PDA

View Full Version : Wtf ??? No Co-op Mode



tsum2
15th Sep 2003, 22:35
http://actionvault.ign.com/features/interviews/commandos3intpt2.shtml

at the bottom

Why are you guys doing this ????

The co-op from commandos 2 was the best part.

This type of game screams co-op.

ahh well that kills it for me. I'll pass on this one.

Vote with your dollars people.

Guz
20th Sep 2003, 11:36
OMG..

theyve lost another customer, thats the stupidest decision ever,

''what shall we do to make C3 better than its predecesors?''
''how bout we get rid of multiplayer Coop and put some **** stuff in its place?''
'' sounds GREAT!!!''

Mike_B
20th Sep 2003, 11:42
*cough*

http://c2.gamesurf.tiscali.de/screens/C3/c3-40.jpg

Guz
20th Sep 2003, 15:40
this tells me that these peopleare having a COMMADO VS COMMANDO COOPERATIVE DEADMATCH, so its not a cooperative game, its a coopertive deathmatch, eg team deathmatch.

Mike_B
21st Sep 2003, 07:25
Ah sorry. I think it's good that they got rid of it. They came up with a total new multiplayer game experience which will probably be played by more people. The co-op mode took usually a long time to play online, while now you'll be able to play shorter games.

[PAK]Krwawy Lew
21st Sep 2003, 09:59
Originally posted by @m
Ah sorry. I think it's good that they got rid of it. They came up with a total new multiplayer game experience which will probably be played by more people. The co-op mode took usually a long time to play online, while now you'll be able to play shorter games.

Yeah it did take a long time to play co-op........but it was fun.
This new idea sounds interesting.........but why ohh why did they have to scratch co-op mode?

Why does everything online have to be player vs player?

Some games i'd rather play with other players then against them and sort of creating a bond between me and the other guy in the team, after some time I'll know what he's up too and we can co-ordinate our movements. That's what i just love about co-op, working as a team vs. the computer (Evil Matrix Agent Bastards :D )

David
22nd Sep 2003, 03:24
how many times u can complete same mission. 10-20. coop is doomed my friend;)

[PAK]Krwawy Lew
23rd Sep 2003, 01:26
Originally posted by David
how many times u can complete same mission. 10-20. coop is doomed my friend;)

I know...but they didn't have to kill co-op just because it's not that popular (and not really an uber re-play value). :rolleyes:

David
23rd Sep 2003, 03:36
i doubt that A LOT of people would be playing it when there is deathmach or CTF!!!!

mattaudio
23rd Sep 2003, 12:34
this is two differents ways to play the game , for me too , the co-op mode was the best feature of commando... i know three other friends that won't play to commando 3 because there is not co-op mode.....
once again i'm very sad that eidos has followed a typical vision of multiplayer game..:(
we are maybe not the majority of players , but for us disabling this feature has killed the interest of this game..
not all players are thinking like you and it's too bad to forget them...:(

WeinerMan
24th Sep 2003, 00:59
but they didn't have to kill co-op just because it's not that popular
huh? this is the perfect reason for killing it, especially if by removing it they made room for or allowed the development of something better...

Lechuck
24th Sep 2003, 10:50
I also need to express my views on the fact that there is no co-op. Team Deathmatch sounds ok-ish. But Why ditch the co-op??? The co-op was great. In real-life a group of commandos WORK AS A TEAM. They do stuff simultaneously not one at a time. EG Thief does the theiving, Beret slices the unconscious left by the thief, whilst he's covered by the sniper. THATS WAT ITS ALL ABOUT PPL! Lets just hope you come out with a patch pronto Eidos. Calling Moderators, WHAT WILL BE DONE TO BRING BACK CO-OP!! I AM A DIE-HARD FAN ON THE VERGE OF BREAKDOWN BECAUSE OF THIS.

Mike_B
24th Sep 2003, 11:31
Originally posted by Lechuck
WHAT WILL BE DONE TO BRING BACK CO-OP!!

Probably nothing.

kowboy
28th Sep 2003, 17:38
I think they should have just taken that little extra step to include coop mission.

