The Co-op Thief Thread

Domarius on 19/4/2006 at 13:23

Co-op is a type of Multiplayer game. Multiplayer encompasses it. Multiplayer also encompasses death matching, MMORPGs, turn based strategey, etc.
So it makes no sense to say Co-op is one thing and MP is another. Let's be clear on that.

@Soul Shaker - I don't wholly agree with you.
Personally I see nothing wrong with taking Calendra's Legacy and adding multiple human Garrett players in it to play alongside each other. Obviously a nice cosy amount would be prefferable, like 2 to 4 players.

Kurgan on 19/4/2006 at 15:17

Quote Posted by demagogue

The problem with coop maps is that they just aren't capable of sustaining a regular crowd to play them. They are more like 1-shot deals; you play the map and then it's done. The problem with that is it's hard to pull a bunch of people together just to play one map...

Quote:

The only way you're going to sustain a regular crowd for coop gameplay that I can see is if you also have a regular series of maps coming out on a regular basis that tell a story episodically (TV like)...

Forgive me for just quoting those highlights, but those are what I wanted to comment on.

I disagree that it is, or has to be, that way, on either count. Linked missions would be fun, but they don't have to be linked. Just look at thiefmissions.com and day of the week, and you'll see a handful of new FMs posted, most one-shot storylines. Those are typically really good missions, and I can tell you I'd have even more fun with them if I could connect to a friend and have him participate in the mission with me. If the game had coop MP capability, then anyone playing the FMs could play in whichever fashion preferred, single (as usual) or coop. No one's left out, and there'd be a steady supply of missions, as there have been for years, now.

I anticipate much enthusiasm and support for Dark Mod when it's released, and many more FMs for it than, unfortunately, Thievery ever saw. If DM were to have coop support, either native or via patch or plugin, the lack of differentiating between "modes" (tac vs coop) would keep the coop crowd happy, while allowing the typical single-player gamers to continue doing what they enjoy. The real key is just in the mindset of the mission designer, who will either be focusing on creating a tactical map, or a full mission. I have no doubt that some will also begin creating "maps" for tactical play, but that's cool, too. Small chance that FMs will stop being produced as a result. The more the merrier.

This is where the real irony is, though. Missions that are ideal for coop play are already being produced in droves, and have been for ages. We're simply lacking the ability to get into them in a coop environment. I can't think of a single FM I've ever played that I wouldn't have a blast playing alongside someone else.

Sure, a few along the way may run into the occasional glitch, as we discussed before, if some sort of in-game event is triggered and the players aren't central to each other at the moment, but hey, that's ok, I can live with occasional things like that. :)

Kurgan on 19/4/2006 at 15:41

Quote:

Somehow this distinction of Tactical MP vs. Co-Op MP feels rather arbitrary and doesn't really serve a purpose because to my mind it is essentially the same.

Yeah, I noticed. :cheeky:

Well, just cuz ya can't see the difference, doesn't mean it's not there. Trust me, I wouldn't be here talking about this if "multiplayer" were being utilized in all its glory. Unfortunately, most games that say multiplayer on the box don't really allow the game to be played that way. If you want me to illustrate how I mean that, observe:

Joe and Sam head to their local game store. They see some Deus Ex clone on the shelf and read the box, which claims to be multiplayer. The description of the "adventure" sells them completely, flying around the world, encountering villains, saving kittens from trees, finding a cure for a disease, and facing-off against, and defeating, the ultimate dastardly bad guy in the end. They each buy a copy, run home, install it, grab all the latest patches and updates, then quickly discover that they can't play it together as they'd thought. Clicking the multiplayer tab takes them to a list of servers, with zillions of random maps cycling away every ten or twenty minutes (some from the game but stripped-down for tactical play, some fan-made), filled with spawnkillers, clans, snipers, campers, and a milieu of 14 year olds with raging hormones, acne, and a serious need to stop shooting things and discover sunshine and girls. Yep, fun, lemme tell ya. :)

Now, I'll admit, some may find that fun. Even I have dabbled a bit (I enjoyed playing CTF in Soldier of Fortune for awhile, and going head-to-head occasionally with a friend in DXMP --until the cheaters got so bad we gave up in disgust). But no, that's definitely not the same thing as being able to play the actual game, as described on the box, together. Nu-uh, no way, no how.

Give me coop, or give me cookies! Er-- I mean death, give me death!

Domarius on 20/4/2006 at 08:46

Quote:

Joe and Sam head to their local game store. They see some Deus Ex clone on the shelf and read the box, which claims to be multiplayer. The description of the "adventure" sells them completely, ...

Yeah, tell me about it. They blab on about how great the single player game is, then slap a "multiplayer!!!111" label on it - what other conclusion are you supposed to draw? That the adventure mode can also be played with friends. :erg:

I quickly learned to never expect a proper co-op mode unless it was confirmed explicitly in a review or I'd seen it myself.

Kurgan on 21/4/2006 at 03:49

Quote Posted by Domarius

Y'know what really gets me? That adding coop isn't always as hard as they imply. System Shock 2, with the aid of a patch, had coop, but they say "it can't be done" with Thief. One of you was saying that the SS2 and T1 engines weren't quite the same, but I'm not so sure about that. I read an interview a few years ago with one of the designers, and he was saying it was "the" dark engine they used, and all they did was create different skins and such, and other minor tweaks (no light gem, for example). He went on to point out one of the funny aspects of doing it that way, how the monkeys were just shrunk, re-skinned guards, and would act like them if you looked closely.

