CO-OP Is A Must Be For Next Entry

[Ravagexe]

Lets face it, an awesome concept got ruined with a terrible game. CO-OP.

First time watching the trailer of Unity, I was hyped beyond hype limits. After the failure landed, it was still fun to play with a few friends...However game's terrible reputation dragged it down failry quick...

Now Ubisoft is telling us that they will be focusing on SP, leaving MP aside (By MP, Im talking about pure CO-OP missions, not that boring Deathmatch) to create an actually working game. Thats a blatant lie sir, a blind bat can see that a company is either have no more resources in that department or using no MP as an excuse for its own laziness.

In the end we got what? A fairly playable AC2 sequel. A disaster at sales charts. Sales were so bad that Ubisoft especially blamed Unity's infamous reputation as reason.

I dont like this about Ubisoft, they are so bad at lying. They feel like they have to find cover stories for every bad thing instead of trying to actuall fix it. Now Farcry Primal is following the same route as Sundicate, no CO-OP full single player storyline...

And as Syndicate proved us, we now all know where Primal will end. It will be remembered as a mediocre/great game with terrible sales just like Syndicate.

PURE single player games no longer have a place in gaming world at 2016. It is a function that attracts even those who doesnt care about series storyline. It longers the games playability by a large amount. And do you know why AC Syndicate was a flop? Because more than half of gaming community decided that they should pirate "A Single Player Game That Has Zero Replay Value." instead of buying it for further purposes.

So I beg of you, this was a series I really liked once. You turned it into an abomination, but I believe you still have a chance to redeem it. Syndicate, was a good step towards this. It was a good game. Now please make the dream come true, give us this amazing game with actual CO-OP system. Stop blaming CO-OP for the fu***k up game called Unity.

[Xyper]

Personally i like that there are certain games that are completely single player like assassins creed and Far Cry. I liked Unity quite well too, but did not give a rats ass about co-op. If i want to play games with friend there are different games i play with them, not story driven games like assassins creed.

They might not make the enormous sales, which they might have when they included co-op. But i am pretty sure i don't stand alone at all in prefering a assassins creed without a co-op and will still buy the game if it is to my liking.

[MemPhiZ ZX - #NewYear2025]

more like a great game ruined by a terrible concept: co-op.

so many features in the game dumbed down just to compensate for co-op. what's the point?

[Shio]

Originally posted by MemPhiZ ZX - #TheForceAwaken:

more like a great game ruined by a terrible concept: co-op.

so many features in the game dumbed down just to compensate for co-op. what's the point?

Have to agree with this. Unity could've actually been a better game if Ubisoft wouldn't have added co-op to the game. They put so much focus on something like this and it turned out to be terrible.

You're saying there's no room for Singleplayer games anymore now? Are you kidding me? Didn't games like Witcher 3 and Fallout 4 turn out to be some of the best games of last year?

You're saying this was a series you really liked once, a series that was pure Singleplayer with a mediocre Multiplayer added to it at some point, a multiplayer that took ressources away from the singleplayer and turned out to be just a nice little addition which a big amount of the players who purchased the game maybe only played a few times and then forgot about.

If you really liked this series so much, you wouldn't want them to make the same mistake again they made with Unity by making another game with co-op, but rather focus on what actually made the series so great in the first place, which isn't multiplayer or co-op, but the pure singleplayer.

[The two ton terror of Tel-Aviv]

You have absolutely no clue what you're talking about. Your personal preferences are not what the gaming world 2016 should be. Singleplayer games should be just that, games for a single player. I would kill myself if every game released from 2016 onward was purely co-op or multiplayer. Because my biggest passion in the world is video games, and nothing is better to me than an amazing single player game.

Nothing against multiplayer though, I generally spend more time in games with multiplayer and I enjoy PvP games. But co-op or multiplayer in every game? Hell no.

And you make it seem like Singleplayer games sell worse aswell which is false. The Witcher 3 and Fallout 4 are two of the best selling games of 2015 despite the latter being released so recently, and another game that sold extremely well was Arkham knight, also singleplayer. And I could go on with other big selling games like Until Dawn but you should get the point now.

So yeah you got it all wrong, as for Assassin's Creed? I personally would want it to be a solo experience, as that is my preference. Optional multiplayer or Optional Co-op missions sure, but dont force it on me.