It doesnt hurt those who dont like it, they can just not play it.

angrysquirrel
30th Sep 2003, 03:56
So what's the death match and capture the flag supposed to be like? That will keep my attention for about 15 seconds. If people want to play DTM or CTF, they would play an FPS like BF 1942 or UT. Absolutely silly. I heard they dumbed down the interface and took out commands that were in commandos 2.

What is it with game companies today? Do they think users are too stupid to handle the complexity of tactical decision making. I see it all over the place. Rainbow 6 was dumbed down. I heard swat 4 is also more simplistic than swat 3. They up the graphics to give you a sense that it's a better game when in fact it is just more simplistic. If I wanted simplistic, I would have bought a PS2 or an xbox (sorry folks if you have one). But you guys know what I mean. On a PC and you want to play strategy, for god's sake, make the game complicated! Has anyone else noticed this?

More examples. There's a new game called UFO: aftermath. Anyone remember x-com? Well, the designers in this new game dumbed it down. No deformable landscapes (i.e. no more thowing incindiary grendades into fields and burn those aliens), no entering buildings. (which was so much fun in x-com. Clearing buildings).

Don't they get it? We don't want puzzles, we don't want pac man. If we buy a tactical game, we want as many tactical options as possible. Jagged alliance 2 was the last good tactical game I've played. This game won't cut it.

Someone mentioned that Commandos 2 was TOO HARD??? A monkey could beat that game. Just make a noise, lie down. The guards come running and your team mows them down with machineguns.

I'd like to see beter AI. I'd like to see a group of enemy show up on a location and then fan out into smaller groups. I'd like to see a soldier go to the bush you are hiding behind and stop to look at it for a while. Maybe make a perception check. He comes around the bush and your scuba guy has his throwing knife ready. Just as he yells, "Ala..." he gets knifed in the chest. A guy off in the distance turns around and thinks he heard someone yell. He stops for a second and makes a short look of the area. But the guard is dead and behind the bush. The guard turns around and keeps on searching.

You see, game designers don't think that way anymore. At least in the last 10 years there has been either a disregard for game quality over hype by the marketeers and then a release of a buggy product with a gratuitous patch (see raven shield for that nice maneuver. One patch wonder. Addresses no issues. "some units had problems climbind ladders. We fixed that."

Yes, this is my soapbox. I am just so sick of seeing gaming companies dumbing down their products.

Here's a great example of a dumb game company that was actually saved by some mod developers. Battlefield 1942 desert combat mod. Even secret weapons expansion pack sucks compared to desert combat. The DC team continues to tweak the game and make it more realistic. EA does absolutely nothing.

The only hope for the gaming community is to convince a game developer UP FRONT to make their games modable. Allow a map editor to be released. Allow modding tools to be released. Make them user friendly. Because folks, gaming companies no longer care about their users. That is why the developer doesn't visit this site. That is why you get no feedback from Eidos. (you think they care about that you think? No they don't. Post away. Unless it's offensive, you will see no action or response from Eidos. They are only in it for the quick buck. Build up the hype, hope that users buy the pitch, people buy, are dissapointed, can't return their games, and then they are sold on ebay for a fraction of what they originally paid.

Can anyone think of any companies recently that actually make a high quality game in terms of depth and features over the last few years. I can't. I can tell you some great OLDER games I've played with more features than any of these newer games. System shock 1&2 (origin systems & looking glass studios, bought out by EA - AKA "the devil" and then dismantled). Descent series (freespace 1&2, descent). Made by Volition, inc., a company that was bought out by interplay. The company was subsequently bought out and then dismantled by Interplay. Volition actually took an idea for a turret for bombers in freespace one that I suggested and incorporated it into freespace 2. Now that was a company that cared for it's customers. But they're gone.

Are there companies that still listen to their customers? Maybe jo-wood. (but they are owned by god-games, so they bow to their leader). How about Deus ex? Ironically, published by eidos but I don't know who the devleoper was. That was a great game. Anyone wondering if Deus ex 2 will be eye candy with less features? How about half life 2? Will that be a dog at the sake of good eye candy? Firefly studios stronghold and crusader was a really great game. Unfortunately, they just made a game called "space colony" whcih is like the Sim's meet Alliens. You have to talk with people and develop rapport and relationships while aliens are attacking your base. That was a bright idea by a game designer. Or was that idea brought to the table by someone from marketing who took a "poll" of great new game ideas?

