor, writer of poetry and prose, martial artist, student of philosophy and sciences aplenty. And one day, I vow, I will be under the employment of your prestigious company. With ample opportunity for music, writing, exploration and general creativity, I know the industry can use a multi-talented lover of video games like myself. I will pursue all my passions, and one day make an impact on the industry that encompasses them all.

With the introduction to your contact page having probed me to make a suggestion, I absolutely must take the opportunity to share an idea that I hope you find interesting. I have one humble suggestion, and I'm sure you've not heard it before.

Multiplayer. Please hear me out before you scrap my letter.

I know there has been speculation and suggestion galore about a MMO Elder Scrolls and similar nonsense (and I say nonsense not to insult, but honestly, what would a mass prison break do to Tamriel?). My proposal works differently than others.

I propose a multiplayer arena where players can compete. Perhaps for gold? Fame? That is up to you. What I suggest, however, is that this arena work similarly to the one in Oblivion. The following is my reasoning, and hopefully you will find brilliance in it:

The Elder Scrolls has, as far as I understand it, never been a medium whose story can be told in multiplayer format. I respect that, and I hope for it to remain that way. The problem with this format, however, is that there is a long, agonizing and enjoyable character build process. Players can complete the games' quests, slay monsters on the highest difficulty, and even after hundreds of hours when it's all done, go on a NPC killing spree, but one sliver of satisfaction is missing: the ability to compare your prowess with your neighboring gamers.

By enabling players to compete in an arena, you provide an attraction for the entire Elder Scrolls community while still maintaining the singleplayer-centric experience. It does not need to interfere with the main game in any way, and would bestow infinite replay value to the large and loving community who have a newfound way to connect. I do not intend for this suggested game mode to have the Elder Scrolls compete with any other franchise, particularly those which are multiplayer-centric. No experience points or ranking up or unlocking things or any of that stuff (lest you find it a good idea to include, though I do not recommend it). Just pure community connection where we can show our love for one other and the series by unchivalrously spilling each other's guts into the Red Room below.

I sincerely hope that you put a good amount of consideration into my suggestion before shaking your heads about it; if it is to be thrown out the window, let there be good reason. Even if it may be too late in the development process, this is something that can be an addition to the game in the form of a patch, DLC, plug-in, or anything else you can think of. And I'm sure if you called it something like The Elder Scrolls Arena it would garner a lot of attention.

I kindly request that you reply to my feedback and suggestion in an email. I shall await your return to my thoughts excitedly and hopefully.

Always your Adoring Fan,

Enrique Rivera
User avatar
Kelsey Hall
 
Posts: 3355
Joined: Sat Dec 16, 2006 8:10 pm

Post » Tue May 17, 2011 5:42 am

Personally I love co-op. I love diablo, I love borderlands and I and love me some red alert 2 multiplayer. But imo TES will not and should never be multiplayer.
User avatar
Kara Payne
 
Posts: 3415
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 12:47 am

Post » Tue May 17, 2011 3:15 am

I like it as a single player game.But i do agree that co-op would be good as long as it was optional ( as stated ) and did'nt take anything away from the single player elements.
I also think that co-op would go well with arena fights or tournaments,which i have thread about :)
User avatar
jeremey wisor
 
Posts: 3458
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 5:30 pm

Post » Tue May 17, 2011 7:47 am

An optional, 4 player max, closed world co-op version of the single player experience would be a very very very fine idea to me :)
User avatar
Rachie Stout
 
Posts: 3480
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 2:19 pm

Post » Tue May 17, 2011 6:17 am

Mmo rhymes with no, 4 player coop is too much, 2 player would be alright, single player... now that's where it is at. Nothing beats a single player game especially with all
these multiplayer games already out. I like to enjoy playing a game by myself and just talking to other friends on what they are doing in their world. Now what would be nice,
is in the main menu, you could have the option to check your friends status in the game, what the character looks like, what they are wearing, days spent, creatures killed, things
of that nature.
User avatar
Silvia Gil
 
Posts: 3433
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 9:31 pm

Post » Tue May 17, 2011 10:46 am

I have to admit, there are countless times when a friend and I will be playing Oblivion. Well, one of us plays, the other is watching. And then it hits us, how cool would it be to both be dungeon crawling together in a group?
i don't think co-op would really kill immersion. That totally depends on how serious you and your co-op buddy plan a dungeon crawl etc. If you are tactical about it, it could actually create more immersion. If your buddy is some one like
Leroy Jenkins, than yah... immersion killer complete! Plus, it would be great to rely on each other for your different strengths in experience.

