I was sitting in a chaise, probably in the press lounge, at GDC, talking to the Washu, and we asked, "Why isn't there more of an emphasis on co-operative play?" Specifically, local co-operative play. From everything I've read and heard, Gears of War's co-op has been a smash hit, and I've admitted freely to only having finished Halo in co-op. To complete Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time, a friend and I shared the duty, with him doing all the fighting and myself doing all the acrobatics. The emphasis in multiplayer has been primarily competitive, I think due to the popularity of FPSes, particularly when it comes to online multiplayer. I really don't want to play online, because most people online are rude, hypercompetitive and just not fun for the way I like to play. I'd rather play with my friends, and I literally mean with them, not against them. We suggested the following: Imagine an American football game which is designed for up to 4-player co-op. On offense, one player would be responsible for the quarterback, one would be responsible for the offensive line, and the other two would handle strong and weak side backs and receivers. Similarly, on defense, you'd have front line, safeties and so on. Making plays then becomes a cooperative effort. My vision for a game like that would be a little cartoonish, with simplified interfaces so that syncing coordinated moves becomes a little easier. In any case, the point is, how else can we introduce "cooperativity" (as distinct from "cooperation") into game design, and is it a valid emphasis? The floor's yours.

I've long complained about the lack of good co-op in current games - until Gears arrived (and now Crackdown) the last good co-op was Halo 1/2. Co-op used to be much more popular back in the 16bit era, with games like The Chaos Engine being much more fun with a friend than with some faceless AI.

I suspect it fell out of favour during the 2d -> 3d switch. When you're doing a 2d top down or side scroller adding another player character isn't too tricky - graphically theres very little extra work, and gameplay wise it just takes a slightly more intelligent camera. But when it comes to 3d where most games are first person or third person you're pretty much forced to do split screen, which requires awkward scaling back of the graphics to keep things smooth. The few games that do allow split-screen multiplayer could deal with this reasonably well because you'd be playing in much more limited multiplayer areas instead of the big sprawling single player levels.

IMHO co-op is at it's most fun when good teamwork is easy and gives you a significant advantage. It might be fun running around a FPS level together, but it's best when you manage to save your mate from that monster creeping up behind them. What Halo manages to do well is keeping the players together by teleporting the other person forwards when certain checkpoints are reached. This stops you having to wait for your mate to plod through miles of empty corridors that you've already cleaned out.

Personally I'd like to see more of Gears-style co-op where the second character is present but AI controlled in single player (which The Chaos Engine did originally, but without having cutscenes the effect wasn't as great). Not only does it spice up vanilla single player a bit, but it stops those awkward "WTF, two master cheifs?" moments when playing co-op.

I totally agree, I think most people stop playing games online when the 'Counter strike n00bs' play, the stupid script kiddies that shout at everyone when they die and shout abuse. Those people ruin the game. Maybe 'Left4Dead' will restart the Co-op games!

I agree about how coop can enhance a game. I think that's why many MMOs are so popular today. I don't play WoW, but my friends tell me they play it for the people rather than the game. I also remember months ago when me and my friends rented Marvel Ultimate Alliance which we played for 8-10 hours straight per day over a weekend. It was so much fun because we were all playing together at once.

On the contrary, me and my friends recently started playing Mario Kart Double Dash which has pretty bad coop (it seems forced).

I think coop is overlooked in game design but when done right it makes games just that much better.

Add to your list a few great tactical co-op shooters: G.R.A.W, G.R.A.W 2, the Rainbox Six series. I can _only_ play those games co-op. it's an awesome/hilarious experience.

To play devil's advocate for a second, I think problem you'll have to overcome is griefing. In a co-op game where you rely on the other person to help you out you're going to have tons of online problems. A decent percentage of gamers (me amongst them) think it's pretty hilarious to occasionally grief the hell out of someone. Friendly fire is on? fine i'll shoot you. I can push you around with my collision box? fine i'll throw you over that ledge.

For playing with your friends co-op is great. I think you have to be extremely careful about how you design co-op play if you want it to be viable over the internet with strangers.

-me

I've always wondered why Super Mario Bros or MegaMan (especially X) haven't never been co-op. I think with 3D it's hard to get co-op because, as someone mentioned, split-screen issue. In that regard however I wondered why a games like Halo or any 3D FPS game didn't promote box-to-box co-op more (ie. two consoles connected together). There should be far less lag than networked co-op. Hopefully the Wii will bring that back.