Deus Ex is another perfect example. Tactical MP was all they incorporated, but one fan proved it didn't have to be that way. Witnessed it myself. He converted some of the maps back into the original in-game missions, and fired 'em up via MP. It worked. As I mentioned in the other thread, I came into the game and got to see others playing out the actual game, just like the single-player experience. Coolest thing I'd seen in years. Always wondered if he'd done them all, and if so, where we could find them. Don't remember who it was that did it, though.

If only someone had the skill to create an ancillary patch for T2, that didn't alter the game, but simply allowed people to connect and share the environment, we'd be in hog-heaven.

Domarius on 21/4/2006 at 16:07

Yep.

I remember checking that Deus Ex thing you mentioned, last year. They still only had the one map. I think he had to re-edit a lot of triggers or something.

Coop isn't difficult, its just time consuming, and given the low appreciation, obivousliy somethign that they don't care much for intheir project budget.

Hm... you may be interested in this...
(http://coop.deusexgaming.com/)

Kurgan on 22/4/2006 at 00:24

Quote Posted by Domarius

I remember checking that Deus Ex thing you mentioned, last year. They still only had the one map.

Pretty sure he'd done more than that. Been ages, so my memory isn't doing a lot of good, but the last time I had looked for info on it, I seem to recall being told he'd done five or six of the missions, which is why I was wondering now if he'd done them all. I suppose that could be wrong, of course, and maybe whomever I was talking to at the time had their facts off. However, I'm almost certain that, when I was on the server, the map cycled once or twice, into other SP missions.

Quote:

Hm... you may be interested in this...
(http://coop.deusexgaming.com/)

Heh, been awhile since you updated your links, eh? :) That project died a long time ago, unfortunately. The link reverts back to the base DXG page, where they are currently talking about DX: Reborn, which is a total DX conversion project attempting to re-create DX under UT2004 so people can play it coop. Very cool idea. The DX Coop patch never made it past beta 1.1, and although it works, it's limited, and can't save games or switch maps.

Hey, there's an interesting thought. Does anyone know if a site exists that's dedicated to FPS/Coop gaming? I'd sure be interested in knowing about other coop games out there that I may be unaware of. Heck, I only just found out that Ghost Recon had coop, and am planning on playing that soon. :)

Domarius on 23/4/2006 at 03:58

Quote:

The link reverts back to the base DXG page, where they are currently talking about DX: Reborn

I know, that's why I posted the link.

Yeah Ghost Recon is coop, but only in the way that you have to queue up the maps in the correct order and set them to coop - you miss out on the vids and mission breifing (idiots), but you can view them manually. The vids are easy enough to play I think, if you get the right player or codec (can't remember which) and the briefing text canbe found by searching the folder for files containing... um, briefing, or some text that you know a briefing should contain. then just view it in a text editor.

My brothers and I completed it that way, it was awesome.

Holywhippet on 26/4/2006 at 04:02

Most of the co-op games being mentioned are ones where the extra players just make the game easier for the most part as they can support you directly. For example, Diablo 2 can be played through with co-op multiplayer but all that means is you have multiple people bashing all the monsters.

Thief is in a different boat. How exactly would co-op work? Would person A work on stealing vases and other valuables while person B went for the main treasures? IMO this would just result in a game that is half as fun and possibly frustrating.

Alternately, you could be working together with one person distracting a guard while the other blackjacked them. Again though, this makes things too easy.

The final mode I can think of would be to require person A to climb up and hit a switch say while person B waited to go through the door that the switch opened. But this would require the entire game to be designed for this in advance. You'd have to have a maximum number of people in mind. You could manage it by allowing the player to switch to another character provided their current character is hiding somewhere. In short, it could be done, but not with the current Thief levels.

Kurgan on 26/4/2006 at 17:30

Quote Posted by Holywhippet

Thief is in a different boat. How exactly would co-op work? Would person A work on stealing vases and other valuables while person B went for the main treasures? IMO this would just result in a game that is half as fun and possibly frustrating.

Oh, no, not at all. Truuust me on that one. :) You've just got to think of it as it was originally intended, as an experience, a story to be interacted with, and not just a goal-oriented hack-n-slash session. I played all the Thievery missions under coop with a friend, and my only gripe really is that there are so few of them (although, as I've said before, it would've been nice if more of them had been designed like full FMs, and less like tactical maps). We worked together as a team to achieve things, and it was a total blast, much more fun than solo, and no less challenging.

Quote:

Alternately, you could be working together with one person distracting a guard while the other blackjacked them. Again though, this makes things too easy.

Heh, not really. Having more thieves may give more hands to get things done, but it also creates more bodies to be seen, fewer places to hide, more chances for mistakes or blunders. Had several occasions where I was playing and one of us would dive for cover, only to discover the other had already jumped into that same spot, and we'd have to quickly race somewhere else to avoice capture. Thief-style games have a multitude of ways that playing as a team can be of great benefit, and a lot of fun.

Quote:

... But this would require the entire game to be designed for this in advance. You'd have to have a maximum number of people in mind. You could manage it by allowing the player to switch to another character provided their current character is hiding somewhere. In short, it could be done, but not with the current Thief levels.

I can only say I disagree. As a player, I wouldn't want to see someone beef things simply because they knew it was going to be played by multiple persons. An intriguing story, a realistic setting, --things like that make it worth playing. If a few friends are in it together, that's fine, and it wouldn't have to be "harder" per se for things to remain fun and challenging. Heh, sometimes having others in it with you makes it harder!

I will say this, though. I don't think it would be fun if it were a big pack of thieves hitting a mission together. Two is good, maybe three, but I wouldn't want to do it with more, unless it was some gigantic mission and we were breaking off into pairs to head in different directions to deal with various tasks.