No Co-Op? / No Multiplayer? - It´s 2024..

[Chris714n]

Oh well.. - It could have been something beautiful..

[Narrowmind]

So could your comment, but you decided to make it ugly.

Co-op and multiplayer have existed for over 50 years in video gaming. Not every game is designed or needs to have them to be a beautiful game.

[EasyCompany]

I think it's best to be single-player base and devs made a right decision.

"Oh well, how about making the game co-op so you can play with friends?"

You would never be bad against this kind of sweet-hearted suggestion. But it only makes this kind of game feel cheap and not enjoyable.

[ShadowFox]

I go the other way, I would rather a great single player game than a crappy multiplayer one

[Narrowmind]

That's what I'm saying. There's nothing wrong with a single player experience.

[XaeroDegreaz]

Well, your squad moves as a single unit. People don't split up and do their own things unless you specifically tell one squad member to interact with something, or perform some special task.

Look, I love coop games, too, and it's definitely one of the first things that I look for when I'm choosing games, but this game seriously would not benefit from it.

You're a scared group of marines nut-to-butt with each other the whole run because you're scared for your life; there's no splitting up.

[DessIntress]

Small novel, but apart from what has already been said, it is always a question of age within the target group. The older the people are, the less likely they are to be players who mainly play in multiplayer - and the financial benefit of co-op support is also lower. It simply costs additional time and money to design a game accordingly. Then there is the additional team that supports multiplayer after the release.

And why older people tend to play less in co-op than younger people is also very easy to explain: job, hobbies and own family. Then you need the counterpart, i.e. a fellow player who is about the same age with the same skill, and who has the right conditions at the right time. Of course there are also people who meet up regularly to play games even when they are older, but let's be honest... Who spends a lot of money on a handful of people?
From 30+ onwards it becomes critical when it comes to MP. 10-18 is the most active and 19 to 29 is slowly winding down.

The target group here will be on the upper end, although younger players are of course welcome. However, the first group is no longer the planned target group due to the official age restriction.

And btw...
- Forget "local co-op only" ideas. It's already a fully niche game with its niche franchise and niche genre. No need to spend all the extra money for the two guys in Santa Barbara or whatever.
- Random lobbies can also be eliminated; these quitter orgies will no longer be needed in 2024 if you seriously want to play a game and don't want to spend another 20 minutes hanging out in a lobby with hardly any people every 5-10 minutes. (Yeah, I mean you, AFE! And Dark Descent would be more worse because it has long missions and no rush-gameplay like AFE.

DD has 426 active players....the 24h peak is at 447 players. Add additional 400 players for a fictional co-op mode with a lobby for randoms, the 447 people still play sp mode, that's why the bought this game...
Why adding 400 people and not 4000? Because the co-op shooter Aliens Fireteam Elite has a 24h peak of 387 on steam, and co-op wouldn't add more players than singleplayers for such a game.
Now split it for the 12 missions. Now split it again for the difficulties. I make it easy... It's 8 players in 24h, but only if you distribute them fairly. (In reality there might be a bit more, as the peak has been split here, but there CAN be an input and an output of players during 24h. But it could also be that it is always pretty much the same people.)
Finally, divide the number, because co-op games require at least 2 players. Take it 3x if it's a fictional cross platform title. (pc,ps,x)
Since the majority of players tend to play the easier modes, at least Nightmare becomes a bit of a hassle. Most co-op games have a serious lack of players on higher difficulties. Now wait for the 1 player and hope he will not quit during the mission and is no "low level" gamer who need a pusher for his achievements.

[Ecks Theory]

This game is something beautiful. I bought it on PS5 at release, and its an amazing game. It no more needs multiplayer, than the human body needs another hole. Co-op/multiplayer would ruin this amazing game.

[Narrowmind]

@ Dess Thoughtful. I'll add, there are always less players for strategy than other pillars of the gaming community, and this being an especially niche product, there's no way that multiplayer would have helped this one. Throwing things against a wall and hoping it sticks is a way to quickly burn through your budget,