multiplayer quests

[agua de chuca]

i just start the game with a friend, but only one can talk to npc and see the progress of the quest, is this right?

after the first person talk to npc he not share the dialog with other persons in the party, and i cant see what was going on, if i talk to npc after he not repeat the dialog.

[andrew.thiele]

This is correct. Perhaps you and your friend can work something out such as he does everything on Normal / Vet difficulty and you talk to everyone on Elite difficulty or something.

But if you and your friend are in voice chat then he could just communicate it to you.

Though, there will be certain NPC's / missions that you'll both have to talk to / turn in. It's not many but it will happen.

That being said, the games' story is best experienced solo if you want to know everything that's going on.

[agua de chuca]

thanks for the answer!

this is really sad, a game with such potencial.

[Straffe]

Yeah started Multiplayer aswell and we where wondering it aswell.

[🎶Alleine Dragonfyre]

I understand the workaround suggested but this really takes away from the experience of the game. I hope they can fix this. It's really not cool

[agua de chuca]

Originally posted by Alleine Dragonfyre of Moonglow:

I understand the workaround suggested but this really takes away from the experience of the game. I hope they can fix this. It's really not cool

back from the dead haha

but, this is my whole point doing this topic

[🎶Alleine Dragonfyre]

its not a necropost if the bug still exists. it's really annoying and takes away from an otherwise superior game.

[Gregor]

Originally posted by Alleine Dragonfyre of Moonglow:

its not a necropost if the bug still exists. it's really annoying and takes away from an otherwise superior game.

Was this ever different?
I'm not familiar enough with all GDs patches.
Can someone clarify it's a missfunction and not something that is functioning the way it should and wasn't meant to be different or would need a rework to funtion the way.
I'm neither completely sure, if when playing Multiplayer, that I did not hear some of the spoken Dialouges spoken in some of the quests.
The word "bug" might just be wrong at that place.

Edit: I've copied these lines from the english wikipedia: A software bug is an error, flaw or fault in a computer program or system that causes it to produce an incorrect or unexpected result, or to behave in unintended ways.

[🎶Alleine Dragonfyre]

Originally posted by Gregor:

Originally posted by Alleine Dragonfyre of Moonglow:

its not a necropost if the bug still exists. it's really annoying and takes away from an otherwise superior game.

Was this ever different?
I'm not familiar enough with all GDs patches.
Can someone clarify it's a missfunction and not something that is functioning the way it should and wasn't meant to be different or would need a rework to funtion the way.
I'm neither completely sure, if when playing Multiplayer, that I did not hear some of the spoken Dialouges spoken in some of the quests.
The word "bug" might just be wrong at that place.

Edit: I've copied these lines from the english wikipedia: A software bug is an error, flaw or fault in a computer program or system that causes it to produce an incorrect or unexpected result, or to behave in unintended ways.

How can something function correctly if only one player in the group can hear or see the quest? That's ridiculous.

The only way for the person I'm playing with can see/hear the quests is if we read it to each other or if its an audio quest, turn our speakers up so the other can hear it. If we were not in the same room, it would be a problem.

[Gregor]

Originally posted by Alleine Dragonfyre of Moonglow:

Originally posted by Gregor:

Was this ever different?
I'm not familiar enough with all GDs patches.
Can someone clarify it's a missfunction and not something that is functioning the way it should and wasn't meant to be different or would need a rework to funtion the way.
I'm neither completely sure, if when playing Multiplayer, that I did not hear some of the spoken Dialouges spoken in some of the quests.
The word "bug" might just be wrong at that place.

Edit: I've copied these lines from the english wikipedia: A software bug is an error, flaw or fault in a computer program or system that causes it to produce an incorrect or unexpected result, or to behave in unintended ways.

How can something function correctly if only one player in the group can hear or see the quest? That's ridiculous.

The only way for the person I'm playing with can see/hear the quests is if we read it to each other or if its an audio quest, turn our speakers up so the other can hear it. If we were not in the same room, it would be a problem.

There's no real way around the mainquest for the character depending on the progression it likes to reach and there is a questlog accessable.
That is also not the case for every quest. I do recall sidequests, that players have to accept by themselve and turn in by themselve.


