For an alleged multiplayer game, 76 coop feature is remarkably unpolished

[Gadina]

I’ve played a few years ago and recently I’ve returned and started a new playthrough in coop with my girlfriend. I’m frankly puzzled by some design decisions in this game and I’m trying to make some sense of the quests while playing them in team. This is what I found out.

1. There are quests that can be completed only by one person, for example the main quest line about Crane. Everything is instanced and the only way to complete them as a team is to enter the instance separately, i.e. coop is not available at all.

2. Event quests treat the players as a team and the quest completes for the whole team, but unless it is a “kill” quest, it may be completed only by the player who started it. For example, in the “Dogwood Die Off” event you have to load Fertilizer from one place and deliver it to three other places – and only one player can contribute to that, while the other is just an escort.

3. And there are quests that can be picked by anyone on the team, but they can be progressed only by the first player who picked them, and they do not progress for the other player AT ALL. For example, in the Order of the Tadpole quest, you are supposed to clean up cabins by gathering Toxic mutagenic waste. For my surprise, only I was able to see and collect the waste, while my girlfriend cannot do anything – but when I completed the task, she still has the quest while being unable to do anything about it.
I don’t really understand how is this supposed to work. My best guess is that I picked it first, but perhaps the game expected the party leader to pick it and complete it, and then it would perhaps complete for everyone else on the team?

4. The only “proper” coop quests in the game which can be picked by anyone and completed by anyone on the team, seem to be the straightforward “kill X types of Y” or “kill everyone in this area” kinds.


For me, all this is quite unacceptable and frustrating player experience. As a game designer and actual narrative designer myself, I fully realize that creating narrative content is a complex iterative process, and I can even guess what has led to one design choice or the other – but I’m still puzzled how I’m supposed to play this as a coop multiplayer game.

Please, anyone knowing the works of this system, tell me how quests of type 3 are intended to play, and give me suggestions how to make the coop experience of 76 somewhat more enjoyable.

[Deklend]

Originalmente postado por PotatoBasket:

Originalmente postado por Gadina:

Indeed. However, the first few quests actually feel good (even though they are just single player content) and it shows that someone has put some thought in them, but then they quickly devolve to an overextended tutorial with "go there and do that" tasks that quickly become tedious chores.

But then again, I would expect that the side quests could make up for that and give the opportunity for some downtrodden designer to shine. With the resources poured into this game, it's sad to see they are rather half-baked as well.

And then again, after you finish the overly long tutorial and do some (or all) of the side content, can the events, nukes and PvP even be considered as content? Is that what people do late game, like, chew up the same stuff over and over again in pursue of some more item rewards?

That is pretty much the jist of it for most players. There's TONS of little stuff and side stuff to do - so far as content and (wasted) potential 76 takes the cake for modern platforms. There is no other title that holds a candle to what 76 could have been . Bitter players blame different demographics of the player base for the features they like having been removed in favor of other mechanics; but c'mon man, it's definitely not us players doing the development - or 76 would contain ALL of the things we want in separate server-types (Factional, battle royale, survival, co-op only, and or variations thereof) and there would be no contention of this sort within the player base.

Personally, I love the feel of the game; mutations or power armor, the camp system, and interacting with other 76ers in the weird ways we can are the part that I love. The parts I hate - that we all hate, I have no fear of speaking for all 76ers as in this one instance we all agree - is the lack of further content. They're doing what they can with the resources they have. The correct place to direct your anger is not at the player base, platform, or even the devs; industry change is necessary for better quality and care of beloved platforms. The modern age in general is one of consumption rather than longevity in what we produce.

The problem with this line of thinking is that you must believe development exists in a vacuum for it to be feasible. That just doesn't happen, and developers design games in a way they believe will be most profitable. If the loudest elements of a fanbase demand changes to be made in a struggling game, those changes WILL be made.

Originalmente postado por AlexSledge:

The Fallout franchise has always been single player. One big mistake was thinking you can just convert single game players into multiplayer game players. There are very specific reasons I choose single player games, and there are very specific reasons I play multiplayer games, and they don't really overlap. I expect the same is true for most gamers.

If they took Call of Duty and added dating game elements to Modern Warfare 12, or whatever, that the CoD community would be happy?

And another argument that really doesn't hold water in reality. The majority of online games are derived from franchises which had "always been single player". Final Fantasy, World of Warcraft, Grand Theft Auto, and Pokemon all originated as single-player games, and there are many other examples, not to mention those which sprang from popular franchises from other media such as Star Wars.

This argument also ignores the fact that the original developers at Interplay always intended to do an online version of Fallout when the technology to do so caught up to their ambitions. They actually were working on a Fallout Online MMORPG before Zenimax/Bethesda shut it down.

[Mooman]

Originalmente postado por Gadina:

A good game designer sees the game as his child. You want only the best for your child and you try your best to see it walk and run, and fly.

They all resigned, they orphaned their child and left it with strangers.

