Should KB have multiplayer?

[phoenixreborn]

Should this game have multiplayer?

As far as I understand there is no mp in the original release but it is being planned for expansions.

I don't quite understand why? A strong storyline driven rpg with limited tactical combat doesn't scream multiplayer to me. Doesn't quite make sense. Unless it is well done it won't attract a horde of fans.

So I guess I'm against it for now but I'm willing to be convinced.

[Anatoly]

The release version of King's Bounty: The Legend does not have multiplayer mode.
KB is a very story-oriented RPG and it is hard to imagine multiplayer for this one now.

[KingImp]

I voted YES!

This was probably the biggest thing that upset me when I found out it wasn't in the game. I was hoping for another game to play with the wife like we do Heroes.

Now I'm a bit more upset based on Anatoly's response. We've been hearing that multiplayer was going to be introduced in the expansion, but unless I'm reading it wrong, he's making it sound like they have no plans for that.

Multiplayer = Longevity
People will get bored quickly of playing by themselves.

[HodgePodge]

With RPG's I prefer single player.

[phoenixreborn]

Having just finished the original KB I'm really having trouble seeing it as an MultiPlayer game. Maybe an alliance mode, but competitive? How would it work?

Longevity is provided by variety, not by MP.

[KingImp]

Longevity is provided by variety, not by MP.

And how much longevity can a game have where you just do a few quests, fight a few fights, and then you're done? It will be the same thing every game unless they provide tons of different scenarios. If they are anything like Nival, which like me you know all too well, this will come with a sparce amount of maps to play. Then what?

And frankly, what's the worry if they do include it? No one will force people to play multiplayer. Just like Heroes (sorry to keep going back to that), you have single player and multiplayer. Something for everyone.

Oh, and I'd be perfectly fine with an Alliance mode. That would be cool.

[Imperial Dane]

Multiplayer ? If you want that why not just go play HoMM 5 ? About the same, besides i think the entire King's bounty system has been worked towards singleplayer and not multiplayer nor coop.
I'd rather see them focus on adding more stuff for the singleplayer campaign:
New areas, new quests, monsters, troops.. other stuff..

[Hingerson]

Im with KingImp nobody is going to force you to play MP, I would love to see MP added in an expansion because more often then not when they leave out MP they dont make up for it by adding more content

[wizaerd]

I voted No, and for those claiming what would it hurt, it wouldn't be required... Well it would need developers to work on it, and adding it isn't just a couple lines of code, but a whole development project in and of itself. Time better spent to increase longevity and playability and versatility for single player mode.

[Hingerson]

wow that was a really stupid comment

[HodgePodge]

I voted No, and for those claiming what would it hurt, it wouldn't be required... Well it would need developers to work on it, and adding it isn't just a couple lines of code, but a whole development project in and of itself. Time better spent to increase longevity and playability and versatility for single player mode.
Very true. I too, would rather the developers used their time and talent to improve the single player mode.

wow that was a really stupid comment
Really, your comment was totally rude, crude, immature and uncalled for! http://i205.photobucket.com/albums/bb257/HodgePodge_Pics/Emoticons/growup.gif

[KingImp]

I will say this. I voted yes only because it has been said that the plans were already set for it to be included in the expansion. I will agree that if they haven't done anything to create this mode that they probably shouldn't waste time trying to make it when they should concentrate on adding more content.

I have to ask though, where have the rumors come from that said MP was definitely going to be included in the expansion?

[Imperial Dane]

I have to ask though, where have the rumors come from that said MP was definitely going to be included in the expansion?

Possibly the place where a lot of rumours come from, some idiot who makes it up.

wow that was a really stupid comment

No what you said was a really stupid comment, what wizaerd made was a valid point in the argument.

[Hingerson]

Possibly the place where a lot of rumours come from, some idiot who makes it up.



No what you said was a really stupid comment, what wizaerd made was a valid point in the argument.

Actually the devs have said that it would possibly be added in a later expansion so I guess those are the idiots your talking about. As regards to wizaerd's comment it was hardly a valid point I don't think anyone on here thinks adding multi player is just as simple as adding a few lines of code which is the reason I said it was a stupid comment

[Imperial Dane]

Actually the devs have said that it would possibly be added in a later expansion so I guess those are the idiots your talking about.

Do you actually read what other people write ?

First of the rumour was that it would be definately in, not that it was a possibility, and no those were not the ones i referred to when i said idiots, because if you read what i wrote, you would have seen this:
Possibly the place where a lot of rumours come from, some idiot who makes it up.

Note it is one person and that it is a possiblity, meaning a chance and not a certainty.