Now we have a demo of Commandos 3, released with serious bugs. (you can't auto attack in the demo. A dog that can't be killed. Disappearing bodies. Do these games go through QA anymore? Are they going through QA and the project lead says, "Screw it...release the demo. We're on a time schedule here."

It's all crap now. I have no idea what's happening out in the software industry anymore. Is there anyone working for a gaming company that could provide some input on this problem?

Okay, got to get off the box now. Work is in 7 hours. Think about it guys. Are we just buying junk now because there's nothing else to buy? Are we being pursuaded by the hype and buying games, only to find out that there are bugs which don't get addressed? Do we live on false hopes and promises from developers that the problems will be fixed? Do we live with clumsy gaming interfaces because that's all we expect. Are the kids (15-17 year olds) playing these games just too young to remember when games used to be GOOD, and that is why we are settling with this CRAP?

And the people who are trying to rationalize a feature removal. I'm sorry, but you've been bought by the system. You're in the matrix. You are sheep. Open your eyes and play some of the older games I've mentioned.

Squirrel out.....

Mike_B
30th Sep 2003, 05:15
Originally posted by angrysquirrel

So what's the death match and capture the flag supposed to be like? That will keep my attention for about 15 seconds.

Don't really know what the mp will be like, I haven't played it but I think it will be a nice addition to the series.


Someone mentioned that Commandos 2 was TOO HARD??? A monkey could beat that game. Just make a noise, lie down. The guards come running and your team mows them down with machineguns.

If you beat the game by gun blazing it's very easy. But if I recall correctly Commandos is still mostly about stealth which makes the game thougher, C2 was still easy then though.


Now we have a demo of Commandos 3, released with serious bugs. (you can't auto attack in the demo. A dog that can't be killed. Disappearing bodies. Do these games go through QA anymore? Are they going through QA and the project lead says, "Screw it...release the demo. We're on a time schedule here."

Yes it goes through QA, if you've browse a bit in the forum you will notice there is a thread explaining that the demo was a beta version which shouldn't be released. There is now an official version of the demo where the bugs are fixed.


And the people who are trying to rationalize a feature removal. I'm sorry, but you've been bought by the system. You're in the matrix. You are sheep. Open your eyes and play some of the older games I've mentioned.

The matrix is a movie nothing more, nothing less. So imo it's pretty silly calling people who are open for innovation sheeps and comparing it with a movie(!).

David
1st Oct 2003, 04:12
[i]

And the people who are trying to rationalize a feature removal. I'm sorry, but you've been bought by the system. You're in the matrix. You are sheep. Open your eyes and play some of the older games I've mentioned.

Squirrel out..... [/B]

all post is undertandable, but this :rolleyes:

WeinerMan
1st Oct 2003, 19:33
someone with that much angst about computer GAMES needs to get outside and play more...

David
2nd Oct 2003, 02:50
rufus, you bloody cheater :)
the probs is not in games. the prob is in us! imo games does not advanced as much as we do, so we see them as worse and worse all the time. :rolleyes:

sick
3rd Oct 2003, 08:17
i think its stupid if theyll take it out. in c2 they took out many featuresin the full game (while they can be activated somehow) and now they put it in c3. so they took them out so c3 would be "newer." now ive heard that there are 14 missions while first was said that there would be 23 missions. that are 9 missions off! so i wonder why they took some features out while its the last part in the commandos series, or they are up to smth...........

Monkey44
5th Oct 2003, 03:30
I dont know what the crying is about for the loss of co-op, i thought that co-op got incredibly boring incredibly fast. As mentioned earlier, you can only beat a level so many times before it just gets plain dumb. Now with the head to head option you can prove to anyone with confidence that you are a better commandos player than they are. I am really excited for this because id much rather play against someone and prove that i am better than he is than play with the guy and beat the level that i have beaten before a dozen times.