[CursedPanther]

Originally posted by Xyper:

Personally i like that there are certain games that are completely single player like assassins creed and Far Cry. I liked Unity quite well too, but did not give a rats ass about co-op. If i want to play games with friend there are different games i play with them, not story driven games like assassins creed.

I agree with this.

It isn't like I don't co-op with friends, but at the same time we chat a lot. So when it comes to story based missions, it becomes much less immersive, for me at least, as we'll probably talking about other in-game stuff. Thus I enjoy narrative based games more by playing on my own, even if it does offer a co-op mode.

[LedZepphead]

Originally posted by Xyper:

Personally i like that there are certain games that are completely single player like assassins creed and Far Cry. I liked Unity quite well too, but did not give a rats ass about co-op. If i want to play games with friend there are different games i play with them, not story driven games like assassins creed.

They might not make the enormous sales, which they might have when they included co-op. But i am pretty sure i don't stand alone at all in prefering a assassins creed without a co-op and will still buy the game if it is to my liking.

Originally posted by MemPhiZ ZX - #TheForceAwaken:

more like a great game ruined by a terrible concept: co-op.

so many features in the game dumbed down just to compensate for co-op. what's the point?

Originally posted by Salty:

Have to agree with this. Unity could've actually been a better game if Ubisoft wouldn't have added co-op to the game. They put so much focus on something like this and it turned out to be terrible.

You're saying there's no room for Singleplayer games anymore now? Are you kidding me? Didn't games like Witcher 3 and Fallout 4 turn out to be some of the best games of last year?

You're saying this was a series you really liked once, a series that was pure Singleplayer with a mediocre Multiplayer added to it at some point, a multiplayer that took ressources away from the singleplayer and turned out to be just a nice little addition which a big amount of the players who purchased the game maybe only played a few times and then forgot about.

If you really liked this series so much, you wouldn't want them to make the same mistake again they made with Unity by making another game with co-op, but rather focus on what actually made the series so great in the first place, which isn't multiplayer or co-op, but the pure singleplayer.

Originally posted by I'm Not There:

You have absolutely no clue what you're talking about. Your personal preferences are not what the gaming world 2016 should be. Singleplayer games should be just that, games for a single player. I would kill myself if every game released from 2016 onward was purely co-op or multiplayer. Because my biggest passion in the world is video games, and nothing is better to me than an amazing single player game.

Nothing against multiplayer though, I generally spend more time in games with multiplayer and I enjoy PvP games. But co-op or multiplayer in every game? Hell no.

And you make it seem like Singleplayer games sell worse aswell which is false. The Witcher 3 and Fallout 4 are two of the best selling games of 2015 despite the latter being released so recently, and another game that sold extremely well was Arkham knight, also singleplayer. And I could go on with other big selling games like Until Dawn but you should get the point now.

So yeah you got it all wrong, as for Assassin's Creed? I personally would want it to be a solo experience, as that is my preference. Optional multiplayer or Optional Co-op missions sure, but dont force it on me.

Originally posted by CursedPanther:

I agree with this.

It isn't like I don't co-op with friends, but at the same time we chat a lot. So when it comes to story based missions, it becomes much less immersive, for me at least, as we'll probably talking about other in-game stuff. Thus I enjoy narrative based games more by playing on my own, even if it does offer a co-op mode.

Corn dogs Jackie! For all these people, Corn dogs!

I agree 100%, I'm so tired of everyone thinking that every game needs to have a co-op and/or a multiplayer component (and that they're the only ones whose gaming preference matters). Optional MP and co-op is fine and was even implemented great from what I hear in some of my favorite singleplayer games such as; AC games before Unity, Uncharted, The Last of Us (I even tried a bit of this and liked it). I do agree with OP about Far Cry Primal though, since I didn't think the co-op in 3 or 4 was intrusive to the story at all. I think multiplyer/co-op games are great for the people that want them (and there's plenty), however, I prefer my single player games and the day they make all games force me to play MP or co-op is the day I stop gaming.

[Ravagexe]

In its current SP state, Assassins Creed series will never survive the cesspool it dropped itself into. Sales proven, the game lost almost entire hype it can generate for the masses and has a laughable portition of fans left.

