Grunker's Divinity: Original Sin Co-op Mechanics Discussion Thread

[Berekän]

Grunker just wants it to be a RPG where you play the role of someone with super hearing.

There's two sides to this, the gamey approach or the roleplaying approach. The gamey one being the one you proposed, engaging on coop dialogue even if you're miles away and the roleplaying one being the actual implementation, if you can't hear what they're saying you can't participate on it. It's obvious Larian wanted a more roleplaying-centric approach when dealing with coop on the game, which is fine for me, I think that when you're playing with another person you're bound to make some concessions, you're splitting the power of choice with another person that might not agree with all your decisions which stops you from "gaming" it as much as you could, unless you both manage to agree on every move you both make which would be boring.

So yeah, you're asking for a game with a coop mode designed from a roleplaying perspective to change a mechanic to be more gamey. The rest of the game should give you a clue of how ingrained this roleplaying focus has been since the start, the fact that you can basically go your own separate ways, that you can throw a fireball to your partner just because... I can understand why you would want to participate on every coop conversation, but you're wrong if you think this is a neglect by Larian, they intended it this way and some other players might find it annoying if they were exploring on their own on a cave miles away from the city only to be psychically enganged on a conversation with the farmer's daugther.

On the upside I also believe something like that might be easy to implement (maybe just remove a check for distance on the dialogue options?) so it's probable modders will fix it™

 

[RK47]

Just kill the other person and that will be the end of discussions.

 

[Onholyservicebound]

The solution is simple, play the game with your woman, women are required by holy law to obey their man:

Spoiler

Context
Wives and Husbands
22Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body.…
Cross References
Esther 1:20
Then when the king's edict is proclaimed throughout all his vast realm, all the women will respect their husbands, from the least to the greatest."Esther 1:22
He sent dispatches to all parts of the kingdom, to each province in its own script and to each people in their own language, proclaiming that every man should be ruler over his own household, using his native tongue.1 Corinthians 14:34
Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says.Ephesians 6:5
Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ.Colossians 3:1
Since, then, you have been raised with Christ, set your hearts on things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God.Colossians 3:18
Wives, submit yourselves to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.Titus 2:5
to be self-controlled and pure, to be busy at home, to be kind, and to be subject to their husbands, so that no one will malign the word of God.1 Peter 3:1
Wives, in the same way submit yourselves to your own husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives,

I've had no issue because my woman follows and waits patiently, which is good.
However I can definitely see how issue could arise if you were just playing with a pal, having them have to be glued to you or miss the role play dialogue, which is one of the biggest draws/quirks to D:OS's co-op, would be annoying. Especially since they can be tied to pretty nice bonuses.
Essentially, you don't want to miss a thing, and that makes sense.

In reality, this thread, being full of people who don't care about an issue arguing with someone who does is fucking retarded. I can't think of any value to it since they're not opposed. Especially since the solution is as simple as, let them be part of the conversation no matter where they are, the end.
Seems like people get overly engaged when it comes to D:OS criticism, even if it's as light as this.

Since this is a co-op mechanic discussion thread I'll add that my biggest problem with co-op, although I guess it isn't JUST co-op, is that characters who die in combat don't get exp. Co-op partner does a lot of damage, we try to keep her alive, she falls. Since lots of enemies can one hit kill you that's something that can happen often. Yet despite her participation she gets no exp? It's fucking retarded.

 

[Excidium]

Especially since the solution is as simple as, let them be part of the conversation no matter where they are, the end.

Lame ass solution to nonexistent problem, just catering to crybabies

 

[Onholyservicebound]

The only thing non-existent is the reason to your opposition.

 

[Arkeus]

Grunker just wants it to be a RPG where you play the role of someone with super hearing.

No, he wants two things:
a°) First, he wants a clear ability to see what your partner says even when you are pulled in the dialog- sometimes you are pulled in the dialog but you can only see what your partner says as 'floating text over the head', and then you have to answer a question you didn't hear.

b°)he wants the ability of the other player to go "Hey, there is a choice here, come here". And, guess what? *this is what the teleporter pyramids are about*. If there was a prompt whenever there is a co-op dialog, and you could throw down your teleporter pyramid to get to your co-op partner and enter the dialog, it wouldn't be "more game-y", it would be the equivalent of what we already have (magic pockets and teleporter pyramids) but actually used in a way that makes playing with your friend playing with your friend.

Currently, playing with your friends is annoying as hell because you always feel like you can't actually play with them. This is a serious issue for a co-op game.

 

[Metro]

Naga go play Killing Floor if you want co-op.

 

[Arkeus]

Naga go play Killing Floor if you want co-op.

Or play the sole rpg that was designed from the ground up as a co-op game. That you don't like playing co-op doesn't mean there isn't a huge amount of players who try it and go 'this is broken' when they realize they can't actually play the game together.