You could as well look at the dialogue and then try, if you can press the x in the upper right corner of the Dialougebox , not accept the quest, let the other person hear and/or read it and accept it, when you'r both done with the texts.

[Gregor]

Originally posted by Alleine Dragonfyre of Moonglow:

How can something function correctly if only one player in the group can hear or see the quest? That's ridiculous.

The only way for the person I'm playing with can see/hear the quests is if we read it to each other or if its an audio quest, turn our speakers up so the other can hear it. If we were not in the same room, it would be a problem.

I will not claim, that there could be no superior solution.
I'm open for suggestions, but I'm neither conciously capable or responsible for those changes.

But ending dialogues without answer should help, instead of answering one thing or the other, turn around and leave, then they can wait for your response.

[🎶Alleine Dragonfyre]

Originally posted by Gregor:

Originally posted by Alleine Dragonfyre of Moonglow:

How can something function correctly if only one player in the group can hear or see the quest? That's ridiculous.

The only way for the person I'm playing with can see/hear the quests is if we read it to each other or if its an audio quest, turn our speakers up so the other can hear it. If we were not in the same room, it would be a problem.

There's no real way around the mainquest for the character depending on the progression it likes to reach and there is a questlog accessable.
That is also not the case for every quest. I do recall sidequests, that players have to accept by themselve and turn in by themselve.


You could as well look at the dialogue and then try, if you can press the x in the upper right corner of the Dialougebox , not accept the quest, let the other person hear and/or read it and accept it, when you'r both done with the texts.

Yes that is the only workaround that we can think of but it really should allow for the quest dialogue be available to the person that did not click the quest npc in either audio or text, otherwise they have no clue what's going on .

[Gregor]

Originally posted by Alleine Dragonfyre of Moonglow:

Originally posted by Gregor:

There's no real way around the mainquest for the character depending on the progression it likes to reach and there is a questlog accessable.
That is also not the case for every quest. I do recall sidequests, that players have to accept by themselve and turn in by themselve.


You could as well look at the dialogue and then try, if you can press the x in the upper right corner of the Dialougebox , not accept the quest, let the other person hear and/or read it and accept it, when you'r both done with the texts.

Yes that is the only workaround that we can think of but it really should allow for the quest dialogue be available to the person that did not click the quest npc in either audio or text, otherwise they have no clue what's going on .

I recall to have playd with someone who was new to the game as well in last years spring event,while steam offered a 5 days free playing and it worked well to start and end dialouges so that we both had an idea and the Questlog is your helper, your tool, your support and not your enemy.

[agua de chuca]

it is incredibly sad to see someone defending a failure of this magnitude, which should be the BASICS of a coop game.

[Gregor]

Originally posted by Machete:

it is incredibly sad to see someone defending a failure of this magnitude, which should be the BASICS of a coop game.

So I've had this huge text with 500-800 Words around why and why not.

Just one example why just a single character talks to a NPC , since it would disturb the flow of the game and the experience of the player talking and acting with the NPC.

Duncan and Angrim((might be the wrong name for the NPC)The choice for the smith in Devils Crossing)
The NPC can be turned into hostile or the player can choose to side with the NPC to get it as a smith or can bring the hammer to Angrim to get that NPC as a smith in Devils Crossing.
So while player 1 reads the quest from the NPC and player 2 reaches the NPC and starts clicking itself through the NPCs dialogues the NPC turns hostile because of player 2 decision.
Where's the reason to let both of them start the conversation simultaniously or have the conversation started seperatly, if the impact of choices is that big ?
Why not expect , that that's 1 of multiple dialouges that change the games progression ?
Why not respect, that the multitude of choices can not be present at the same time ?
Why expect, that it's possible to "glitch" in Duncan and Angrim at the same time as smith, because of the different decisions of the players and call it reasonable?
Or let the People somewhere in Arkovia get to Devils Crossing, while the other player starts a dialogue to slaughter them ?
Or the Quest around Isaac?
Or the Quest/Cave around the Rovercamp around the Gruesome Harvest ?
Or the Rovers somewhere in Wightmire in a cave ?
Why not just accept, that because these decisions will change the gameworld, that these choices can be taken only ones and that there's no turning back and that leads to a smart choice of allowing a character the dialogue, while the others got to wait for the conversation to end, to wittness the result of the conversation ?

