Weird, coz almost his entire post is regarding technical difficulties (which aren’t as apparent with small numbers of players).
I do understand why co-op isn’t a feature in a lot of games, I just think that a lot of what’s said in this thread is a little misleading in terms of technical feasiblity.
One possibility is that adding cool features to relatively obscure and poorly marketed games isn’t necessarily going to give them the push in sales that one might hope for. However, maybe adding a cool feature like co-op to a more well-known game or one that has a strong marketing campaign behind it might result in a significant boost in sales.
I think the bottom line is that publishers have never seen proof that adding co-op to a game has increased it’s sales to be worth it. This is why no extra money is thrown at it.
On NOLF2, it was one of those situations that we felt was a good way to make our product stand out. Everyone has done DM, Team DM and CTF. We had the AI resources, but didn’t want to apply co-op to the entire single player game, so we took existing levels and re-implemented co-op gameplay (which is far different than typical single player gameplay). I think our implementation was ok given the time we had, but I would’ve done it a bit different if I could. I love co-op, but understand the challenges inherent in creating a quality co-op experience and understand why it’s not done too often (internet play is even harder).
It was a good experiment, but like I said, never provided the proof needed in sales that co-op brings in more money.
This is my new favorite development quote.
More games aren’t coop because executives don’t care about coop. Hell, most games are only MP these days because execs started thinking that MP sells games.
I’m not sure I’ve ever worked on a game that didn’t start out having coop, but most of the games I’ve shipped don’t have coop. Things get cut, and coop is usually first on the list.
Well, I bought two copies 'cause of the co-op – wouldn’t’ve picked the game up otherwise.
It was a good experiment, but like I said, never provided the proof needed in sales that co-op brings in more money.
Well, dammit.
Weinstein has the answer nailed.
Synchronizing threads on your own CPU can be difficult enough. Synchronizing actors and clients across a UDP network is much harder.
Synchronizing all of that in a trustworthy way is even harder.
Getting any decent perf now that you have an exponential bandwidth growth curve and verification going on is harder still.
Now try convincing your boss that you should spend half of your QA budgest testing something that’s really hard to test, with nigh impossible repro conditions for a feature that only 10% of your market will care about.
Still wondering?
Time for a reply Jon.
Just give them the facts and I’m sure that they will see your point.
Wow! What an informative thread. Co-op is one of my big issues on deciding whether or not to buy a game. I knew it created more work but did not understand all the issues. I now have a better understanding. I will control my urge to whine in the future when some premier title I am interested in does not include co-op in the future but it will still influence my purchasing decision.
I still have fond memories of playing through all of Q2(not to mention D2) and several expansions co-op at geek fests years ago. The Delta Force games provided it but after #2 it was very broken and out of synch.
p.s. Thanks to Dave for taking the time to explain the issues.
Wow. With an attitude like that, it’s almost as if you were taking part in the thread instead of throwing a potshot from the sidelines like a little whore.
I’m tired enough of the issue for the moment to be statisfied by Dave’s long answer. The one that, coincidentally, doesn’t match up in the least bit with the short answers.
You mean other than being a detailed breakdown of:
–Dave
No. I mean how the long answer, which actually does explain how co-op could require more bandwidth is apparently “nutshelled” with quickshots about scripting, rebalancing, QA, and the co-op market not being accepting of rough co-op implementations, all of which are either total bullshit or niggling excuses.
Look, there’s nothing else we can do with this aside from getting catty. The bandwidth explanation works well enough and the rest is going to lead everyone in circles like it usually does. You’ve got it. Have some cake and take a victory lap.
Wow. With an attitude like that, it’s almost as if you were taking part in the thread instead of throwing a potshot from the sidelines like a little whore.
I’m tired enough of the issue for the moment to be statisfied by Dave’s long answer. The one that, coincidentally, doesn’t match up in the least bit with the short answers.[/quote]
Cry me a river Jon. You’re just a sore loser.
Way to keep it up 2 days after the fact while still having absolutely nothing to do with the argument.