 

[Metro]

Or play the sole rpg that was designed from the ground up as a co-op game.

Cool, which game are we talking about? Oh, OS?



That you and others fell for the marketing gimmick that this game was co-op centric does not matter.

 

[Arkeus]

Cool, which game are we talking about?

"Aahahah, i am so funy".
D:OS has been touted and designed from the ground up as a co-op game- this is why the game has systems such as being always open to multiplayer from anyone on steam, a global chat, or forcing two characters at part creation. This is also why you don't go with more than 2-character co-op, because Larian thought their own campaign was designed around 2 characters making choices together and having special dialogs, and it wouldn't be fun playing as a henchman when you don't have the capacity to make those choices.

This isn't larping or whatever, it's one of the foundation of the game. That you refuse to see this when Larian hits you wtih constant messages about it is hilarious.

 

[Metro]

That you keep using the phrase 'that you' is doubly hilarious. 'Touted' is the key word. Fish hooked the guppies.

 

[Excidium]

I will never know why people who don't play together not experiencing co-op content is such a horrible thing

 

[RK47]

maybe if i co-op i can finally let someone else finish the game for me.

 

[Arkeus]

That you keep using the phrase 'that you' is doubly hilarious. 'Touted' is the key word. Fish hooked the guppies.

Does it matter that you believe Larian is lying about the game being designed for co-op? The important thing is that Larian has put their all marketing efforts toward promoting the game as a co-op game, that the sole identifying feature between the first build we saw and the current build is "it is co-op", that Swen has been showing off co-op games dozen of times (there is literally like 20 videos of Swen or ForkTong playing the game on co-op with media and fans).

Those are the important things because if Larian fails at following through on the biggest unique thing they have been talking about since the beginning of their game devellopment they are making a huge marketing mistake. And if you want to say "there is no one who will care about co-op", then don't say "it was a marketing coup" as it would only have been about Larian /wanting to do a co-op game because they are the only one, in your mind, who cares about it/. And if that's the case, they should follow it through because it's something they personally want to work.

I will never know why people who don't play together not experiencing co-op content is such a horrible thing

Because when you are playing with a friend on voice-chat and he tells you "hey, i found this cool thing", you want to be able to share it with them. Or the opposite. Playing on co-op is about sharing stuff with your friends/lovers, and not being able to do so sucks.

 

[RK47]

It's the same deal with SWTOR - they have this 'roll to win dialogue' in party mode - but depending on the choices, sometimes the other player must be present to participate.
Otherwise, he can just watch by loading up a holo-comm trigger.

It's a nice idea, I just don't know how you will execute this in D:OS when a dialogue could lead into combat etc... does the game automatically warp you over to the convo starter?
It's a minor issue, but a simple 'Your partner is starting a conversation, do you wish to join in? Yes/No' to warp party members over it fine by my book.

 

[Arkeus]

It's a minor issue, but a simple 'Your partner is starting a conversation, do you wish to join in? Yes/No' to warp party members over it fine by my book.

Hell, it could be on the side of the player having th conversation- have a button that's basically a "Alarm" that asks your partner to warp to you via teleporter pyramids (and the partner can of cours accept/refuse) when there is a choice to be made.

 

[Grunker]

No, he wants two things:
a°) First, he wants a clear ability to see what your partner says even when you are pulled in the dialog- sometimes you are pulled in the dialog but you can only see what your partner says as 'floating text over the head', and then you have to answer a question you didn't hear.

b°)he wants the ability of the other player to go "Hey, there is a choice here, come here". And, guess what? *this is what the teleporter pyramids are about*. If there was a prompt whenever there is a co-op dialog, and you could throw down your teleporter pyramid to get to your co-op partner and enter the dialog, it wouldn't be "more game-y", it would be the equivalent of what we already have (magic pockets and teleporter pyramids) but actually used in a way that makes playing with your friend playing with your friend.

Currently, playing with your friends is annoying as hell because you always feel like you can't actually play with them. This is a serious issue for a co-op game.

Bing-fucking-o.

 

[Grunker]

Does it matter that you believe Larian is lying about the game being designed for co-op?.

It's impossible to argue with Metro's viewpoint here because it's so loaded. And anyway the co-op IS fun. It does work. The mechanical support for it is there. It just suffers from some easy-to-solve quality-of-life issues.

Arguing that co-op doesn't feature prominently in D:OS is like saying you're a retard if you play Ironman in Xenonauts. It's Metro going "I don't play that way so why should you?". It's nonsense, because not only do many of the mechanics exist solely to support co-op gameplay, co-op also works on many fronts. Metro's argument basically comes down to "I don't like co-op and I have an unsupported theory it was only implemented to draw in 20-year-olds (???), so you shouldn't either, and calling for Larian to fix serious but easily fixable issues is dumb." It's fucking absurd.