Lechuck
9th Oct 2003, 23:44
Angry squirrel's right. Whats the point of these forums if your voice isn't heard? an announcements board would suffice. Eidos don't give a shhh about their gamers. All they care about is making money. AS wasn't comparing eidos to a movie, he was being metaphoric. I was a big fan of commandos 1 & 2. But because Eidos don't care about their gamers any more they can take one more copy of C3 and shove it.

sick
10th Oct 2003, 08:37
have to agree wth lechuck. i have the feeling that eidos nor pyro gives a shhh (wink to @m) about the community. when the source of hl2 was leaked valve posted in a forum, asking for their help to find out who stole the code and he told he gives a lot about the community. thats the way it should be, giving about the community, not only about moneh.
w/o the community, no money!

ez rider
11th Oct 2003, 12:47
no coop? i found this on the eidos site

COMMANDOS 3:
DESTINATION BERLIN Coming October 2003

Prepare to take the Commandos on their deadliest mission yet. From the frozen ruins of Stalingrad, through to the forests of central Europe, and on to the beaches of Normandy, your men must use all of their combined skills to disrupt the German war machine. For the first time in the series, you can go behind the lines and engage in intense multiplayer mayhem, with all new deathmatch and cooperative scenarios for up to 12 players.

does eidos contradict itself or what?

and what about Fins our knivethrower? he doesn't seem to be in the team or am i wrong? i'm sure gonna miss him

anyway 1 more week or so to go then we all know what C3 will really be like

WeinerMan
11th Oct 2003, 14:13
the driver, natasha, and the mutt are gone...fins will be there

Lechuck
11th Oct 2003, 16:42
The co-op you're talking about ez rider is like "deathmatch co-op" as in 1 team against another. You can't have more than 1 team against another team though, so that sucks. It's not the co-op we all want - a group of people assuming the roles of 1 or 2 commandos each and taking on the enemy as a team.

mattaudio
14th Oct 2003, 03:49
Originally posted by David
how many times u can complete same mission. 10-20. coop is doomed my friend;)
you're right we're not gonna play 20 times the same mission in coop mode , so why not kill the solo game (because i don't think players will complete the solo game 20 times ) and add 10 extra deathmath map .....
i 've got even a new name for the game commando 3 ARENA :(

thesavegameking
15th Oct 2003, 17:35
This is a complete misjudgement of their target audience in my opinion.

It reminds me of when Colin McRae III on the PC had no network multiplayer but rather made your friend play with you split screen on the same PC (PC here - not a console) even though CM II offered this basic functionality - which was important to enjoy it with a friend.

I couldn't understand how the non-game Master of Orion III was conceived after the excellent Master of Orion II - they took a perfectly good game and ruined it.

What is it about second sequels? Commandos III is nothing to many people without co-op. Thats the way alot of people expected to be able to play it - just as they had Commandos II.

As others have said, I also will now not buy the game although I intended to. Nor will my house mate who was going to play co-op with me. I also know two people who have not posted to the board who were shcoked when I told them co-op was no longer possible - I assume they will not buy the game either.

I suppose it is an overeaction to get upset about a game. But Commandos II was such a good game which I and my friend enjoyed playing together - and we'd been looking forward to Commandos III for over a year now that to hear this is very disappointing.

It's all the more frustrating because programmitcally this is simple to implement. The network play mechs are there obviously, and the campaign is obviously there. All it needs it a button allowing people to nominate which characters they will control. I assume no gameplay balancing issues are there with two co-op players.

I really don't see that this would be hard to do in a patch - obviously I'm not a developer on the team but it's hardly taking the game in a new direction or requiring game engine changes.

I seriously encourage the developers to reconsider this - I expect it to cost sales.

Deathmatch?!? By all means offer it as an extra - but to base to whole multiplayer component around it is a gross misunderstanding of how and why people play the Commandos series.

Admittedly theres not much co-op replay value - though there is some. But I don't think there is on single player either. Commandos II wasn't about replay - completing it once was worth purchasing the game (or two copies for co-op).

I'm glad I didn't preorder it now. As of an hour ago I can download the game off the internet for no cost to myself. I don't condone priacy (to download and play it is illegal) and haven't indulged in it for over a decade now but even if that were not the case I wouldn't download it - the game simply isn't worth the bandwidth.