I have always been a great fan of co-op. Two wonderful (or at least fun to play at the time) games for the N64 were Armourines and Gauntlet Legends.

Personally, I have been toying around with the idea of a LAN based story driven co-op game, set in a post-apocalyptic (or nuclear fallout, or heck, even the overdone zombie) type scenario. It would be up to you and your friends to survive. Each player would get to pick from a set of characters, each having special abilities. The story would unfold involving all the characters who are playing (or at least have them present in cutscenes that drive the story forward). It would involve a certain amount of teamwork, but would also allow the players to each do thier own thing without being restricted to being within a certain radius of the other characters. Either way, I think co-op would open up a lot of new gameplay ideas

Heck, imagine co-op Elder Scrolls: Oblivion done as a co-op game! (Or Half-Life 2 co-op!)

I think part of the reason co-op hasn't been as successful is a lot of people get a similar rush out of playing regular multiplayer (against people they don't necessarily know). Mutliplayer in general is a bigger selling feature as well, when compared to co-op. I think the story driven co-op game could be something new, something fresh. Imagine a LAN game, but instead of fragging eachother, you are all scared witless of zombies eating your friends (or something similarly scary).

Quote:

Original post by Palidine Add to your list a few great tactical co-op shooters: G.R.A.W, G.R.A.W 2, the Rainbox Six series. I can _only_ play those games co-op. it's an awesome/hilarious experience. To play devil's advocate for a second, I think problem you'll have to overcome is griefing. In a co-op game where you rely on the other person to help you out you're going to have tons of online problems. A decent percentage of gamers (me amongst them) think it's pretty hilarious to occasionally grief the hell out of someone. Friendly fire is on? fine i'll shoot you. I can push you around with my collision box? fine i'll throw you over that ledge.

I thought the focus of discussion was local games, anyway, in which case you're most likely playing with a friend who is most likely acutely aware of the fact that if he shoots you in game there's going to be real life retaliation.


One thing, I think a common viewport is helpful to the sort of cooperative play we're looking for. Split screen makes it seem more separate and less of a team effort. If you want us to work together, show us "together".

Making it so that each player has a different sort of experience makes for fun times. Like splitting Prince of Persia into fighting and acrobatics. Super Strike Eagle (I think that's the title) for the SNES allowed one player to fly and the other to man the guns. I think The Lost Vikings for the SNES could be played multiplayer. Basically, it's the same idea as the football example: the quarterback won't get very far all by his lonesome. This is why FPS's have trouble with co-op: the game is designed so that one player can do it all, and now you have two do-it-all characters.

An RTS could possibly be split into economics and combat. Let one player command the armies, the other allocates resources and/or manages supply lines.

I've been thinking about cooperative play also, but more "competitive cooperative" play. Games where you form a team, but there is still competition among the team. A lost of Nintendo platform games have recently been playing on this, and I think it works really well. FF: Crystal Chronicles, Zelda: Four Swords, the Tank game in Wii Play, etc. In Four Swords, finding out you can pick up your friend overhead and whack them into enemies is fun.

It takes the griefing mentioned before and sort of makes it part of the game. The games have rewards for working well together, but you are still out for yourself to some extent.

If playing on a FPS shooter game it always makes me mad when on Multiplayer its only versus. You can't play coop with your friend and fight AIs just to have fun. Halo did a good job of integrating multiplayer, but it could use a system of two people playing AI characters, or if 7 people wanted to play system link, throw in an AI to join the smaller team. However, on Coop play, Halo is amazing. My friend and I were playing the last level of Halo 1 and I had low health. Since I could be brought back alive and we were trapped in a hall I just randomly said, throw a plasma on me. My friend asked what the heck I was gonna do but threw it on me and I rushed down the hall into the Covenant and killed all of them with a plasma stuck to me. This is an example of good coop play where strategies like that can be intregrated. Also, that God cursed game Splinter Cell really shows a need for teamwork on Coop. Games show it is possible to make good coop, but so many decide not to integrate it.

On an MMO I've found that the point of being online with millions of players is ruined when soloing becomes an easy part. No MMO has an integrated system where cooperation is key when "farming" or "grinding". Vanguard: Saga of Heroes claims to have this kind of coop required play but I haven't played it so I don't know. Guild Wars integrated the need for teamwork in the missions of Prophecies (The first one) but lost it in Factions (the second one) where people could beat the last mission alone. A game where you need that cooperation and teamwork would be an instant hit.