Reply
Dec 10 2012
By: cvbxsta Hekseville Citizen 268 posts
Offline

How Multiplayer could work

1 replies 112 views Edited Dec 10, 2012

Personally, I never saw the danger in adding a multiplayer mode to a game. Yes, I'm wary of tacked-on additions only there to tick off some developer's wishlist but if it doesn't betray the series' core, then multiplayer never hurts. Max Payne 3, Uncharted, Assassins Creed: franchises that, in my opinion, didnt necessarily need multiplayer but did so incredibly well and remain true to the franchise's strengths.

 

If done well (and I have faith in Naughty Dog), The Last of Us could very well be added to that category.

 

What are the strengths of the series? From what we've seen, it's the atmosphere, the grittrealistic encounters, the survival aspects, and the dynamic AI. For multiplayer to work and work well, these must be present.

 

My suggestions are Scavengers (competetive) and Survivors (cooperative).

 

Scavengers would be set during the earlier days of the outbreak. The two teams would be groups of hunters and the goal would be to gather more supplies than the other team. Not amount of kills, but amount of gathered supplies would lead to success. The mechanics of single player would still apply: there would be no regenerative health, players could start with guns but no bullets and would have to scavenge ammo from the map, supplies would be needed to craft medkits and other tools.

 

But the key element would be the AI-driven Clickers that roam the map. They are truely neutral and attack anyone. Sound and gunshots will attract tthem so matches would be more tactical as any random shots could lead to death. Teams could use bait to lure the clickers to attack the other team. Stealth, subterfuge, and silent weapons like bows would be the key to staying alive the longest and gathering the most supplies.

----

In Survivors, a team of two to four players are placed on a large open map. They have certain objectives to complete and then must escape. Maybe they have to gather supplies or parts then make it to a car or find the way to lower a bridge to cover a river and escape. But like in the campaign, gangs of hunters and clickers inhabit the map. These AI enemies would be randomly generated as would the conditions of the map: time of day, weather, etc. And as with single player, supplies and ammo would scare.

 

 

If the multiplayer stays true to the essence of the game, The Last of Us could deliver a memorable, well-done online component. Any opinions on these ideas or suggestions of your own?

Message 1 of 2 (112 Views)
Naughty Paw
Registered: 05/31/2009
Offline
2019 posts
 

Re: How Multiplayer could work

Dec 10, 2012

cvbxsta wrote:

Personally, I never saw the danger in adding a multiplayer mode to a game. Yes, I'm wary of tacked-on additions only there to tick off some developer's wishlist but if it doesn't betray the series' core, then multiplayer never hurts. Max Payne 3, Uncharted, Assassins Creed: franchises that, in my opinion, didnt necessarily need multiplayer but did so incredibly well and remain true to the franchise's strengths.

 

If done well (and I have faith in Naughty Dog), The Last of Us could very well be added to that category.

 

What are the strengths of the series? From what we've seen, it's the atmosphere, the grittrealistic encounters, the survival aspects, and the dynamic AI. For multiplayer to work and work well, these must be present.

 

My suggestions are Scavengers (competetive) and Survivors (cooperative).

 

Scavengers would be set during the earlier days of the outbreak. The two teams would be groups of hunters and the goal would be to gather more supplies than the other team. Not amount of kills, but amount of gathered supplies would lead to success. The mechanics of single player would still apply: there would be no regenerative health, players could start with guns but no bullets and would have to scavenge ammo from the map, supplies would be needed to craft medkits and other tools.

 

But the key element would be the AI-driven Clickers that roam the map. They are truely neutral and attack anyone. Sound and gunshots will attract tthem so matches would be more tactical as any random shots could lead to death. Teams could use bait to lure the clickers to attack the other team. Stealth, subterfuge, and silent weapons like bows would be the key to staying alive the longest and gathering the most supplies.

----

In Survivors, a team of two to four players are placed on a large open map. They have certain objectives to complete and then must escape. Maybe they have to gather supplies or parts then make it to a car or find the way to lower a bridge to cover a river and escape. But like in the campaign, gangs of hunters and clickers inhabit the map. These AI enemies would be randomly generated as would the conditions of the map: time of day, weather, etc. And as with single player, supplies and ammo would scare.

 

 

If the multiplayer stays true to the essence of the game, The Last of Us could deliver a memorable, well-done online component. Any opinions on these ideas or suggestions of your own?


I like some of your ideas, as I mentioned them in the larger MP thread. The game has to follow it's theme and survival is the key to that. Don't make it hokey and "easy" for the average player. I believe, as an Uncharted player, a lot of us are freaking tired of that. It's a tough game, with a tough concept...keep that vibe, make it rewarding in the end. 

 

Either way, props to your stuff. Not perfect but I'll go back over them later when I have more time to think it out. 

Twitter: @TryceUp

USN 04-08
Message 2 of 2 (99 Views)
Reply
0 Likes