The co-op thing would be easy I think.  It would just need to work like diablo does.  Your game, your world, your progress but with an option to allow X players to join your world if you want them to.  Diablo is a single player game and it feels like a single player game even with co-op.  TES will always be a single player game as well and feel like one so I don't see a problem with co-op.  I do not want an mmorpg TES but it wouldn't be.  I would also love to be able to fight other players to test my build out.

If it came to a fight, then people would just spam their health potions.

That being said, I want MOON SUGAR BACK!! SKOOMA JUST DOESN'T SATE MY ADDICTION!!!

 Bloody Diplomat wrote:

 Ramon284 wrote:

to everyone who says they wont buy it when its co-op, think about this : you CAN play co-op, you dont HAVE TO. if there are a few people that like co-op, let them play co-op. just like in fable 2, it was garbage. but you just go to option screen and disable seeing other people, and then it isn't co-op anymore, just a single player game. i mean, they can't make the game that you HAVE to play with 2 or more people, so whats the problem?

Because they will devote more time trying to make a crappy co-op when they could be polishing the single player...

well, in my eyes there are 2 sides of co-op. you can co-op with a special multiplayer story and special quests u need 2 players for, and stuff that can only be defeated by 2 spells at the same time or sumthing like that. or you just play the game but instead of doing quests urself and closing oblivion gates urself ( just taking oblivion example ) you both fight your way trough the game. they shudn't make co-op special. if they make it available so that you can ask people to join, but without special stuff for those co-op players ( maybe a few bonus modes or sumthing ) every1 will be happy

 Ramon284 wrote:

 Bloody Diplomat wrote:

 Ramon284 wrote:

to everyone who says they wont buy it when its co-op, think about this : you CAN play co-op, you dont HAVE TO. if there are a few people that like co-op, let them play co-op. just like in fable 2, it was garbage. but you just go to option screen and disable seeing other people, and then it isn't co-op anymore, just a single player game. i mean, they can't make the game that you HAVE to play with 2 or more people, so whats the problem?

Because they will devote more time trying to make a crappy co-op when they could be polishing the single player...

well, in my eyes there are 2 sides of co-op. you can co-op with a special multiplayer story and special quests u need 2 players for, and stuff that can only be defeated by 2 spells at the same time or sumthing like that. or you just play the game but instead of doing quests urself and closing oblivion gates urself ( just taking oblivion example ) you both fight your way trough the game. they shudn't make co-op special. if they make it available so that you can ask people to join, but without special stuff for those co-op players ( maybe a few bonus modes or sumthing ) every1 will be happy

I wont and neither will 99% of the smart Oblivion fanbase.

---

Playing CoD instantly makes you a gun expert.

Really, thier is no way oblivion would be able to support multiplayer.Because what if you just started the game and your lv 2.Now an lv 40 joins your game s now the lv 40 is tearing everything up while your still on the same level.

---

FireproofGalaxy isn't my real Gamertag.

then, 99% of the people are just stupid. they whine when the co-op will be bad, cos they want a good one. they cant get a good one, cos that takes lots of time. but they want the game as fast as possible, so they get a co-op and whine about how bad it is or gonna be. you can only choose 1 thing i suposse

 Ramon284 wrote:

then, 99% of the people are just stupid. they whine when the co-op will be bad, cos they want a good one. they cant get a good one, cos that takes lots of time. but they want the game as fast as possible, so they get a co-op and whine about how bad it is or gonna be. you can only choose 1 thing i suposse

And I choose a polished Single Player game it does not need Co-Op.

---

Playing CoD instantly makes you a gun expert.

 Bloody Diplomat wrote:

And I choose a polished Single Player game it does not need Co-Op.

I dont want co-op in the game either.

---

FireproofGalaxy isn't my real Gamertag.

 FireproofGalaxy wrote:

 Bloody Diplomat wrote:

And I choose a polished Single Player game it does not need Co-Op.

I dont want co-op in the game either.

I third that.

---

 OldPepsiMan wrote:

the whole secret is more Pepsi and less booze.

 Taldarin wrote:

 FireproofGalaxy wrote:

 Bloody Diplomat wrote:

And I choose a polished Single Player game it does not need Co-Op.

I dont want co-op in the game either.

I third that.

I fouth that. Lets keep the choo choo train going, shall we?

---

Assassins Creed 2 Achievement Walkthrough!

