Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
^ Exactly. in this age, everybody wants coop/multiplayer. even skyrim is going to have a coop mode made by fans -"skyrim together". why can't they just include something simple like that
Everytime I buy a co-op or MP game, people stop playing after a month. So it turns into a waste of time and money.
Wasted development time for a feature not many people want and that doesn't fit with the game's design to begin with.
Nonetheless I understand that some of the community may not want it, as it would take a substantial amount of resources away from the development of other features. It’s one thing if multiplayer would cost nothing, then they people who dislike it could just not use it, but as multiplayer does cost substantial game development time, Frontier would likely have to cut some content from the game to make room for it. To be honest I feel similar whenever I hear someone ask Frontier to add an option to control the dinosaurs (that and controlling the dinosaurs is completely against the spirit of the game).
More time devoted to making the game what it should be is a big plus.
Multiplayer/co-op means they have to start from scratch.
So have multiplayer and the game will come out in 3 years from now
Or
Only have singeplayer and have it released when they say they're gonna release it.
Your choice.