Multiplayer!

[shareyou]

Multiplayer!

Who here thinks multiplayer would be awesome either in a future game or MMORPG?I am not sure about The Witcher 2 but I know the first game was based on Bioware's the Aurora Engine and has multiplayer inherently built into it (From Neverwinter Nights).Remembering the days when I used to fiddle with the game editor, they released for the first game, you could see there are still some semblance of classes (Like Triss was a Sorcerer). Hence if they had further developed these classes maybe they could've had multiplayer in the first game. (Even if only the second player could control Triss or another Witcher).I just think Multiplayer would make it the best game ever (I think that now anyway but it might help others to see it too).

 

[Eri94_user70]

I think an arena type multiplayer where you can have swordfights, magic fights, pick your witcher or sorcerer/sorceress and weapons beforehand would add to the life of the game. Many people are still playing Rune after so many years because the multiplayer is so cool. Could implement different areas or places to fight or capture the flag like tournaments.Would be cool for an addon or something

 

[Garrison72]

Get out.

 

[netopier]

I suppose this suggestion could be asked in the Ask the Devs Thread: http://tw2.thewitcher.com/forum/index.php?topic=31346.540OR in TW2 wishlist: http://tw2.thewitcher.com/forum/index.php?topic=28352.735(I don't like to use click here style hyperlinks)Absolutelly no need to make a new thread.And Slimgin, when someone new comes here, it may be beneficial to put the "Joke", or a smiling face on your comments.

 

[sweeper41]

No. Just no.

 

[Eri94_user70]

I suppose this suggestion could be asked in the Ask the Devs Thread: http://tw2.thewitcher.com/forum/index.php?topic=31346.540OR in TW2 wishlist: http://tw2.thewitcher.com/forum/index.php?topic=28352.735(I don't like to use click here style hyperlinks)Absolutelly no need to make a new thread.And Slimgin, when someone new comes here, it may be beneficial to put the "Joke", or a smiling face on your comments.

NahPerson is asking the gamers not asking or telling the devs

 

[netopier]

NahPerson is asking the gamers not asking or telling the devs

If it's not TW2, then it belongs to Community.If it is TW2, then it probably belong to wishlist or Ask Devs. If it's something else, then I'm sorry I didn't get the message, but I still saw quite a couple of places it would probably fit (I'm not so sure on this one).

 

[Eri94_user70]

A couple of issues with multiplayer.- It forces people to either get alot of friends over or make them play through the net.Most people don't have that many friends that play your game or ever have the time to get over and when you play it like an mmo you realize alot of the people there are idiots.- It makes the single player campaign in 90% of the case worse.The single player campaign is still what all people can play, it is what the majority play. When a game get multiplayer they tend to focus too much on it causing the single player campaign to be more a side project instead of being the actual game. Games must hold up on single player alone.- Games are being judged unfairly.Alot of games who otherwise suck tend to get a better score just cause they have a good multiplayer. This is missleading since once again, the majority will play it with single player. It could also be that games get alot of shi't just cause they they have a bad multiplayer, which is weird since it is still the single player campaign that counts.- Having a good multiplayer doesn't add anything to the story or the single player campaign.While games can have a good multiplayer it never have any impact on either the story or the single player campaign, it's more like capture the flag, dead match or whatever. Why add something to a game that doesn't (in theory) feel like the same game except the same weapons and so on.Instead of spending time and energy making multiplayer why not do it like GTA or other games? Release a multiplayer separatly from the game later on, which will let those who would want to play it in multiplayer do so while the rest of us still getting 100% of the products we buy instead of 50%.If TW 2 would be in multiplayer I would immediately cancel my pre order.

 

[idshanks]

NahPerson is asking the gamers not asking or telling the devs

If it's not TW2, then it belongs to Community.If it is TW2, then it probably belong to wishlist or Ask Devs. If it's something else, then I'm sorry I didn't get the message, but I still saw quite a couple of places it would probably fit (I'm not so sure on this one).

He's just asking for the community's opinion on the matter.

 

[netopier]

If TW 2 would be in multiplayer I would immediately cancel my pre order.

I think you're being a little harsh.Not buying the game based on a single thing...Borrowing your own arguments, the game get better or worse scores because of the multiplayer (which you called weird and unfair). Don't you think that when you buy the game based on multiplayer, you're falling into the same trap?

- It forces people to either get alot of friends over or make them play through the net.Most people don't have that many friends that play your game or ever have the time to get over and when you play it like an mmo you realize alot of the people there are idiots.

This clearly affects only people who use it, and can actually be beneficial in teaching about planning and how smart your friends are. You better learn the idiocy of your friends now, than in a life or death sutiation.

- It makes the single player campaign in 90% of the case worse.The single player campaign is still what all people can play, it is what the majority play. When a game get multiplayer they tend to focus too much on it causing the single player campaign to be more a side project instead of being the actual game. Games must hold up on single player alone.

That's clearly a may, not a must. 90% is the number taken out of the air, and even if true is still a may.Anyway worse for TW2 is still skyhigh for others.

