Hero6 Forums

Most people were disappointed to hear that the Multiplayer aspect had been removed from QG5. The idea of adding multiplayer support to Hero6 has come up more than once. How would Multiplayer benifit Hero7? Most of the games have tasks that need to be done in order. If a second player were to complete some of them, wouldn't that throw off the order of the game?

-Game plays like normal, but new options for puzzle solving and events are available due to multiple players.

-Several players can take on different roles, and how they interact with each other and the gameworld will affect the plot of Hero7. Might be far too complex though.

-Using the gameworld as a backdrop for other types of gameplay modes that don't directly(or not at all!) follow the Hero7 plot but maybe can utilize locations, NPCs, puzzles etc. Some ideas: Team based warfare(with PvP combat, could be fun) stuff like capture the flag or territorial control, competition to be the first group/person to solve a randomized quest etc.

IMO, hero7 should be multiplayer!   ^_^  

Agreed! We want Multiplayer!

But how should it be implemented? The technical aspect is not a problem, but how would the quests differ? How would the game progress? What if a player leaves the game? Should it just be a MMORPG?

Personally, I would rather see it as a well-developed single player game than a poorly-concieved multiplayer game, and I'm sure the rest of you agree.  

I think an MMORPG is a bit too complex to implement for a free game.  Perhaps have it somewhere along the lines of Diablo2 mutliplayer, where each player has a Quest list which gets updated when he/she either gets a new quest or completes one. Once a quest is completed in that game, anyone who joins later won't be able to complete it and will have to join a new game to do so.  

The only problem with that is that if there is an item that is required to complete a sequencial quest, it may be unavailable.

Also, what would the advantage of having multiplayer be then? Both people would just be trying to accomplish the same tast, and even worse, they might each prevent each other from doing so.
 

The quests need to be specially designed with multiplayer in mind. Similar to killing the Hydra of QG5, there must be tasks that require more than one person, but could be completed with a AI Ally.

Lastly, it would need to be written to encourage competition between players as well as companionship.

That's not really a problem. The player can just start a new game and that quest item will be there. It's only a minor annoyance.


That happens quite often in other online RPGs. It's quite ok with me. Players can choose to help or work against each other. It's makes the game realistic and challenging at the same time. As for the goal, I suppose as long as the player/s solve the main quest, they win the game.

Perhaps you could post some of your suggestions on what might work for a multiplayer adventure game.  

I think multi-player would be a bad idea. While QFG5 was supposed to have it, thinking back, I think it would have made the game even worse.

I think there is a way to implement it successfully, but it will be more work than it is worth. The only thing that would make it worth while, in addition to the actual game play, would be the virtual spit in the face of Sierra who couldn't manage to accomplish it.

Well, a persistent world can easily be accomplished if Hero7 is built using nwn's.

Btw, Hero6 and Hero7 have nothing to do with Sierra.  As for QFG5, I believe that Sierra did the best that could considering their budget and also the technology available at the time.

I am well aware that Hero6 and the future Hero7 are not affiliated with Sierra and judging by what is said by the Coles on Transolar.com, they did the best they could for the circumstances. They seemed to be as surprised by the inability to include multiplayer as the rest of the fan base was.

I also believe that they, above all others, would be proud to see some one able to succeed where they have failed as well. They were less than content with the work environment at and around Sierra at the time of production for QG5.

It must have been very disappointing for them when they considered what they initially dreamed QFG5 to be and then compared those dreams with the final product...

I think QFG and it's similars should be like The Elder Scrolls series. Dedicated to giving the best single-player.

If the game world is large enough,
the story line can cause the players (the characters) to spilt up into different (geographically remote) paths, without option to return,
in the hope of meeting at the end of their paths,
if each player manages to find his/her way through their path.

There should be more available paths, of course, than the number of players.

Also, the outcomes of path completions should be independent of each other,
so that if a player fails or quits, the other(s) can continue in the game without him/her,
but their tasks should be harder due to it.

So essentially, it's like a single player game that starts in a sort of lobby area with multiple people?

To put it bluntly, why bother?

The players paths should join now and then and also contain joint missions and battles on those occasions.

