Coop shouldnt be a stretch goal but should be a primary feature and PvP should just go away


#1

Coop shouldn’t be a stretch goal and should be a main part of the game. The biggest reason is me and friends have looked for games where we can build together such as this one. What peaked my interest on the Green Light submission on Steam was the fact that it had coop. Well as I looked around its a stretch goal and not a truly added feature. Just a heads up to the team. I would suggest you remove the coop tag from your Steam Green Light page unless it will be a truly added feature. I would like to see you guys succeed but if you remember the upset about The War Z on steam and how they listed features and didn’t have them.


#2

I don’t mind the pvp feature, since it’s not going to be a real true pvp part of the game. I do agree though that they should commit to Co-Op or say screw it and just focus on the single. It doesn’t even have to be anything super hard core. I would be happy with a minecraft-esk multiplayer where I can just setup a server and my friends and I can get online and build crap together then go fight other other crap together.

Sadly, I think this is one of those things that only time will tell for us :frowning:


#3

I have no issue with your post on the whole as it’s your opinion and you are entitled to it.

But I think comparing this with the War Z is a completely unfair and wrong comparison. People were annoyed by the War Z for a lot of other reasons rather than it simply listing features it didn’t have. The development process, the communication with the public, the press and everything to go with that game is an absolute disgrace and a very good display of how not to develop a game.

As for the multiplayer @Cronus I think they stated that it will be Minecraft style, in the sense that you set your server up, and your friends can join in etc.


#4

PvP is way easier to do than Coop, getting to Coop requires them to do the PvP first, so doing it reversed would make no sense.

I’m also 99.99% sure they’ll make the 400k goal so don’t worry. Pledges will slow down, but not that much. And the last days of a kickstarter bring in a lot of backers too.


#5

I believe your right but I figure if I mentioned it then it would save being brought up later. lol


#6

Yer that’s true, I’m sure it’ll hit the $400,000 anyway, so nevermind!


Community Gaming Time!
#7

Well here is why I bring up the The War Z thing. I thought flat out Coop was a core feature when in fact it is NOT a current core feature. Sure I know this is in development, but after everything that happened. Having the green light page say coop is very misleading. I just don’t want to see indie devs suffer through all the crap that The War Z devs were put through even though those guys deserved it. I am just saying they need to say coop is a stretch goal or something. Otherwise other people could throw a huge fit.


#8

Both co-op and pvp should just go away and make room for more actual game content. *shrug *


#9

Actually COOP as a core feature would bring a lot more customers. People love being able to play with friends and create or destroy things.


#10

That’s a weird thing to say.

Personally, the modability and Co-op were very promising to me, since you could try do someone’s challenges with your friends.


#11

Coop is like the biggest selling feature for me…


#12

I strongly agree with Gazz, though, I purposely backed past the buddy tier for a friend. I don’t like the idea of something pushing single player content out for a ham fisted multiplayer features.


#13

There really needs to be a sticky with official developer clarification on this, it feels like there’s another post like this every day.


#14

Before someone thinks that I think they are doing a lack luster job on secondary features, I don’t. It’s an thought to any single player focus game I have.


#15

[quote=“ernierock, post:10, topic:273”]
That’s a weird thing to say.[/quote]
Not at all.
On the first “page” of the Kickstarter project the devs state that "This kickstarter is to fund the single player version of the game."
Everything beyond that is gravy.

The single player game needs to be awesome so that there is any point in wanting to play it multiplayer.
“It has multiplayer” always reminds me of “It’s got electrolytes!” =)

Of course, it doesn’t hurt to structure a game so that multiplayer can be added without re-writing half of it and re-balancing 2/3 of the game. Game balance isn’t just about numbers. It starts with designing the angles of freedom, the way features scale and how they interact. The numbers are only the final touches.


#16

You really made it seem like they shouldn’t include multiplayer ever and keep developing singleplayer, which is something different than you are saying now, namely they should create a good base first.


#17

Well not true PvP anyways since its just a NPC town that is a copy of an actual player so I really don’t think it would be any different (I’d be pretty upset if players can intrude into your game and wreck all your hard work). Down the road I’d imagine that some kind of “hardcore” mode will be added to give players the option to duke it out.


#18

Hey Zarx. Stonehearth will definitely have co-op, it’s just a question of whether it comes in the initial release or shortly thereafter. If we reach our stretch goal, we can afford to hire more programmers to speed up development and get it into the initial release of the game. Even if we don’t reach the goal we plan on adding co-op play soon after release funded by the revenue generated from sales of the single player game. Sorry for the confusion on the Greenlight page, but we’re as excited about Coop as you guys are. Thanks!


BOOM! Guess what just happened?
#19

@Ponder You mind if I snip this for the Q & A?


#20

You should definitely make a post about this on the Kickstarter page. It seems to be a common misconception and I feel like it would persuade a lot of the “I’m not funding unless we get the co-op stretchgoal” crowd to finally jump aboard.