 Ramon284 wrote:

then, 99% of the people are just stupid. they whine when the co-op will be bad, cos they want a good one. they cant get a good one, cos that takes lots of time. but they want the game as fast as possible, so they get a co-op and whine about how bad it is or gonna be. you can only choose 1 thing i suposse

I choose single player. I dont want a co op Elder Scrolls game, whether the co op is good or bad.

---

\¯\/¯/ |¯|)¯) /¯/\¯\ \¯\/¯/
¤¤BLADED¤PHANTOM¤¤
/_/\_\ |_|)_) \_\/_/ /_/\_\

 Mikedzines wrote:

 Taldarin wrote:

 FireproofGalaxy wrote:

 Bloody Diplomat wrote:

And I choose a polished Single Player game it does not need Co-Op.

I dont want co-op in the game either.

I third that.

I fouth that. Lets keep the choo choo train going, shall we?

Fifth or Sixth, nor sure how it goes this far down.

---

April 15th is no longer Tax day, it is now TEA day

 default15 wrote:

The co-op thing would be easy I think. <snipped>

Firstly, it would not be easy to implement anything as alien as multiplayer to the Elder Scrolls. An immense amount of time and effort would have to be put into making the crap work, then they'd have to go back and rebalance everything to work with it, change how quests are handled, and figure a way around the strain that would be put on the host system having to keep up with two players running around a large, detailed world and behind-the-scenes AI updates, etc.

All of that would take away from the time spent on the single player aspect, thus watering it down even further.

Read the thread before posting.

---

Acid Bath - Jezebel

Death knowz...you sir, are a god.

 death knowz wrote:

 default15 wrote:

The co-op thing would be easy I think. <snipped>

Firstly, it would not be easy to implement anything as alien as multiplayer to the Elder Scrolls. An immense amount of time and effort would have to be put into making the crap work, then they'd have to go back and rebalance everything to work with it, change how quests are handled, and figure a way around the strain that would be put on the host system having to keep up with two players running around a large, detailed world and behind-the-scenes AI updates, etc.

All of that would take away from the time spent on the single player aspect, thus watering it down even further.

Read the thread before posting.

I dont understand why people keep posting this idea. We've already proved it is quite possibly mone of the worst ideas ever. Fable 2 is the perfect example.

---

Time to Bring on the Payne!

 Wastelander08 wrote:

I dont understand why people keep posting this idea. We've already proved it is quite possibly mone of the worst ideas ever. Fable 2 is the perfect example.

Yep

---

FireproofGalaxy isn't my real Gamertag.

 FireproofGalaxy wrote:

 Wastelander08 wrote:

I dont understand why people keep posting this idea. We've already proved it is quite possibly mone of the worst ideas ever. Fable 2 is the perfect example.

Yep

Diablo

---

First Rule: We don't talk about it
Second Rule: We don't talk about it
We have no name, only in death we are Bob Parker

 FireproofGalaxy wrote:

 Wastelander08 wrote:

I dont understand why people keep posting this idea. We've already proved it is quite possibly mone of the worst ideas ever. Fable 2 is the perfect example.

Yep

Because most of us don't like being shut into one game and have a friend over and he can only watch. Of course it's a pipe dream, but Having other included in your game can only make it a waay more fun experience. If you have the opposite opinion then you should get better judgment on who to let play in your world.

Besides, Fable 2's co-op wasn't because it HAD to be that way, they chose to link the two screens together old dungeon crawler style AND they chose to not let you use YOUR own hero on someone elses game, which I think was retarded.

---

First Rule: We don't talk about it
Second Rule: We don't talk about it
We have no name, only in death we are Bob Parker

But thats not the main issue. The main issue is they spent too much time making co-op work and as a result it was sloppy, as was much of the game. Simply...it was rushed (The Co-op had to be downloaded like a week after it came out due to the rush to ship the game i believe). I dont want the same thing to happen to Elder Scrolls games.

---

Time to Bring on the Payne!

 Wastelander08 wrote:

But thats not the main issue. The main issue is they spent too much time making co-op work and as a result it was sloppy, as was much of the game. Simply...it was rushed (The Co-op had to be downloaded like a week after it came out due to the rush to ship the game i believe). I dont want the same thing to happen to Elder Scrolls games.

It was obvious it was a rush, but we're not talking about adding co-op in now, just what we would like to have. Hell, I couldn't say I wouldn't at least like a separate save for co-op only.

---

First Rule: We don't talk about it
Second Rule: We don't talk about it
We have no name, only in death we are Bob Parker

Thats fair enough, I just dont personally see the attraction to the idea.

Anyway, I mention this alot... But i'd really like the ability to join/start rebellions and overthrow a town et cetera et cetera.