As for an MMO... It all depends on how Bethesda would do it. If at all... I have a hard time playing any MMO because most feel watered down and are littered with HUD clutter. The substance just isn't there. I just can't justify a monthly fee to
play, it totally looses my interest. Now, if Beth did an MMO, I'm certain they would do it tastefully, and make it worth the monthly fee. The problem is, they are always so far ahead of the curve technically in regards to an RPG. I doubt the investment would pay off with so many people unable to afford nice PCs to run the game on. Somehow, some way Beth would need to lighten the game so that it would be able to push across the net with low latencies. And getting the proper infrastructure in place would be a nightmare. Beth strikes me as a company wanting full ownership of most if not all aspects of business. They probably want their own server farm :)
User avatar
james tait
 
Posts: 3385
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 6:26 pm

Post » Tue May 17, 2011 8:11 am

I didn't read the read but I will say that some games just don't need to do the multiplayer thing. Or even the single player for that matter. Certain games don't need RPG elements or hardcoe mode or any number of features. Certain games are as they should be and should remain such.

As a game developer you need to choose your focus. Spreading your talent too thing makes a mediocre game and often that is what happens. "Everyone" loves sandbox games right? Well some games should be more linear or more focused on the story. You have to know what you want to create and do that without trying to please everyone. No matter what you can't be everything to everyone.
User avatar
Loane
 
Posts: 3411
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 6:35 am

Post » Tue May 17, 2011 10:31 am

I like co-op, but mostly teamwork kind of games.

The only way I see a co-op work for Skyrim is when it's optional, in no way will it change the storyline. Other than that, co-op should not just be co-op, I mean, there should be the possibility to split up and let's say "meet there and there, in the meantime try to get this and this for me okay?". That for me could be fun, it makes for a bit of change in gameplay. Because having to stick together all the time and work together all the time isn't really immersing, plus I kinda like the idea to not know where your friend is and you say meet up there, and maybe he never is there? This means not having 'chat-to-all' kind of stuff. Only realistic chat, so that you can only chat when you're close to the person. This makes for good planning if you want to meet-up again. Other than that, you could be sending people doing errands for you and delivering a message to your partner-in-crime.


I completely agree with this post. If for example its 4 player max in a 'room' 4 friends link up with one of them as the host and party leader, the other 3 should be able to press a button and leave the party. If 4 of you play as the generic fighter,wizard,priest,thief combo..the thief guy is going to want to break off at night to go robbing and not necessarily have the others know whats hes doing. Likewise if the priest wants to go on a hippy pilgrimage and the others just want to smack a few sewer rats then fine.

While you're in the party you share a journal and dialogue and that is your 'party' history but the world will have been affected by your actions. So if the party kills the rats in bongo cave, the rats in bongo cave will still be dead if the fighter goes there alone.

In fact id be more inclined to experiment with another character as i mainly only had one in Oblivion. If co op was included i'd have a character that complimented what we needed in the team. Id have another character for single player.

I think the inclusion of a small scale co-op option would be marvelous
User avatar
Jordan Fletcher
 
Posts: 3355
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2007 5:27 am

Post » Tue May 17, 2011 4:44 am

2 player co-op.
User avatar
kirsty williams
 
Posts: 3509
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 5:56 am

Post » Tue May 17, 2011 2:49 am

Multiplayer can be done in TES without the game losing its traditional gameplay but the game would have to be built around multiplayer seeing as how the game is fashioned for singleplayer. I'd rather not sacrifice our Singleplayer TES games to make a separate multiplayer one.
User avatar
Jani Eayon
 
Posts: 3435
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 12:19 pm

Post » Tue May 17, 2011 8:26 am

I feel like its way to much work for multiplayer. This is a story based game and doing all this would take to much away from the time that could be spent on making a truly remarkable campaign. Id rather just stick to what were good at here roleplaying and adventuring. Now if there was a system link option or onlineoption where you could do missions together or just go dungeon diving together I wouldn't be opposed but I don't know how much work that would take. But pvp just isn't a good idea.
User avatar
CxvIII
 