I've had things to do, like enjoying the game and just came up with this text instead of going as far as I've chosen to do with a prior wording, that is more or less finished already and is laying in a steamchat, since I've discussed that with someone.
Gregor(So that I and I can not be misinterpreted by you) got communicated by someone else, that there could be a different frame for understanding, patience and offenses for the words that this is answered on.

Just do it yourself and find a solution, that you'll see as fitting, that needs to prevent the other player killing Duncan after you've chosen the character as smith, because the other wanted Angrim and wanted to take the Hammer with force and chose to kill of your blacksmith.
Does Angrim then side with the player that chose a different path because of pitty ?
Is Duncan back alive, when the Character is reloaded into the map ?
What about that Burning Rovercamp ? and releasing and Slaying that Ch'thonic at a savefile without any incidence of "Buggy".

Think about it and concider the solution to newly created problems with the "feature" you want.

[🎶Alleine Dragonfyre]

Originally posted by Machete:

it is incredibly sad to see someone defending a failure of this magnitude, which should be the BASICS of a coop game.

Exactly. I mean it's a good game but this really puts a damper on it.

Originally posted by Gregor:

Originally posted by Machete:

it is incredibly sad to see someone defending a failure of this magnitude, which should be the BASICS of a coop game.

So I've had this huge text with 500-800 Words around why and why not.

Just one example why just a single character talks to a NPC , since it would disturb the flow of the game and the experience of the player talking and acting with the NPC.

Duncan and Angrim((might be the wrong name for the NPC)The choice for the smith in Devils Crossing)
The NPC can be turned into hostile or the player can choose to side with the NPC to get it as a smith or can bring the hammer to Angrim to get that NPC as a smith in Devils Crossing.
So while player 1 reads the quest from the NPC and player 2 reaches the NPC and starts clicking itself through the NPCs dialogues the NPC turns hostile because of player 2 decision.
Where's the reason to let both of them start the conversation simultaniously or have the conversation started seperatly, if the impact of choices is that big ?
Why not expect , that that's 1 of multiple dialouges that change the games progression ?
Why not respect, that the multitude of choices can not be present at the same time ?
Why expect, that it's possible to "glitch" in Duncan and Angrim at the same time as smith, because of the different decisions of the players and call it reasonable?
Or let the People somewhere in Arkovia get to Devils Crossing, while the other player starts a dialogue to slaughter them ?
Or the Quest around Isaac?
Or the Quest/Cave around the Rovercamp around the Gruesome Harvest ?
Or the Rovers somewhere in Wightmire in a cave ?
Why not just accept, that because these decisions will change the gameworld, that these choices can be taken only ones and that there's no turning back and that leads to a smart choice of allowing a character the dialogue, while the others got to wait for the conversation to end, to wittness the result of the conversation ?

I've had things to do, like enjoying the game and just came up with this text instead of going as far as I've chosen to do with a prior wording, that is more or less finished already and is laying in a steamchat, since I've discussed that with someone.
Gregor(So that I and I can not be misinterpreted by you) got communicated by someone else, that there could be a different frame for understanding, patience and offenses for the words that this is answered on.

Just do it yourself and find a solution, that you'll see as fitting, that needs to prevent the other player killing Duncan after you've chosen the character as smith, because the other wanted Angrim and wanted to take the Hammer with force and chose to kill of your blacksmith.
Does Angrim then side with the player that chose a different path because of pitty ?
Is Duncan back alive, when the Character is reloaded into the map ?
What about that Burning Rovercamp ? and releasing and Slaying that Ch'thonic at a savefile without any incidence of "Buggy".

Think about it and concider the solution to newly created problems with the "feature" you want.

You're being ridiculous. You are literally ADVOCATING that 1/2 the co-op shouldn't have to know the entire story.

You're being SO ridiculous in fact, that I'm no longer going to reply to you as you absolutely must be a troll to argue in favor of such a large problem with co-op play.