If the players were together all the time it could just ruin it for some of them (i.e. one player hogging all the action).

My idea is to give each player the best of a single player games,
yet enable interaction, common goals and joint missions using the outcomes of the single missions.

You could picture it as a quest party separating into smaller parties or singles,
working alone and then reuniting again and again - allowing group scenes and single scenes in the same game.

Here's my oppinion on the subject:

No.

If you are so certain my idea is no good,
I'd be happy to hear your idea on how to implement the multiplayer aspect.

Well it's not that your idea is bad, it's just that some people think that a multiplayer
Hero7 isn't worth the extra effort. My fear is that it would either be half assed, or it would be awesome but require tons of extra work. The Hero6 team has had enough trouble just make an awesome singleplayer game. Could they handle creating an awesome single player game(Hero7) with an excellent multiplayer component?

What I'd really like to see for multiplayer is each player controlling an NPC from the game(and someone plays the hero). The player controlled NPCs can end up making decisions that change the plot, and run into dialogue and events the Hero never sees.

But yes that is quite complex, I told you making it awesome would require tons of extra work. ;)

It'd be like a Multiplayer Elder Scrolls. From a distance, it sounds awesome. But then you realize that when there're thirty people tromping around Cyrodiil, you're hardly a Hero anymore, you're just a number.

And I am not a number! I AM A FREE MAN!

[Reply to lazygamer:]
The multiplayer idea itself wasn't mine, however I think it would be great to see a good multiplayer RPG - games I have seen were mostly one band walking together, passing items between them and doing everything together - not very interesting. Also if one player played more than one character the battles were always boring - either in turns or trying to set a strategy for the others characters, which usually were not dynamic enough to work well (the strategies were to simple to last for long). Even in the final battle in QFG5 (which by the way had a good battle system - different moves using keyboard, changing weapons during battle, ...) the battle was hard to coordinate - passing weapons and potions to everyone at the start of the battle became a tough race against time with the purpose of completion in time to defeat the dragon without anyone dying.

I believe that a good RPG is as drawing as a good movie, but enables the player to complete the mission in various ways and according to his/her own thinking style (like in QFG and in opposed to KQ and the others).

My idea was to keep the single-player charm, but allow playing with friends - giving each missions that change the plot and meeting now and then to work on goal that can not be completed alone (like group battles or missions that one character class could not handle alone or that have to been done simultaneously by more than one person).

Yes, that would require more work - more complex plots, smarter enemy (so they can decide who to attack), more software design and programming, but the outcome would be worth it - it could bring RPG quests back into mainstream (where games have budgets).

If your response is "easier said than done", then I am willing to stand behind my words and participate in the development, as a programmer or at least in the design of the code and to offer whatever I can to the plot.

By the way, I think a hybrid 2.5D game, like QFG5, with 3D battles would be best for this - group battles in 2D combat could cause one player to block a part of the other's view of himself or his foes.

[Reply to Corsair5:]
Of course the game should be limited to a party no larger than 5 (unless the other players play villains).

[Edit by Swift] Please make use of the edit button instead of double-posting. Thanks.
[Edit] Didn't realise I did double post - just meant to reply, not to be repetitive.

If the game were more complex you could have it like an instanced Multiplayer game. (everyone can do the main quest separately)

But under NO circumstances do I want to hear

"LOL SELLING FLAMING PALADIN SORD PZL WHISP WIT OFFER" in an old-school adventure game.

They were not made for multiplayer. My oppinion still stands.

No.

That is pathetic - selling game items  :cheerygrin:

There should NOT be an option to move your character from game to game and sell things and each game should have limited member access to prevent such things.
Also - if character import/export from game to game is possible it should be without any items except the basics (they can be lost during the teleport or at sea or something).

Multiplayer gaming should be about collaboration and team work (kind of like pre-modem games, which enabled to players to play together were).

But the empasis should be on great single-player game, with, maybe, optional future multi-player support.

yeah, one of the things I find rather rediculous about games like Baldur's Gate is the ability to export your end-game character and give all your stuff to some newbie character over and over again.

anyway, I don't go in for multiplayer games since I never make use of the multiplayer functions anyway.