---

Time to Bring on the Payne!

 Wastelander08 wrote:

Thats fair enough, I just dont personally see the attraction to the idea.

Anyway, I mention this alot... But i'd really like the ability to join/start rebellions and overthrow a town et cetera et cetera.

That would be cool.

---

FireproofGalaxy isn't my real Gamertag.

 Pharaoh X360 wrote:

<snip

Diablo doesn't force you onto one screen. Your team mates, all 8 of them can be in whatever act they want. Keep in mind that diablo is a 2d isometric RPG..

 In terms of fable 2, technical and gameplay issues found it necessary that both characters needed to be on one screen. The technical issue was the time it took to load ONE character into a zone. Imagine loading two characters in Fable, into SEPERATE zones. The gameplay issue was the fact that Fable has a "dynamic" enviornment. If you start destroying windows and killing people, you will be fined and feared; You could inflict mass chaos on  your buddies game and they wouldn't be able to to do anything about it.

Apply the same aspect to Oblivion, a game of much higher visual calibur and to a land full of people who are individually unique. You kill an NPC in fable, they'll respawn in a few in game days. You kill someone in a town in oblivion, they're dead.

From the beginning, nerds around the globe, felt as if  the elderscrolls series was their best kept secret when it came to RPGs. I felt that way when I played Daggerfall in 2000. When Morrowind was released, i'll admit, I was pretty mad. Tons of Xbox owners came crawling into the TES forum and started asking all kinds of crazy questions. I was younger at the time, and picked a fight which got me kicked off the forums. I had a lot of time to think about how close minded I was until the release of Oblivion.

What i'm trying to say is, people who jumped onto the series, still feel like the game belongs to them and them only, and thats why they don't want another person in their world. My brother is a big fan of the game, and I wouldn't mind him playing with me, but I know that quality time could be spent making the experience better for me...or him..individually. The elderscrolls series means something different to all of us, so I can understand where you're comming from.

I hope  you read this, and I also hope that this made some sort of sense.

---

Assassins Creed 2 Achievement Walkthrough!

 Mikedzines wrote:

 Pharaoh X360 wrote:

<snip

Diablo doesn't force you onto one screen. Your team mates, all 8 of them can be in whatever act they want. Keep in mind that diablo is a 2d isometric RPG..

 In terms of fable 2, technical and gameplay issues found it necessary that both characters needed to be on one screen. The technical issue was the time it took to load ONE character into a zone. Imagine loading two characters in Fable, into SEPERATE zones. The gameplay issue was the fact that Fable has a "dynamic" enviornment. If you start destroying windows and killing people, you will be fined and feared; You could inflict mass chaos on  your buddies game and they wouldn't be able to to do anything about it.

Apply the same aspect to Oblivion, a game of much higher visual calibur and to a land full of people who are individually unique. You kill an NPC in fable, they'll respawn in a few in game days. You kill someone in a town in oblivion, they're dead.

From the beginning, nerds around the globe, felt as if  the elderscrolls series was their best kept secret when it came to RPGs. I felt that way when I played Daggerfall in 2000. When Morrowind was released, i'll admit, I was pretty mad. Tons of Xbox owners came crawling into the TES forum and started asking all kinds of crazy questions. I was younger at the time, and picked a fight which got me kicked off the forums. I had a lot of time to think about how close minded I was until the release of Oblivion.

What i'm trying to say is, people who jumped onto the series, still feel like the game belongs to them and them only, and thats why they don't want another person in their world. My brother is a big fan of the game, and I wouldn't mind him playing with me, but I know that quality time could be spent making the experience better for me...or him..individually. The elderscrolls series means something different to all of us, so I can understand where you're comming from.

I hope  you read this, and I also hope that this made some sort of sense.

Mikedzines, you should become a preacher.

---

FireproofGalaxy isn't my real Gamertag.

 Mikedzines wrote:

 Pharaoh X360 wrote:

<snip

Diablo doesn't force you onto one screen. Your team mates, all 8 of them can be in whatever act they want. Keep in mind that diablo is a 2d isometric RPG.. Lol it actually wasn't me saying Diablo, it was my friend with false recall. I thought I could undo the post by stopping the load, guess not.