Face the fact, no one will trust these series ever again unless some drastic changes appear and it will stuck in this loophole of low sales business untill it totally collapses.

[CursedPanther]

Originally posted by Ravagexe:

In its current SP state, Assassins Creed series will never survive the cesspool it dropped itself into. Sales proven, the game lost almost entire hype it can generate for the masses and has a laughable portition of fans left.

Face the fact, no one will trust these series ever again unless some drastic changes appear and it will stuck in this loophole of low sales business untill it totally collapses.

This has got me thinking, what is that crucial magical element that has kept CoD afloat all these years? I mean we've seen a far larger group of people bashing the CoD series for a much longer period and it remains to be very alive.

Btw, the official AC movie is coming this December, and with a pretty huge cast. I wonder if it can attract enough attention to keep the next AC game in the spotlight.

[ColdWolf]

Originally posted by Ravagexe:

In its current SP state, Assassins Creed series will never survive the cesspool it dropped itself into. Sales proven, the game lost almost entire hype it can generate for the masses and has a laughable portition of fans left.

Face the fact, no one will trust these series ever again unless some drastic changes appear and it will stuck in this loophole of low sales business untill it totally collapses.

Didn't find much to fault with Syndicate, it was far better than a few of the other games in the series, particularly the way they changed the Rift missions to be a secondary open world area.

You say no-one will ever trust the series again, but as CursedPanther said, people buy a new CoD every time it releases a re-skinned version of the same gameplay, at least with the AC games we have some kind of plot and historical references to look forward to. The fact that Ubisoft have revealed they're skipping a major release this year makes me excited to see what they do with a whole extra year of development time, as it could be a major game-changer!

[Ravagexe]

Originally posted by Xanatos:

Originally posted by Ravagexe:

In its current SP state, Assassins Creed series will never survive the cesspool it dropped itself into. Sales proven, the game lost almost entire hype it can generate for the masses and has a laughable portition of fans left.

Face the fact, no one will trust these series ever again unless some drastic changes appear and it will stuck in this loophole of low sales business untill it totally collapses.

Didn't find much to fault with Syndicate, it was far better than a few of the other games in the series, particularly the way they changed the Rift missions to be a secondary open world area.

You say no-one will ever trust the series again, but as CursedPanther said, people buy a new CoD every time it releases a re-skinned version of the same gameplay, at least with the AC games we have some kind of plot and historical references to look forward to. The fact that Ubisoft have revealed they're skipping a major release this year makes me excited to see what they do with a whole extra year of development time, as it could be a major game-changer!

Kids buy CoD, but according to sales...even those ignorant kids skip AC series nowadays.

[ColdWolf]

Originally posted by Ravagexe:

Originally posted by Xanatos:

Didn't find much to fault with Syndicate, it was far better than a few of the other games in the series, particularly the way they changed the Rift missions to be a secondary open world area.

You say no-one will ever trust the series again, but as CursedPanther said, people buy a new CoD every time it releases a re-skinned version of the same gameplay, at least with the AC games we have some kind of plot and historical references to look forward to. The fact that Ubisoft have revealed they're skipping a major release this year makes me excited to see what they do with a whole extra year of development time, as it could be a major game-changer!

Kids buy CoD, but according to sales...even those ignorant kids skip AC series nowadays.

Yeah it would seem so. It's a shame, but hardly surprising after the issues with Unity.
Having had very few technical issues with it myself I enjoyed it immensely, but I can still understand why people are so mistrustful after such a poor reception of the previous installment.

Still, they made up to pretty much everyone in the form of either a free Season Pass or a free game (getting Far Cry 4 for free after already getting a fully working Unity was unreal!) unlike some other developers, who instead don't even deliver the patches that Ubisoft did!

[LedZepphead]

Originally posted by Xanatos:

Yeah it would seem so. It's a shame, but hardly surprising after the issues with Unity.
Having had very few technical issues with it myself I enjoyed it immensely, but I can still understand why people are so mistrustful after such a poor reception of the previous installment.

Still, they made up to pretty much everyone in the form of either a free Season Pass or a free game (getting Far Cry 4 for free after already getting a fully working Unity was unreal!) unlike some other developers, who instead don't even deliver the patches that Ubisoft did!