Funny thing is following where they went and what they are doing now they all ended up in similar situations.

One is making a Knights Templar game which is how he changed the Brotherhood of Steel to be like. Another is making an atmospheric horror game born out of Lovecraftian lore and cryptids. Others have started a studio to create an open world live service game.

All of them could have maintained the energy on FO76 but for whatever reason left. In that case it wasn't burnout but culture or management.

[Anissa]

I'd never describe 76 as your typical MMO. I always describe it as a single player Fallout game that just so happens to have other people running around in it.

[JBrown247]

The main story quests are mainly single player, while the events and other activities are mainly group.

I haven't played much WoW, but in ESO, the quests also seemed mainly SP with the MP stuff being dungeons and trials.

I am sure there are MMOs that have coop quests, but I don't know of them. The Borderlands games seem more like what you are talking about.

[peacetohippies]

yawn... you signed up for a remedial MMO.

[Gadina]

Nope, I've played MMO's (quite long ago) and that's not what I expect.

What I'm expecting, is at least a clear interface that shows if a quest can be completed in coop or not.
For example, in quests type 1 there is such interface warning you that you can enter the instance with the team leader and only help them complete their quest. But for the quests type 3, there is no indication at all. The player has no idea that they cannot complete that quest in any way, as long as they are in a team. This contradicts industry standards (as much there are such things), as well as common sense.

[ULTRA]

Originalmente postado por Gadina:

1. There are quests that can be completed only by one person, for example the main quest line about Crane.

Haha!

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/91467/so-freaking-frustrated-and-disappointed-about-not-having-the-ability-to-share-quests-with-friends

LMAO!

Originalmente postado por peacetohippies:

yawn... you signed up for a remedial MMO.

A "MMO" with a smaller session player capacity than some 90s first person shooters

sv_maxclients 64

[Gadina]

I... rest my case.
It seems that Zenimax/Bethesda are just S.P.E.C.I.A.L.

[PotatoBasket]

Originalmente postado por Gadina:

I... rest my case.
It seems that Zenimax/Bethesda are just S.P.E.C.I.A.L.

Things are changing. For the better? Rarely that way. We can hope though.

[undefined]

People will say this wasn't supposed to be a co-op game, and that it's mostly single player with a co-op option, but that doesn't excuse anything.

After the first incarnation of 76 failed miserably, Bethesda changed course. They then decided to build a traditional quest-driven single player experience, but in a world filled with bullet sponge enemies to make playing by yourself painful to "encourage" multiplayer. Not exactly a recipe for fun.

You and your gf would be better served playing just about anything else.

[JBrown247]

Originalmente postado por Hadley:

in a world filled with bullet sponge enemies to make playing by yourself painful to "encourage" multiplayer.

Make a better build.

[Ron]

Fallout 76 came about because the vampire capitalists that ran Bethesda's parent company Zenimax (like Les Moonvez and Donald Trump's brother) demanded that Bethesda have an active MMO to make it look good to get the company purchased. So they grabbed all the parts they had been working on for a multi-player expansion for Fallout 4 and hastily cobbled Fallout 76 together. Folks over on the Elder Scrolls online side of things said that it made more sense to base the game on ESO's already-created multiplayer engine, but that wouldn't get the game out in the timeline that Zenimax demanded. The game was released as a hot mess because Todd Howard was occupied with coordinating Starfield and could only be bothered with dropping in on Fallout 76 meetings (Bethesda employees called this "seagulling" where he'd fly in, ♥♥♥♥ all over everything and then fly out).

[Gadina]

I found out how Fallout 76 is supposed to be played in coop!

Heed my revelation. Bear with me, for it is glorious:

1. Join the same server as your coop buddy.

2. Do NOT make a coop team.

Ta-daa! That's it. Throw the half-assed coop feature out of the window and you get the opportunity to play ALL quests together, simply by playing them out separately! Otherwise like half of the content just doesn't reach one of the players, and you never know WHICH half.

Yesterday we played the Beckett quest 3 times before we get to this glorious revelation and just enter and complete it separately.

What you lose when this genius solution is applied, is merely the following:
- No team interface, so you can't see the other player's health, nor have them shown on the map.
- You don't get to teleport in their camp for free.
- You throw all cards with team bonuses out of the window.

Of course, you can safely be on a team during the time when not on a quest, right?

Good work, Bethesda!

[Zekh]

Originalmente postado por AlexSledge:

This is a single player game with "occasionally hang out with friends" features. It's not cooperative in any real sense, it's just multiplayer. In that odd realm of "not-coop" & "not-pvp" multiplayer.

100% correct

[undefined]

Originalmente postado por JBrown247:

Originalmente postado por Hadley:

in a world filled with bullet sponge enemies to make playing by yourself painful to "encourage" multiplayer.

Make a better build.

Translation: look up a meta build that takes advantage of 76's terrible balance, grind out legendaries while praying to RNJesus, Bethesda nerfs build, start all over again. How about I just play real games instead?