Elder Scrolls V

Status
Not open for further replies.
Climb under your collective rocks single-player fans, Elder Scrolls will get co-op eventually. In the mean time, you all have nothing to say.
 
as long as co-op is kept separate from the single player mode, does not detract from the quality of the single player mode, and is not required/integral to play the single player campaign, then I'm fine with co-op.

now whether or not a game like Elder Scrolls needs co-op, that's a different story.

I guess if you can have multiplayer FPS games, it might be kind of cool to have a FPS multiplayer but with swords, shields, and spells.
 
Look, I would be fine for co-op in Elder Scrolls if it was an optional thing, so I can explore, level up and trade items in a friends world... But it is in no way NEEDED or a dealbreaker, like the initial comment that started this convo suggested
 
I just feel as though Co-Op would ruin the experince entirely, but that's just me. I would hate to see Elder Scrolls become even more fmaous just because of multiplayer. The games are famous for what they are.
 
I get what you're saying, but that's kinda silly...Speaking hypothetically, it would only get more 'famous' from multiplayer if the multiplayer was good.

I don't see how optional co-op would hurt a game, if it's not forced and it would affect the development time, since Bethesda are one of those developers that aren't afraid to take as long as they have to, to make the best game possible.
 
People want co-op in Elder Scrolls now? What's becoming of the gaming world? Why do we always need people with us?
 
For the record, one guy said no co-op was a deal breaker for him. That was like 2 pages ago.
 
Ah.

I don't hate co-op... but some games just need to be SP only. Sadly, all gaming will be about one day is MP and SP story will take a back seat. :(

Maybe not with Nintendo...
 
I dont think there is a game company that neglects deep, single player adventures MORE than Nintendo.
 
Wolvieboy17 said:
I get what you're saying, but that's kinda silly...Speaking hypothetically, it would only get more 'famous' from multiplayer if the multiplayer was good.

I don't see how optional co-op would hurt a game, if it's not forced and it would affect the development time, since Bethesda are one of those developers that aren't afraid to take as long as they have to, to make the best game possible.
Click to expand...
well, what I'm trying to say is I wouldn't want the series becoming more popular than it is just because of Co-op like Call of Duty. Co=op can be great for Elder Scrolsl if done right...but I just don't want it.
 
I think you're confusing online multiplayer with co-op. CoD is a series that drastically needs co op
 
It's kind of sad that adding multiplayer has became synonamous with "short" or "mediocre".
Not every game is Call Of Duty or Halo. Look at the Orange Box, Uncharted 2 or Portal 2. And it's not like Bethesda ever skimp on content.
 
Wolvieboy17 said:
I dont think there is a game company that neglects deep, single player adventures MORE than Nintendo.
Click to expand...

Nintendo games may not be deeply story driven but they are fun, single player games. That's what I'm talking about.

I'll take a fun single player game over a forced Multiplayer experience ANY day.

Besides, it seems like Bethesda, at least right now... are fully focused on giving that deep SP experience. With all the co-op/Massive MP games out there, MP gaming nuts should at least be ok with ONE game not catering to them.
 
I don't think it'll happen, because I don't think the gamers want it.

Yes, they want co-op. But not in something like this. This kind of game is designed to be a solo operation.
 
Todd Howard said it's a feature they get a lot of requests for.
 
To be honest, I think out of all the game types that co-op would be an improvement to, open world games are definitely one of them. For the exact same reason gamers want their own world to explore and manipulate how they see fit, a lot of fun in that can be potentially sharing it with your friends. I enjoyed the hell out of Fable 3 co-op, just getting to pop into my friends world and compare how our weapons leveled up, what we did differently in certain sections, how drastically different our characters looked.

If there's one thing playing Borderlands made me realise, it was how much I craved a co-op Fallout game. Also, after collecting all the gnomes with a friend in Fable 3, when I was trying to 100 percent Assassins Creed Brotherhood at the same time as my friend, I was thinking how great it would be to be able to do that together, racing each other, back to back sword fighting. I also thought, after how much fun i had with Red Dead free roam, that the game could have easily been co-op too, at the very least for Undead Nightmare (although the main thing that add on was missing was a Zombified free roam).