- Having a good multiplayer doesn't add anything to the story or the single player campaign. While games can have a good multiplayer it never have any impact on either the story or the single player campaign, it's more like capture the flag, dead match or whatever. Why add something to a game that doesn't (in theory) feel like the same game except the same weapons and so on.

Nor does it subtract anything.Anyway, different people play games. Multi can be done differently, and again, games are made for different people who DO find benefit in multi.

Instead of spending time and energy making multiplayer why not do it like GTA or other games? Release a multiplayer separatly from the game later on, which will let those who would want to play it in multiplayer do so while the rest of us still getting 100% of the products we buy instead of 50%.

It's pretty clear if CDRP does something, it will do just that.But actually, 50% and 100% numbers can be countered with a later release date, and/or an additional body hired specifically for multiplayer.

 

[secondchildren]

If TW 2 would be in multiplayer I would immediately cancel my pre order.

I think you're being a little harsh.Not buying the game based on a single thing...Borrowing your own arguments, the game get better or worse scores because of the multiplayer (which you called weird and unfair). Don't you think that when you buy the game based on multiplayer, you're falling into the same trap?

Okay. So just give us the option to choose single player\multiplayer campaign. Like in NWN. Sort or forfait for everyone. Coz I'm more with Johan, I dare say.

 

[netopier]

Okay. So just give us the option to choose single player\multiplayer campaign. Like in NWN. Sort or forfait for everyone. Coz I'm more with Johan, I dare say.

I never heard anything about not having an option.Actually NWN model is the one I was thinking about.The reason I didn't mention it was because I heard it was a classic example of a game that had a single player campaign that suffered because of it's multiplayer.I don't really see how multiplayer could be mandatory.You can install an option to have a multiplayer deadmatch, you can have an option to do single player campaign with a group, but even games (with the exception of MMO) that are multiplayer focused, like Call of Duty, had a single player campaign.What I think Johan was saying, is that when a company starts to include multiplayer, it becomed multiplayer focused, which in turn ruins the single player campaign.

 

[zax19]

...Rune...

2H hammer in your face! Great game, fun multiplayer, props for mentioning it! On the topic, I'd love to see a NWN-style multiplayer DLC, that would be just awesome (NWN1 is slowly losing its playerbase and I don't like NWN2).What I see as a problem is the RP and character customisation, not everyone can be a witcher so it would require some additional classes and so on.Arena-based multiplayer, just to smash each other, that could work well and I’d say it’s fairly doable as a DLC…As an MMORPG? Witchers would have to be what Jedi were in the original Star Wars Galaxies, you'd play your character (let's say a warrior/rogue/mage type of class) and you'd have the possibility of unlocking being a witcher. But I'd hate to see a witcher on every corner, just horrible.Regarding multiplayer I was actually daydreaming about a MMORPG based on motion capture fighting when you could buy special devices to fight the battles yourself or you could come to come some centre and get a few personalised combat animations for your character...How about motion capture Witcher 3?

 

[curlyhairedboy]

co-op multiplayer might be fun. competitive? wouldn't fit well, imo.

 

[yayodeanno.831]

You want multiplayer? Go buy a mumorpuger. What are you even doing in TW forum?Oh yes, I want automatic firearms and first person view, shoulder heigh cover and a nanosuit in TW, wouldn't that be oh soo cool? And aliens. And then maybe multiplayer too. You listening devs?

 

[Boreas_Mun_bg]

It is going to be cool if you are goint to play with a friend even if hes character doesn't say a word in a conversation.But most developers that concentrate on multiplayer ruine there games.Look at COD some people find it normal to be 5-8 hours long.

 

[zax19]

WTH are you talking about? MMOs usually use auto-attack and skill spamming, just go play rune or something where you actually have to postion yourself and where you can combine swordplay and magic. I guess you weren't wishing for a Oblivion multiplayer mode.Just a simple hack and slash co-op or an arena would be great. Nobody wants to change the game, they only want to experience it with other people, the way it is.Currently we (I assume most of us are from Europe) are waiting for Vindictus... now imagine that 4 player instance in TW2.

 

[zax19]

You want multiplayer? Go buy a mumorpuger. What are you even doing in TW forum?Oh yes, I want automatic firearms and first person view, shoulder heigh cover and a nanosuit in TW, wouldn't that be oh soo cool? And aliens. And then maybe multiplayer too. You listening devs?

WTH are you talking about? MMOs usually use auto-attack and skill spamming, just go play rune or something where you actually have to postion yourself and where you can combine swordplay and magic. I guess you weren't wishing for a Oblivion multiplayer mode.Just a simple hack and slash co-op or an arena would be great. Nobody wants to change the game, they only want to experience it with other people, the way it is.Currently we (I assume most of us are from Europe) are waiting for Vindictus... now imagine that 4 player instance in TW2.

 

[Garrison72]

You want multiplayer? Go buy a mumorpuger. What are you even doing in TW forum?Oh yes, I want automatic firearms and first person view, shoulder heigh cover and a nanosuit in TW, wouldn't that be oh soo cool? And aliens. And then maybe multiplayer too. You listening devs?

And zombie's, don't forget. Any good multiplayer game has plenty of zombies..