Your speaking some serious truth man. I thought that Ubisoft did a great thing by doing right with their customers. Giving away a choice of a free $60 game (regional pricing aside but they were newer games at the time) to people who bought the season pass and the season pass to everyone else is a rarity by a publisher in this business. They didn't just give these things to the pc either which was the real mess at launch but across all platforms (I got Far Cry for the ps4 even though my Unity copy worked fine on the ps4). They also fixed Unity as you said, which can't be said for a few other publishers/developers. Just look at Arkham Knight for the pc, WB's apology gift included the previous games in the series but chances are if you bought AK, you already owned the other games (I still think it's a good gesture but ends up being a win-win for them). I decided to buy all the AC games on pc even though I own them on console because I really believe Ubisoft does care about their customers (well, also pc is much better).

Having said that, I do understand that Ubisoft lost a lot of trust with their pc customer base and I'm sure there are many who will require Ubisoft to earn that trust back (if they let them at all). But I think in comparison to other publishers and developers, Ubisoft has shown me they are trying far more than most by taking steps to mend that relationship (actions speak louder than words). Their actions with handling Unity and the delayed release of Syndicate (also being a great game in my opinion) at least tells me they deserve the benefit of the doubt moving forward. But of course, only time will tell if this is indeed true (for me it already is).

[ColdWolf]

Originally posted by LedZepphead:

Your speaking some serious truth man. I thought that Ubisoft did a great thing by doing right with their customers. Giving away a choice of a free $60 game (regional pricing aside but they were newer games at the time) to people who bought the season pass and the season pass to everyone else is a rarity by a publisher in this business. They didn't just give these things to the pc either which was the real mess at launch but across all platforms (I got Far Cry for the ps4 even though my Unity copy worked fine on the ps4). They also fixed Unity as you said, which can't be said for a few other publishers/developers. Just look at Arkham Knight for the pc, WB's apology gift included the previous games in the series but chances are if you bought AK, you already owned the other games (I still think it's a good gesture but ends up being a win-win for them). I decided to buy all the AC games on pc even though I own them on console because I really believe Ubisoft does care about their customers (well, also pc is much better).

Having said that, I do understand that Ubisoft lost a lot of trust with their pc customer base and I'm sure there are many who will require Ubisoft to earn that trust back (if they let them at all). But I think in comparison to other publishers and developers, Ubisoft has shown me they are trying far more than most by taking steps to mend that relationship (actions speak louder than words). Their actions with handling Unity and the delayed release of Syndicate (also being a great game in my opinion) at least tells me they deserve the benefit of the doubt moving forward. But of course, only time will tell if this is indeed true (for me it already is).

With you on that one. I finished Syndicate this morning, and just started the Ripper DLC.
Gotta say, I'm totally impressed with what they've done with it. The amount of people hating on it because of the previous game having issues is just appaling! Syndicate is definitely one of the best games I've played from 2015, and as much as people might say that it's the same stuff over and over again, they re-jigged a lot of the activities to be much more interesting.

Having finished Syndicate, I'm REALLY excited for what 2017's installment will bring!

[Monarch]

I find it odd how Unity implemented Co-Op while it didn't really make any sense in my perspective.

But in Syndicate, you play as two supposedly different playstyle assassins. Yet they took out the Co-Op component.

I find that backwards design interesting.

[similarly]

Technically, Unity ran great for me, and I enjoyed a LOT about Unity.

The only two things I DIDN'T like about Unity were:
1. The companion app being required to unlock content
2. The co-op competitions being required to unlock content.

I understand why they did it, but don't like that they did it, and don't like the way they did it. I hope they never do it again.

That said: PLAYING co-op was FUN.

I normally HATE multiplayer because I've had too many bad experiences with cheaters and trolls and griefers.

Unity was one of the very few multiplayer experiences I've had that was completely positive, and once the competitions were over and people stopped trying to run ahead and get quick kills before anybody else, once people were working like a team again, co-op was awesome.

So I agree: I'd love to see co-op again in a future game. I agree with what someone said on another thread that Syndicate would have been good for a two-player co-op game.

One thing I'd change in co-op though:
In unity you had four people basically playing Arno in different colors. I'd like the co-op character to be a unique assassin with FULL customization options for face, hair, costume, etc., and maybe allow MORE assassins: like 8 instead of 4.