What is it with SP-only people slamming co-op?
People saying stuff like "I'd rather a solid SP story", or "don't need a lackluster MP mode" are missing the point entirely.
NOTHING about the game needs to change for co-op. It can 100% be the exact same game.
Look at the Splinter Cell series, Halo series, Call of Duty Black Ops 3 / World At War, Too Human, Saints Row 4, etc. I could list these games for hours, these are just those I've played recently.
The story of the game is the exact same whether you're playing alone or with a friend, you can go through the entire campaign / story mode totally unaffected either way.
The ONLY thing that changes, is the fact that everything is better because you're sharing the experience with someone. To reiterate, the STORY, does NOT change. You don't lose features, the map doesn't get smaller, the graphics don't worsen, and the world won't end by letting people play with their friends.
That being said, MULTIPLAYER, like Team Deathmatch, Capture the Flag, King of the Hill, etc... is totally unnecessary. Games like those are a dime a dozen, but CO-OP isn't something that should be overlooked. It brings far too much to the table to be a feature that everyone ignores.
The replayability factor alone makes co-op an amazing thing. Not to mention all the other positives, that come with literally no negatives.
It blows my mind that people are so adamantly against the idea, when it doesn't detract from the game at all, it just adds to it.
I agree. EA's decision to make Star Wars BF an online-only game is a terrible one, and it's great to see developers still catering for the SP fans.Originally Posted by Stone_Punk Go to original post
+1 on everything you said. Could not have put it better myself.Originally Posted by Aryxe Go to original post
Another here for COOP mode.
FC3 and FC4 I only bought because of COOP.
Will be skipping Primal because there is no COOP.
(and yes, I was mostly a SP gamer until a few years ago, except for Quake 3. COOP with a buddy is just way too much fun. it can even bring a boring game to life with someone else playing with you).
Funny to read that some only bought Far Cry 3, yes 3, for coop, since it was really really minor part of the game.
Game is going to be awesome but at least if we're not getting any kind of coop (wich seems to be the case), we'll finally have a totally SP dedicated game and boring internet creepers will stop crying about "how lame FC MP and Coop are, filled with bugs and others". You don't like, you don't play but just let others have fun. Don't spill your virtual ink for nothing.
Nice to see that some developpers still care about SP games. No one cries about lack of coop in Deus Ex, Mirror's Edge or others. We're fine without out.
"Funny to read that some only bought Far Cry 3, yes 3, for coop, since it was really really minor part of the game.
Game is going to be awesome but at least if we're not getting any kind of coop (wich seems to be the case), we'll finally have a totally SP dedicated game and boring internet creepers will stop crying about "how lame FC MP and Coop are, filled with bugs and others". You don't like, you don't play but just let others have fun. Don't spill your virtual ink for nothing.
Nice to see that some developpers still care about SP games. No one cries about lack of coop in Deus Ex, Mirror's Edge or others. We're fine without out."
"I see a lot talking about less content without even having scene one minute of gameplay. That's a bit lame."
@angstik could not agree more with both of this statements above i also hope that the game does well i will be buying it and i hope that the Far Cry team continues to change up the far cry series with more setting similar to this
Yay, focusing on a Singleplayer experience, the words that seem to fall on deaf ears these days. Too bad Ubisoft hasn't done even half of this for some of the other titles.Originally Posted by JasonParadise Go to original post