Grunker just wants it to be a RPG where you play the role of someone with super hearing.

If I had a dollar for each strawman in this thread... see Arkeus' posts for a total dismissal of this bullshit, I can't be bothered.

 

[Metro]

Does it matter that you believe Larian is lying about the game being designed for co-op? The important thing is that Larian has put their all marketing efforts toward promoting the game as a co-op game, that the sole identifying feature between the first build we saw and the current build is "it is co-op", that Swen has been showing off co-op games dozen of times (there is literally like 20 videos of Swen or ForkTong playing the game on co-op with media and fans).

Those are the important things because if Larian fails at following through on the biggest unique thing they have been talking about since the beginning of their game devellopment they are making a huge marketing mistake. And if you want to say "there is no one who will care about co-op", then don't say "it was a marketing coup" as it would only have been about Larian /wanting to do a co-op game because they are the only one, in your mind, who cares about it/. And if that's the case, they should follow it through because it's something they personally want to work.



Because when you are playing with a friend on voice-chat and he tells you "hey, i found this cool thing", you want to be able to share it with them. Or the opposite. Playing on co-op is about sharing stuff with your friends/lovers, and not being able to do so sucks.

That you... THAT YOU! Also it's impossible to argue with Grunker because even when he's wrong he'll never admit it... since he just gets off on arguing.

 

[Excidium]

And anyway the co-op IS fun. It does work. The mechanical support for it is there. It just suffers from some easy-to-solve quality-of-life issues.

Would you say it's antifun and encourages toxic behavior?

...since he just gets off on arguing.

Wait, you don't?

 

[RK47]

Go find a room and fuck already.

 

[Metro]

Would you say it's antifun and encourages toxic behavior?


Wait, you don't?

You don't? Grunker shouldn't argue so much, his hairline can't take it anymore.

 

[Darth Roxor]

In a p&p game, there is no reason not to stay together for much of the time

That is only because of technical limitations (tm) because the GM is not a supercomputer that can run 5 different solo adventures simultaneously. You really never had the situation where players arrive to town and everyone splits up because one of them goes to check out the authorities, one goes off to listen to gossip, another one decides to ask the local temple, etc? The same would be valid for situations where there are x players and x rooms to check. In an ideal world, they'd split and each one would check a single room to save time.


As for coop dialogue, I really don't give a shit that DOS lacks cellphones because it leads to funny situations where one player suddenly gets into trouble, and the other one yells "WHAT THE FUCK DID YOU JUST DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO" or where one quest solution is taken over another and the player that did it (alone) can then say "well you shoulda been here to discuss!!! instead of running off like a dumbfuck ".

Also, you can see dual dialogue coming from miles away. All it takes is call up the local chat and say 'regroup' so the other dude can tp in and participate.

Also2, most of the dual dialogue is so meaningless you hardly lose anything if you don't participate in a lot of it.

 

[Gord]

The point of co-op is that Larian knew retards in their early 20's would baaaaaaaaaaaaw if the game didn't have co-op (and acheesemints and trading cards). Never once when I played games like Pool of Radiance or Fallout did I think... man this could really use co-op! Derpgeon Siege 3 has little 'conflict' dialogues like the ones here, it's cute, but utterly forgettable (much like the game itself). I don't know why you're harping about this, seems a silly point.

I'm pretty sure Larian had much higher intentions for co-op than to please some AAA-infected retards.
Co-op was one of the bigger selling points during kickstarter and they made some fuss about how it's not your normal tacked-on multiplayer mode.

Some things obviously didn't work out as Larian intended them, but nevertheless the whole co-op idea is still there.

Btw., can Grunker quickly bring me up-to-date what's the state of the co-op dialogue in the release version? Last time I played co-op was during the beta, but there it didn't really work so great since you constantly had to wait for your buddy finishing dialogue without even really seeing what he said (or just walk away doing different stuff, obviously). And then you have one of the co-op decisions popping-up without really knowing whats going on. Do they now at least correctly (and fully) display the dialogue as floating text?

 

[Clockwork Knight]

I will never know why people who don't play together not experiencing co-op content is such a horrible thing

Because you are playing together, but unless you're following the other player like a puppy you won't actually experience many things (whether you think those things are worth experiencing is not the point). So in co-op one player has to choose between being bored or miss on stuff. That's basically the TLDR version of Grunker's argument (which could be presented in a less spergy way, but Grunkers gonna Grunk I suppose), and I don't understand why people in this thread refuse to acknowledge this when (according to Grunker) Larian themselves recognize it's an issue. "But magical walkie talkies ruin my immersion" is not a very strong argument because there is no immersion to be found in playing a co-op game to begin with.