[PAK]Krwawy Lew
15th Oct 2003, 18:46
Originally posted by mattaudio
you're right we're not gonna play 20 times the same mission in coop mode , so why not kill the solo game (because i don't think players will complete the solo game 20 times ) and add 10 extra deathmath map .....
i 've got even a new name for the game commando 3 ARENA :(

Good one :D

David
15th Oct 2003, 20:11
actualy i lilke the idea of "comamndos 3 arena"!
imagine how much fun it is with 64 people ;)
real battlefield :)

Arni
16th Oct 2003, 00:33
This is the biggest bull**** i have ever seen in my whole life
me and my friend have been waiting for this game since commandos 2 came and now when it finally comes theres no co-op i mean why the ****, this is not a dm game this game is all about stragety taking guards down silently not going in with a team against team. Some people will have fun with that options but why are Eidos just showing other players such a disrespect by doing this, its not much work to add a co-op to the single player game. I just hop they will add it into the game in a new version or something because alot of gamers are REALLY pissed off because of this.

Coop
16th Oct 2003, 16:54
Been waiting for the game since I finnished Commandos II. What did I expect from the game. Not much, few different attack modes, some new gadgets and enhanced graphics.

Instead I get the co-op mode ripped out that made Commandos II so great. After playing Commandos I and II, I wont be playing III. Since I dont wanna touch something that has gone back in evolution.

New idea's are great, but people expect some things to still be around in newer versions..

But I'n not that sad. Now I got more time for UFO:AM. Something that finally looked like the old UFO Enemy Unknown.

Deathmatch aspect. Sure, load up CS or UT.

sick
16th Oct 2003, 22:13
Originally posted by David
actualy i lilke the idea of "comamndos 3 arena"!
imagine how much fun it is with 64 people ;)
real battlefield :)


¡WARNING!
DONT LISTNEN TO THIS FELLAS! YOU DONT WANT TO BE INFECTED WITH THE QUAKE 3 ARENA VIRUS!!:D

your idea is only cool with that mission in berlin, where there are loads of nazis (believe 300+) on a pretty big map.

David
16th Oct 2003, 22:52
oh, c'mon mate. whats wrong being quake fan ;)
i know, i know...you are jelous cuz you arent as good as i am sick :p
if anyone needs good coop, go for doom1! thats helluva fun :p

tsum2
19th Oct 2003, 16:40
Ahh well .....yet anonther niche genere screwed by bean counters who think the game will sell more buy alienating their core fans.

commandos 2 RIP...........:(

Major Disappointed
19th Oct 2003, 18:22
Clearly, many here don't play coop, but just as clearly, many do. For me, C2 (and the previous two games) have become staples for my sons and myself to play coop games (along with Ghost Recon).

This is beyond disappointing, it's incomprehensible. I'm a software architect and senior developer, and I have to shake my head at some of the decisions I see being made these days.

In this day and age, limiting resolution to 800x600 is dumbfounding. And removing coop mode (why?!?) is silly.

I was going to go buy this game today, but just told my sons about the coop debacle. They are disappointed, but agree that it just won't be fun. We'll replay C2 (which, yes, we do replay, we just take different approaches, and each of us chooses different soldiers each time) and Ghost Recon.

I doubt anyone at Eidos will care, but if enough people do vote with their dollars, maybe we can make a difference. Speaking of which, I think we should try to discourage the laze approach of developing for PS2 (which, yes, we also have) and then just porting to the PC, losing out on much of the extra PC power.

Jannick2
20th Oct 2003, 12:46
WTF WERE THE DEVELOPERS THINKING; NO COOP-MP:
You should be ashamed of yourself!!!
I’ve been waiting 3 years for this game to come out. And now they’ve taken out the most popular MP game-type of all.
This game is really great in SP but I won’t play it is MP-mode again,NEVER. I’ve just installed commandos 2, to work out all of the frustrations.
I’m NOT buying, ***S.

My advice for you guys: DON’T BUY BECAUSE THIS IS A TOTAL RIP-OFF (if you wanna play MP)
Sorry for my language but also sorry for this game to come out!!!