Why no multiplayer?

[Randy Savage]

It really makes no sense. One of the most fun aspects of the Dark Souls games was jumping on with a friend and experiencing it together as well as fighting invaders. My brother and I spent hours and hours together in all 3 DS titles and Bloodborne. We live several states away from each other and it was really a way for us to spend time together and we wanted that so much in this game as well. Super disappointed in this decision. I'll still play it, but I doubt it will be a day 1 purchase.

[Gin-chan]

Simple its NOT Dark Souls.

[PC-tan]

It's not that type of game, In games like Dark Souls and Bloodborne the co-op stuff is part of the lore of that world. In this game that is not the case and instead is much more "linear" story driven than those games from what I recall hearing, just the same way that you can't customize your character

[gackie]

Not every game needs multiplayer. Literally that simple.

[JuLLe]

Originally posted by Hat Skeleton!:

Not every game needs multiplayer. Literally that simple.

This, Witcher 3 didn't have multiplayer, Skyrim didn't have multiplayer, yet they still were award winning games. So Sekiro not having multiplayer isn't a problem at all, multiplayer makes some games worse

[leeho730]

I guess FromSoftware didn’t want to pay for server maintenance.

[stevo]

"One of the most fun aspects of the Dark Souls games was jumping on with a friend and experiencing it together as well as fighting invaders"

That was literally never intended as a way to play the game and few people ever did it. Souls games were not co op games for the entire game

[[Wahr] Eogard]

I'm glad it doesn't have multiplayer at all. Not everyone is a pvp aficionado you know. It's good to be able to 100% a game just by playing a solo game.

[Zalgo]

Best answer you could possibly have to your common question:












It's a new IP.... It ain't Dark Souls.

[gackie]

Originally posted by bladechild:

"One of the most fun aspects of the Dark Souls games was jumping on with a friend and experiencing it together as well as fighting invaders"

That was literally never intended as a way to play the game and few people ever did it. Souls games were not co op games for the entire game

This is actually true. Demon's Souls was originally single player, but at literally the last second the were suggested to add multiplayer elements.

[Gitgud]

Simple because that’s the way it is

[Kozzy]

Tenchu had no multiplayer, one of my fav non rpg series ever. No multiplayer is fine by me

[Samurai]

It's great, awesome, fantastic beyond belief and i truly couldn't be happier about the fact that multiplayer isn't part of the game.

I love it and only do even more everytime i read a whiney topic like this.

[Secunda]

I am pretty sure the game has a linear storyline. so invading other people like in dark souls would make no sense, because everone plays the same character

[ArcticuKitsu]

Originally posted by Hat Skeleton!:

Not every game needs multiplayer. Literally that simple.

Not every game needs multiplayer, but they do need 'co-op'. Big difference. My friends wanted to play Skyrim with me, yet couldn't.

Originally posted by JuLLe:

Originally posted by Hat Skeleton!:

Not every game needs multiplayer. Literally that simple.

This, Witcher 3 didn't have multiplayer, Skyrim didn't have multiplayer, yet they still were award winning games. So Sekiro not having multiplayer isn't a problem at all, multiplayer makes some games worse

Not mutliplayer, just co-op. Big difference.

Friends wanted to play Skyrim, yet couldn't. Same with Subnautica. And it's delusional to assume it makes a game worse.... If you're thinking Grand Theft Auto Online, then yeah... That makes it bad. Astroneer, Minecraft, Terraria, Starbound, & etc were improved with having co-op because friends had fun moments.

OP is right... Friends need to connect.

[Gin-chan]

Originally posted by ArcticKitsu:

You do realise Co-op is just another aspect of multiplayer right?. Still multiplayer.