 In terms of fable 2, technical and gameplay issues found it necessary that both characters needed to be on one screen. The technical issue was the time it took to load ONE character into a zone. Imagine loading two characters in Fable, into SEPERATE zones. The gameplay issue was the fact that Fable has a "dynamic" enviornment. If you start destroying windows and killing people, you will be fined and feared; You could inflict mass chaos on  your buddies game and they wouldn't be able to to do anything about it. And when I refer to it having more people, I was somewhat more or less for the future, a better console. Or seperate Xbox's. And my bad for believing the internet on it was their choice to put them onto one screen. To the third point, is why I put out for a seperate save, aka you must start with 2 people +, but you cna play there on you own, just know 3 other people do too and can change things.

Apply the same aspect to Oblivion, a game of much higher visual calibur and to a land full of people who are individually unique. You kill an NPC in fable, they'll respawn in a few in game days. You kill someone in a town in oblivion, they're dead. What I said above.

From the beginning, nerds around the globe, felt as if  the elderscrolls series was their best kept secret when it came to RPGs. I felt that way when I played Daggerfall in 2000. When Morrowind was released, i'll admit, I was pretty mad. Tons of Xbox owners came crawling into the TES forum and started asking all kinds of crazy questions. I was younger at the time, and picked a fight which got me kicked off the forums. I had a lot of time to think about how close minded I was until the release of Oblivion. I hear ya, same thing was with me and my friends about Halo 1 when it first came out.

What i'm trying to say is, people who jumped onto the series, still feel like the game belongs to them and them only, and thats why they don't want another person in their world. My brother is a big fan of the game, and I wouldn't mind him playing with me, but I know that quality time could be spent making the experience better for me...or him..individually. The elderscrolls series means something different to all of us, so I can understand where you're comming from. I see what your saying, I just am rather social, and having to be in a game where I have to rely on NPCs to keep me guessing and too keep it fun just has not seemed to work much since Mass Effect and Oblivion. Yes Oblivion keeps me entertaned as is, I still find it would be much MORE fun for me if say my friend could come along and invade Oblivion gates with me, head down the deepest cave and split up, Or travel the land as a destructive duo.

I hope  you read this, and I also hope that this made some sort of sense.

---

First Rule: We don't talk about it
Second Rule: We don't talk about it
We have no name, only in death we are Bob Parker

 Pharaoh X360 wrote:

 Kyle 1310 wrote:

 Pharaoh X360 wrote:

Stop being so CO-OP nazi-ish. Even a couch co-op would be fun, it isn't really all that fun when my friend is over and we have to watch each other play. If they can pull it off great, if it becomes another two worlds, then no I can deal w/o.

Besides many games HAVE pulled off co-op really well, GoW for example did it as close to perfect as any I've seen.

fable 2 sucked on co-op cuz one screen. you couldnt do anything

I was talking about GOOD ones. . . there's always going to be ideals that some people just fail on, but Bethesda hasn't done me wrong so far.

because they havnt gone near co op and if they stick with single player its only uphill gameplay for us

---

a good friend will pay the bail to get you out of jail, a real friend will be beside you saying "dam that was fun"

Oh. Great. This subject is back.

---

Acid Bath - Jezebel

Death knowz...you sir, are a god.

Let this thread die!

Oh wait...






***.

---

Assassins Creed 2 Achievement Walkthrough!

 IXLER8 wrote:

 Pharaoh X360 wrote:

 Kyle 1310 wrote:

 Pharaoh X360 wrote:

Stop being so CO-OP nazi-ish. Even a couch co-op would be fun, it isn't really all that fun when my friend is over and we have to watch each other play. If they can pull it off great, if it becomes another two worlds, then no I can deal w/o.

Besides many games HAVE pulled off co-op really well, GoW for example did it as close to perfect as any I've seen.

fable 2 sucked on co-op cuz one screen. you couldnt do anything

I was talking about GOOD ones. . . there's always going to be ideals that some people just fail on, but Bethesda hasn't done me wrong so far.

because they havnt gone near co op and if they stick with single player its only uphill gameplay for us

The next Elder Scrolls should have Co-op, as long as the game does not revolve around having it, there, problem solved.

---

A1, Yeah. It's That Important.

Ahhhh there is another thread about improvements! Ok will state here what I did in another mega-thread

These are the ideas that the staff from GameInformer came up with, pretty good ones and of which I think sums up what everyone in this forum has said over in another thread.

http://www.gameinformer.com/News/Story/200903/N09.0318.1805.56285.htm

---

I'm the kind of woman that when my feet hit the ground each morning the devil says, "OH CRAP.... SHE'S UP!"

Let this damn thread die. It serves no purpose but to start more arguments about something that will never happen.

---

Acid Bath - Jezebel

Death knowz...you sir, are a god.