Posts: 3329
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2006 10:35 pm

Post » Tue May 17, 2011 12:13 am

There will never be co-op, arena death match, or any kind of multiplayer system in a Bethesda game. With that understood, ZeniMax Online is making an unannounced MMO that is probably TES (ZeniMax Online was created back in 2007, so this MMO has been in development for a couple of years). Their office is only an hour and a half away from Bethesda in Rockville, Maryland (Easy to coordinate with Bethesda if they have any questions about what to do with the game). They stated various times that they have the capacity to use Bethesda's IPs for their MMO, and we know it's not Fallout Online because Interplay (original creator of the Fallout IP) is currently making that. However, they are going through a huge law suit with Bethesda over the rights and what not (Interplay sold the rights of Fallout to Bethesda back in 2004 I believe when Fallout 3 was announced). Regardless of all this, the only IP from Bethesda that would be practical to use (and probably the biggest) would be TES. People have been wanting online features in TES for a long time, and Bethesda has took a hard stand on being opposed to the idea, for good reason. It was only a matter of time until we actually saw a TES MMO to be honest anyways.
User avatar
laila hassan
 
Posts: 3476
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 2:53 pm

Post » Tue May 17, 2011 3:08 pm

I really really hope Bethesda never makes a MP option for a TES game. They are like the last bastion of decent single player games out there. There simply are no more. Too many developers go for a mix, or directly to MMO, which are fine in their own right, however, a single player game is just as much an art as the others. It's just a dying art, unfortunately, and I directly blame the MP and MMOs for that (true or not, that's my opinion) as I have seen the good single player games die off over the years. Good titles and companies like Looking Glass (Thief Project) and Arcanum are gone. Bethesda is the last. I'd rather they continue making what they're good at, absolutely outstanding single player RPGs.
User avatar
Avril Churchill
 
Posts: 3455
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 10:00 am

Post » Tue May 17, 2011 3:11 pm

An optional, 4 player max, closed world co-op version of the single player experience would be a very very very fine idea to me :)

Alright so i was reading through some forums and saw that a guy had a wish that there was an online arena for Elder Scrolls V. Now i know that the release is less than a year away. But Here was my idea.
Game Mode Ideas:
The Arena. Let the servers hold 8 people. So you can have the choices. Their should be two rounds in every match.
1) To have a 1v1
2) To have a 2v2
3) To have a 3v3
4) To have a 4v4
1v1 Tournament mode. Like when one match is beginning the other 8-16 (i think there could be a possibilty of 16 but 8 will only hold 4 matches, keeping the battles fast and leveling up faster.) But the other non active players will sit and watch the battle in the spectating area of the arena and if they want they can bet on either gamertag instead of having teams in a 1v1 arena it should say that you can bet on (said gamertag.) For the Players that are Getting in the 1v1. They have 60 seconds (1m) to get there weapons and armor equipped and everytime they find a new match it uses previous selected weapons. Then the active players walk up to the Gate ready to battle it out. And if one player is not ready when 60(s) is up then it spawns them to the Arena Gates with selected equipment. When the match Ends it Brings up a map like screen of who's 1v1ing next. Then it loads and spawns everyone to designated places, Non active players to spectating areas and have the choice to bet there online money on (said gamertag) and To bet they can go to a man standing at a bar or whatever this doesnt matter to me honestly. The active players spawn in a room with All of their weapons and armor in a chest and a table where they can heal their Health Magika Fatigue. And in the room That the players spawn in should show their personal stats and arena medals etc. Then 'course they spawn to the gates. For the people who lose the 1v1's they should have the choice to spectate until the tournaments over or leave the game but the losers should earn some xp for fighting.

When you switch to the multiplayer mode it should spawn you in a room where you can equip your arena equipment and take as long as you want you should also be able to see your personal stats, medals, etc. Should be able to go to the armory and buy stuff for the arena with your money. and you can hit the back button for x360 to choose what game mode you want to play, this also doesnt matter to me Bethesda will figure it out.

My Thoughts on leveling up online:
When you level up your skills you can Level up, and Here are the thoughts if you go to the training area you can level up skills and level up but if you play online you can level your skills and your money so you need to play online to earn money to so you can buy weapons and armor but if you want to just level up one certain skill real fast and dont care for the money you can just go play in the Training area.

My thoughts on The personal customization:
I think that online you should be able to change your race and facial features at anytime you want but you should be a certain level like when you pass level 10 or if there are 10 races in Skryim i think you should unlock a race every level and the Default races should be a Nord since this is Skryim and Nords originated from Skyrim. Then also you can change your race, gender, etc. At anytime the player wants to.

