Co-op Multiplayer Games
by superdeformed · in General Discussion · 02/09/2005 (1:09 pm) · 7 replies
Hey Guys
I am currently working on a game for a game development Competition . And the team where at a open day for the the event and we where talking to some people from the industry and they where saying if we can find out what people are looking for in a Multiplayer Co-op game then it would help us to
1) not to re hash something thats done before and make a better game
2) have a better chance of getting into the competition
This is becuase the potentual for Co-op games is there is just never really been done properly in commerical game. Thus not givening the players what they want
So im passing this question out to the anyone who wants to add some imput and tell me what you
1) Think about Co-op Games
2) The Problems with co-op games
3) What would make them better in your view
4) anything else helpfull
Warmest Regards
Kenneth Bathgate
p.s Thank you for taking the time to reply back to me
I am currently working on a game for a game development Competition . And the team where at a open day for the the event and we where talking to some people from the industry and they where saying if we can find out what people are looking for in a Multiplayer Co-op game then it would help us to
1) not to re hash something thats done before and make a better game
2) have a better chance of getting into the competition
This is becuase the potentual for Co-op games is there is just never really been done properly in commerical game. Thus not givening the players what they want
So im passing this question out to the anyone who wants to add some imput and tell me what you
1) Think about Co-op Games
2) The Problems with co-op games
3) What would make them better in your view
4) anything else helpfull
Warmest Regards
Kenneth Bathgate
p.s Thank you for taking the time to reply back to me
#2
Example:
- you need at least four people to open a certain gate
- the team has to blast three charges within three charges to destroy the castle wall
and of course this famous stereotype:
(Scientist enters the lobby of the high security level with a guard.)
Guard: Good evening, Dr. Freeman. How is wife and family?
Scientist: Fine, thank you, Barney.
Both engage their keys left and right of the security doors.
Guard: On three. One... two... three.
Something happens.
Guard: What the ..?
(cut)
02/09/2005 (1:25 pm)
I can only contribute one idea: there should be game where you need to have a number of people in a level on different key positions doing something in a synchronised way.Example:
- you need at least four people to open a certain gate
- the team has to blast three charges within three charges to destroy the castle wall
and of course this famous stereotype:
(Scientist enters the lobby of the high security level with a guard.)
Guard: Good evening, Dr. Freeman. How is wife and family?
Scientist: Fine, thank you, Barney.
Both engage their keys left and right of the security doors.
Guard: On three. One... two... three.
Something happens.
Guard: What the ..?
(cut)
#3
I think something that is very important in coop games, is to allow really nice interaction between the players and their skills. So if its an RTS game, then giving players the ability to give others units and structures, or to give them money if they are in need. To allow cross gaming experiences, like you building a guard tower, and the other player putting people in it. If its an RPG, I think having players aid each other in game is important, so a wizard can cast flame blade on another players sword to help him in combat, heal each other. Use skills on each others equipment to make it better or repair it. Have one character distract an NPC, so the other can slip in to steal something.
Some of the problems these games face are with scripting. I think thats why more games don't include coop, because it breaks alot of scripted events, and its often tricky to predict what one player will do, let alone what two will do in the same game area. Often you have puzzels in games where you hit a switch and rush to the closing door, but if there are two of you, you can get stuck in weird places. Serious Sam solved this by having portals appear that allowed you access to the new area the other player had gone to. This was often annoying, because sometimes you were not finished with the previous area. Also, if one player is a little eager to progress, he may finish the area and prompt a change of level forcing everyone to move with him. Another thing is if the game loses synch, and how it handles that. What happens to disconnections and people rejoining, especially with scripts involved and a strong story, it can really kill the experience.
Cheers!
Ian
02/09/2005 (1:44 pm)
Ditto. Coop is the unsung game mode as far as I am concerned. Coop can make even bad games really fun, just because you have another human there with you and it can turn awesome games like System Shock 2 into amazing games.I think something that is very important in coop games, is to allow really nice interaction between the players and their skills. So if its an RTS game, then giving players the ability to give others units and structures, or to give them money if they are in need. To allow cross gaming experiences, like you building a guard tower, and the other player putting people in it. If its an RPG, I think having players aid each other in game is important, so a wizard can cast flame blade on another players sword to help him in combat, heal each other. Use skills on each others equipment to make it better or repair it. Have one character distract an NPC, so the other can slip in to steal something.
Some of the problems these games face are with scripting. I think thats why more games don't include coop, because it breaks alot of scripted events, and its often tricky to predict what one player will do, let alone what two will do in the same game area. Often you have puzzels in games where you hit a switch and rush to the closing door, but if there are two of you, you can get stuck in weird places. Serious Sam solved this by having portals appear that allowed you access to the new area the other player had gone to. This was often annoying, because sometimes you were not finished with the previous area. Also, if one player is a little eager to progress, he may finish the area and prompt a change of level forcing everyone to move with him. Another thing is if the game loses synch, and how it handles that. What happens to disconnections and people rejoining, especially with scripts involved and a strong story, it can really kill the experience.
Cheers!
Ian
#4
the idea we are throwing about at the momment is a Fps survival horror co-op game . with a large amout of team based puzzles and problems and also splitting the group of 4 down into sub groups during the game like pair or something .
02/09/2005 (2:03 pm)
Cheers for the input guys the idea we are throwing about at the momment is a Fps survival horror co-op game . with a large amout of team based puzzles and problems and also splitting the group of 4 down into sub groups during the game like pair or something .
#5
Cheers!
Ian
02/09/2005 (4:48 pm)
Hey Kenneth, if you are thinking of team based puzzles, check out a game called Project Eden published by Eidos. It was fantastic in multiplayer, but had a serious synchronising issue that killed it for myself and my friend. There were 4 members each with different skills, and one was a badass android who could withstand hazardous environments and packed alot of firepower. The others were mixed between an engineer who could repair things, a hacker that could reprogram things and a commander who could interogate people and find out useful info. The game started off being fairly standard and then took a searious twist and ended up being really freaky, and very scary. I never managed to complete it with my housemate unfortunately due to the stupid sync issues, the last level was so long that the bug always kicked in, and then we had to restart. Must of tried about 20 times. ;)Cheers!
Ian
#6
02/09/2005 (4:54 pm)
Maybe moves where you can use your team mates to help I wanted to make a game like that once. You would use the move and it would display a button on there screen they would press that button at the right time and the attack would increase in power.
#7
For example having 4 people required to open a gate is brilliant. promotes teamplay. but you should also allow a single person to be able to complete the objective.
Especially when your talking about an online game. Where people on your team you may not know and may not want to play co-op :)
I guess it depends on the game.
For our game we are doing minor areas where co-op advantages your team.
For the gate example. Its possible to open a gate being a single person but it takes a LONG time compared to say 4 people.
So the benefit of working co-op is you get objectives done quicker , but for the lonewolf its also possible to complete the same objectives but they just take alot longer.
Just a thought :)
02/09/2005 (6:02 pm)
Whilst co-op is great i dont believe it should be forced.For example having 4 people required to open a gate is brilliant. promotes teamplay. but you should also allow a single person to be able to complete the objective.
Especially when your talking about an online game. Where people on your team you may not know and may not want to play co-op :)
I guess it depends on the game.
For our game we are doing minor areas where co-op advantages your team.
For the gate example. Its possible to open a gate being a single person but it takes a LONG time compared to say 4 people.
So the benefit of working co-op is you get objectives done quicker , but for the lonewolf its also possible to complete the same objectives but they just take alot longer.
Just a thought :)
Associate Anthony Rosenbaum