Co-op?

[Rafoca]

Not every game needs to be solo only!

Hopefully we get to play co-op and not only with some AI controlled companions.

Obsidian made neverwinter nights 2, a great RPG that featured co-op and it's alive to this day because of that.

Some of the best RPG games out there feature co-op: Divinity, Neverwinter nights, baldurs gate, Solasta...

I hope Obsidian don't drop the ball and add co-op.

If it has co-op, it will, of course, has solo play as well. So it's a win win situation

[Krivvin]

Avowed actually started development as a co-op game. But, for some reason, they decided it wasn't "Obsidian enough" (their words) so they decided "We realised that we weren't focused on the things that we're best at".

Yeah. Focus on what you're good at. But, don't insult and drag on another thing to explain away a change in development. It's a change in development. It feels like an insult instead of honesty in saying that the devs found themselves lacking.

These devs are too scared to admit that they aren't good at something and don't feel like they're able to live up to what they wanted to do with co-op. So they'll insult something instead of being honest with themselves and the public.

But, I'm sure the game will have dumb as rocks ai companions that can survive a moon landing on them, with no explanation. Yet, that will definitely not make the experience lesser for it. It will definitely be superior to another player controlling a functional character that is in danger and needs to do all of the same things that the main character needs to do to survive and help with a fight.

There is absolutely no way that a game can be made with ai companions that function like the player character, needs ammo and supplies like a main character, and could just be taken over by another player if the devs decided to just develop that functionality into the game.

So in my opinion, they've already dropped the ball by having no spine and not admitting that they found they can't make a co-op game, or don't want to take the time to make the co-op fun.

[Rafoca]

They actually made good co-op RPG games in the past, but maybe those people back then are not in the team anymore.

But, yeah, I agree. It sux.

Everything is solo only these days. After Baldurs Gate 3 awesome co-op experience, there is simply no reason to not add co-op to RPG games, unless you really don't know how to make one or don't have the resources to

But it's hard believing they don't have the resources after being acquired by Microsoft.

Dragons Dogma 2 was another disappointment. After years of people just wanting to have the option to replace the pawns for real friends, they decide to make it solo only AGAIN.

[Krivvin]

My big problem with their statement was how it felt like a backhanded way of saying that they weren't going to continue to pursue co-op. It's fine to not make a co-op game. It's even fine to start a co-op project and pivot to a single player when they find that they weren't going to be able to do it.

I'm not as interested with it being solo only. I think that they're still technically going to make a co-op game. But, it'll have the ai companions that are an inferior alternate player that breaks the story immersion. That's how I view those companions. They're substitutes for other players controlling characters. The ai companions are always dumb and receive all sorts of things to compensate for being dumb.

Obsidian didn't have to act like it was against their identity to make a co-op game. How it wasn't "Obsidian enough" for them. The truth was that they aren't going to take the time and effort to make a fun co-op game so they ditched it for going to single player. They gave up. They quit. They let the challenge defeat them.

They're just not brave enough to admit that they felt they weren't able to develop it. Instead, they pivot the story to act like they're making some kind of choice instead of backing down from a challenge. It seems like when this happens that devs will always reveal that "no, co-op was never intended. We've ALWAYS wanted it to be a STRONG, story driven, single player narrative experience." Sure. Whatever they want to say to make themselves feel better by spinning revisionist history.

As for Dragon's Dogma 2, I agree. While the pawn system is cool, they could have given the option for players to take over the pawns to play co-op. Somehow, people act like the story is destroyed by another person being involved. Maybe some people need to just recognize that even though the option is there to be silly with your friends, you can also play in an earnest fashion to enjoy the story together.

[Rafoca]

I agree, dude!!

It seems people think that making a game solo is like a receipt for a game to be successful. As you said yourself "let's make a Story driven single player game"... So many developers say that but when they release their games they end up bad anyways. I remember cyberpunk used that excuse, waylanders, and so many others!

Players conveniently forget that most games are solo and most games are bad.

Being solo or co-op isn't a receipt for success or failure.

It's sad that people like you and me, that just want to replace AI for real friends, are in no luck these past years 😥

[What]

Please, take my points. Not every game needs to be solo play. Nor is there one true Medieval co-op game.

[Balalaika]

Art change, design change, looks like after BG3 most of these has been devs do not know what to do anymore or how to deliver. Mediocre wont do anymore.

[Rafoca]

After BG3, especially companies like Obsidian, need to step up their game