I also just finished inFamous 2 and I felt kinda the same way. I think games like GTA multiplayer and Red Dead have proven that people like exploring or mucking around in an open world with their friends.

Bear in mind too, we're talking hypothetically here, but if Elder Scrolls WERE co-op, I honestly think Bethesda would do a great job. Imagine for a minute, non-forced co-op, that is PURELY optional, handled with the same depth as everything else Bethesda does? As an optional thing, would that be a bad thing? Food for thought.

Benstamania said:
Nintendo games may not be deeply story driven but they are fun, single player games. That's what I'm talking about.

I'll take a fun single player game over a forced Multiplayer experience ANY day.

Besides, it seems like Bethesda, at least right now... are fully focused on giving that deep SP experience. With all the co-op/Massive MP games out there, MP gaming nuts should at least be ok with ONE game not catering to them.
Click to expand...

Nintendo have the highest number of meaningless, multiplayer party games out of any console, and they've grown fat and rich off them. Then, out of their single player games, the ones that aren't simple, retro, side scrolling throwbacks, are either platformers on the rail shooters or Zelda. To say they provide better Singleplayer games, or more satisfying single player games is just wrong. How can you compare anything Ninty has to offer with the amazing roster of deep, rich games we've had through Xbox and PS3? Look at the games coming out this year alone!
 
The next Elder Scrolls after Skyrim will be on a new console by the time it releases. You are all getting Skyrim, GOTY already, as a singleplayer only experience. Quiet yourselves, and let capitalism perform its wonders upon this franchise. I would pay more for multi, start a fund for a seperate team to be hired to do so.
 
Wolvieboy17 said:
Nintendo have the highest number of meaningless, multiplayer party games out of any console, and they've grown fat and rich off them. Then, out of their single player games, the ones that aren't simple, retro, side scrolling throwbacks, are either platformers on the rail shooters or Zelda. To say they provide better Singleplayer games, or more satisfying single player games is just wrong. How can you compare anything Ninty has to offer with the amazing roster of deep, rich games we've had through Xbox and PS3? Look at the games coming out this year alone!
Click to expand...

...Where did I say ANY of that?

I said Nintendo has fun, single player games. I would take a fun, single player game over forced in MP to "please the masses" any day.

That's all I said.

Hell, I don't even own a single Nintendo product, I just said if the gaming world starts to focus on Super Multiplayer Everything (in the future), well then I'll just have to turn to Nintendo... because I know they would at least have something to offer me...
 
The next Elder Scrolls after Skyrim will be on a new console by the time it releases. You are all getting Skyrim, GOTY already, as a singleplayer only experience. Quiet yourselves, and let capitalism perform its wonders upon this franchise. I would pay more for multi, start a fund for a seperate team to be hired to do so.
Click to expand...

That'd be acceptable to me. Part of the reason I worry about adding multiplayer is that it'll hinder the team working on single-player and hurt the quality of it.

But, I was worried about them adding multiplayer in Assassin's Creed. And that came out awesome.
 
Success with this latest one, on top of going to a new console, will mean a bigger budget and more oportunity for multiplayer for the next one.
 
:up: Box art revealed! It's in the classic, old fashioned Elder Scrolls style, thankfully.
FqHn5.jpg


http://www.gamersspot.com/?controller=news&op=view-news&news_id=85057
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
  • Locked
The Elder Scrolls Video Game Series Discussion
Replies
1
Views
498
Matt
Matt
zenith16
Bethesda Working On Elder Scrolls MMO
Replies
0
Views
694
zenith16
zenith16
Iceman
Microsoft buying Zenimax
2 3
Replies
67
Views
5K
Iceman
Iceman
Abudefduf
The Elder Scrolls VI
5 6 7
Replies
153
Views
15K
blueharvest
blueharvest
M
Elder Scrolls Oblivion Film?
Replies
6
Views
1K
Doctor Jones
Doctor Jones

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Members online

Total: 3,314 (members: 6, guests: 3,308)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,268
Messages
22,077,230
Members
45,876
Latest member
Crazygamer3011

Share this page

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"