#12

Go and play Chivalry.

2 Likes
#13

Thank goodness this isn’t another MMO, I’m happy this is single player game.

1 Like
#14

They have from the start said that they wanted to do a single player game and focus all the resources on that. They might do a multi-player game with that engine/setting later.

#15

Not all games need multiplayer. It shouldn’t be an assumed feature.

#16

For sure I asked the devs about multiplayer on a private message on Kickstarted, but they also replied as a FAQ publicly if I recall correctly: they said they will look into cooperative multiplayer but definitely not in Act I. And that makes perfect sense to me, if I may throw my two cents in. Cooperative multiplayer is the only way it should be done in a game like this.

1 Like
#17

For the love of God do NOT play that monster said to be game, do not play Chivarly or War of the Roses, these games are BAD, and by bad I mean very very bad.
What is wrong with the mount and blade series, why are you all still talking about these two ripoffs?

#18

I hate the fact that everyone on the internet are thinking of COD or WOW when they hear “MP” in a video game. i want a simple co-op, where you do the normal campaign with 2-3 friends and not some random “kid” from the internet that so many people complain about.

2 Likes
#19

Its not that. Good MP content needs to be designed to be that and isn’t fun for those of us who play solo. Since big Games like this that focus solely on the solo player are rare these days I don’t want to loose it.

#20

No, this just isn’t the kind of game made for multiplayer.

2 Likes
#21

I don’t see why there should be no MP… They say it wiill be main focus on solo at the first step because they want to make it good like this. So everyone that expect to see a good solo game should be happy. Nevertheless, people that would like to see it become MP next should be able to see it. Why would you remove them this pleasure?

If i well recall, Mount&Blade was a solo game at the beginning and became MP later. Saying that this kind of game isn’t made for MP is just wrong. Actually i would love to see massive battle on internet like it can be done on Mount&Blade:Warband mods like Vickingr.

1 Like
#22

I dont see any reason to make MP for this kind of game. Just compare it to Elder Scroll series. They have no MP as well and ppl arent asking them to make it also.

2 Likes
#23

I read somewhere that they may implement Co-op with like only two players. Nothing more than that though. Anyways I would rather have an amazing single player game rather than a mediocre single player game with multiplayer.

2 Likes
#24

I think that Co-op within the game would be a fantastic idea, but with that said these Acts are 30+ hours a piece. The developers should be focusing on making singleplayer as best as they can with the idea of branching out into Co-op later. Mods are also a thing.

#25

I agree that a coop mode would be a nice addition but for me personally it is no must have. I rather like to have a game with a great story, where I have the freedom to do what I want (within specific boundaries of course), but this is just my opinion.

1 Like
#26

Simple answer: because it is a SP game. Period.

2 Likes
#27

Definitely don’t want to see multiplayer splitting the Dev’s attention from the first three acts, but to say never? So long as they flesh out the SP portion well and focus their efforts there first and foremost, I fail to see the reasoning behind the overwhelming “nay” from so many folks that has been thrown forth. No matter how stellar the SP game is, it’s still a mere 30 hours long (yes, yes, Act I only, but let’s focus on what we know for now). If done well I’m certain that I’d play through it multiple times, but as the Devs have already stated that battles will be realistically few and far between, what would be the point after the finale? Shall I ride my plated horse wearing my plate armour with stellar broadsword about the countryside for 20 minutes in the hope of having some under-equipped bandit take a shot at me? Sounds rather… dull.

Added to this concept is the fact that you, being a human being, will eventually find the “sweet spot” of taking out the never-changing intellect of the AI. I suppose some folks like to feel powerful in such a way, but honestly once the challenge is gone, it again becomes rather drab.

Nevertheless, if SP only is “your thing”, cool, I shall die defending your right to believe in such a concept. To say, however, that multiplayer should “stay away forever” because “I don’t like it” can only be considered to be the height of intolerance. I’m really, REALLY looking forward to this game, and will play the heck out of whatever they turn out, but I most assuredly won’t turn down a MP portion in the future to keep the experience alive.

1 Like
#28

Speak for yourself. I think there are many here who would like to see new ways of MP interaction for a game like this.

#29

Multiplayer places additional constraints on the game mechanics: bandwidth constraints and latency make some things downright impossible, even on LAN.

Realistic swordplay would be simply unfeasible, to name one: anyone familiar with Duke Patrick’s mod series for TES will know how hard script lag hit it on Skyrim compared to Oblivion, and we’re talking way smaller lag than those caused by network latency and relatively simple swordplay mechanics (nowhere near realistic).

Besides, introducing multiplayer creates a whole new range of issues to be tackled during development:you have to keep the instances synced, hit/colision detection is extremely hard to get right (you’re doing client side calculations with data that is already outdated), not to mention several gameplay elements must be rethinked around it (from cut scenes to mission handling, not to mention it is extremely tricky trying to build a meaningful story driven multiplayer game).

On the bright side, multiplayer can be a lot of fun when done right and is a game seller to a lot of people.

My personal take? If the devs don’t feel comfortable tackling it, I’d rather they left it untouched. I’d prefer a killing single player game to a half assed halfway solution (compromising single player in order to try to deliver multiplayer).

#30

For those is War of the roses/vikings or Chivalry…

#31

People are asking. There was people asking for co-op in BioShock and Assassin’s Creed. Don’t underestimate the silliness of people.

1 Like