I think there should also be a Training room, like when you spawn in this said Multiplayer room there should be a door like downstairs leading to a room filled with Dummies for people who favor swords, bows, etc. and a seperate section where you can level up magic skills. Now for The marksman skill i think that when you get to a certain level you should have the ability to hold to arrows and shoot and For the People who favor blades should reach a certain level and be able to weild to blades. (daggers, shortswords, longswords, etc.)

My clarification on This said Personal Multiplayer room:
When you swith to Multiplayer it should spawn you in your room with your purchased equipment in a chest or mounted on the wall or whatever and have your personal stats and best (Awards/Medals) And then you can go downstairs to the training area. And have a man upstairs that you cant kill, that is behind something that you can buy equipment from. And in this room where you spawn there should be a mirror around that will let you customize your person to whatever race ,hairstyle , etc. that the player wants.

Another Game Mode:
A Chariot Race would be Great. It would be a race with 4-8 people i guess racing around atrack and the winner gets a bunch of Gold. And you can buy new chariots/horses/spiked rims on the chariots/ armor for horses/etc.

A Chariot Battle would also be nice.
User avatar
Quick Draw III
 
Posts: 3372
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 6:27 am

Post » Tue May 17, 2011 4:00 am

Multiplayer can be done in TES without the game losing its traditional gameplay but the game would have to be built around multiplayer seeing as how the game is fashioned for singleplayer. I'd rather not sacrifice our Singleplayer TES games to make a separate multiplayer one.


Agreed. Multiplayer is what offshoot games like "TES Legends/TES Adventures" games are for, says I. Numbered main-series TES games- single-player all the way.
User avatar
Emmanuel Morales
 
Posts: 3433
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2007 2:03 pm

Post » Tue May 17, 2011 10:14 am

I don't know where that logic comes from to be honest. In fact, Id say there really is no logic there....

If Bethesda was going to do co-op, they probably would just add some network programmers to their team who would handle the vast majority of the work required for co-op. I really don't see how anything would be "sacrificed", or why people are so afraid the single player experience would somehow be damaged. That is nothing but un-educated fear mongering.

In the unlikely event there happened to be co-op, it would certainly be the co-op that is unbalanced and lacked development... not the single player.

There are too many references to Fable and COD and all other multiplayer games for me to quote them. I just want to clarify this "sacrificed" comment.
Fable has a minuscule story line, and lacking gameplay. 10 hour game tops. COD games, typically about 20 hours (from all my friends, generic war games are generic, which is why I like TES, which is anything but generic.) Some of the COD games may have like 40 hours, I don't know, but what I do know is this: they are linear. You must do this now, and wait to do this. Doesn't this seem like a sacrifice, 10 hours of open world multiplayer, or 20 hours of linear multiplayer? When Oblivion had 250 hour gameplay. Per character. If I want multiplayer, I'll play Gears of War. But there isn't much there for single player, you can beat it 3 times in a day while still taking breaks and getting a good nights sleep. So for people who talk about a DLC for multiplayer, you need to realize that the popular multiplayer games still take up more space than Bethesda games and have less content. I don't care how fast your internet is, it's gonna take a helluva long time to download 5 gigs of DLC.
User avatar
Laura Ellaby
 
Posts: 3355
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 9:59 am

Post » Tue May 17, 2011 4:12 am

we can not destory a dynasty for a little extra fun. TES is to great for such small time things
User avatar
Sami Blackburn
 
Posts: 3306
Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2006 7:56 am

Post » Tue May 17, 2011 2:32 pm

I say...if it's optional, and doesn't influence in any way the Single Player experience or the existing lore....why not?

Remember, guys....the keyword is OPTIONAL. You know, like Fast-Travel, which is also OPTIONAL.

I agree with you 100% I wouldnt mind if they put it in there last moment but I dont want it to ruin the single player of the game, it would be nice to have but I can live without it and if it meant losing out of one of the best single player experiences for some decent MP I would rather not have it that and having a second player should make the game significantly harder because just me with a good sword and decent armor I would tear people up but with two or more people we would just go through a dungeon and it would seem like nothing even attacked us. What I am saying is I wouldnt mind having a MP as long as it doesnt ruin the SP

EDIT: What I want is an auction house type of thing where there is a building in the main city(Capital)and I can connect with people over LIVE, PSN, or the internet and exchange items like enchanted armor. I can see this being hacked or abused with people making glitched items and making stuff like 100% Chameleon. But even then I would not mind having this it would be really nice to have in the game and it would put a little MP into a SP only game. An arena would be nice too.
User avatar
Hilm Music
 
Posts: 3357
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2007 9:36 pm

PreviousNext

Return to V - Skyrim