As regards to wizaerd's comment it was hardly a valid point I don't think anyone on here thinks adding multi player is just as simple as adding a few lines of code which is the reason I said it was a stupid comment

I'm sorry, and how does that make wizaerd's post a stupid comment ? The whole point of it was that it would take a lot of work that it WASN'T a few simple lines of code !
Again, do you actually read what other people write ?

[Renevent]

"Again, do you actually read what other people write ?"

No, it doesn't appear he does...

On topic, I voted no because this game seems very single player focused, and very story driven. It's not a game I expect a multiplayer experience from. If they add multiplayer somewhere down the road...great! Good deal! But as for the question "Should KB have multiplayer?"...I say (as a potential customer) that it is not needed and all I expect from this game is a compelling single player experience.

[Hingerson]

Alright lets get back on topic I hope that no matter how much work it takes that they add muliplayer that being said I plan on purchasing the game no matter what

[igoraki]

my vote is yes

Having just finished the original KB I'm really having trouble seeing it as an MultiPlayer game. Maybe an alliance mode, but competitive? How would it work?

Longevity is provided by variety, not by MP.

i dont see what kind of trouble you see for multiplayer...kb is simplified version of heroes,with just one castle you can upgrade and one single hero to lead your army,that will re-appear in that castle if defeated in combat...other creatures you can get from dwellings you can find around

so by adding second starting castle and second hero you can have nice multiplayer...both player would go around the map fighting monsters and solving quests to gain xp,artifacts or some powerfull creatures and when they finally met,each other.

victory condition can be to conquer your opponents castle to prevent hero from reappearing,capuring some specific castle on the maps or something like dig the grail or find some artifact or maybe solving some uber-quest on that map.

so question is how true they have stay to the original kb,if they did,i see no problems to create multiplayer as well,how much coding will be required is completely different story.

[phoenixreborn]

The trouble comes from the real-time part on the adventure map. And then it's turn-based on tactical map...how do you deal with those elements?

[Hingerson]

The trouble comes from the real-time part on the adventure map. And then it's turn-based on tactical map...how do you deal with those elements?

I played a game similar and what they did was when one or the other player went into battle, the one who was waiting watched the battle I dont know if thats the best solution but it worked for me and my buddies since typically a game like this I would probably only play over my network. Just a thought though

[Daystar]

Perhaps there would be a thing where it is largely turn based in sections if that make sense...imagine if both players start from oposite corners/sides of the map, then have to go through check points and are on a clock. When they get through their "turn" ends and they have to wait for the other player to get through. The faster they do this the more time they can spend ?playing Solitare?designing a custom hero?exploring the map in ghost form? etc.

[Imperial Dane]

Just a thought, but how large is this world anyways ? I mean i can imagine that being a problem as well and not just dealing with combat and turns.
If this world is huge, then players won't exactly meet each other very often will they ? I mean this would be a bit like making oblivion multiplayer..

[phoenixreborn]

Just for the record, someone claimed it was a made up rumour:

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=1924&highlight=multiplayer

Evgeny post about mp in the second expansion in this thread.

[Imperial Dane]

I don't recall someone saying it was a made up rumour, and what i did was that i said it possibly was one. But nice link, looks like they've already got a bunch of stuff planned, talk about thinking ahead :D

[WannaLearnEnglish]

Multiplayer?

Hey, the answer is sooo simple...

A duel-style single-battle mode is a MUST.

Maybe not with "duel heros", but with some preparatory mini-maps, single Castle per player, 10.000gp in Chests, some amount of Runes. Just to get some basic upgrade and hire the army someone prefers. Like the first Railag campaign in HoMMV.

A full-fledged multiplayer? I do not see how it is possible with this game. To make a multiplayer one has to change some fundamentals in the game. That would be a DIFFERENT game.

[BurningCold]

I for one did not vote on the subject, for it can go either way.

From an RPG stand-point, no this game can't have multiplayer. RPG's are meant to build your character in a world that reacts to you and your decisions. It is about the story, not the battle, and MP is all about confronting the other player in a battle unless you think along the standards of a co-op mode, then there are possibilities.

From a pure game-based point, this game does have quite a few possibilities for MP. You could take the the idea given where two players go at it normally, travelling across the map and exploring in real-time with an end goal to capture the enemy castle. Or you could take the also very good idea where the game starts with both players in their own area with a time limit to gather and acquire resources/armies in preparation for a large duel between the players once the time is expired.

That is, at least, the way I see things. So again, I won't vote because it could easily be just a manner of choice. Will it be a great game without MP? probably. Will it be a great game with MP? probably. Either way this has a lot of potential and I hope the developers make the best of it no matter which way they choose to go.

[nj2tx]

I think its a great idea to have multiplayer. What i would really like to see is a skirmish mode

[aldrich_gnat]

I voted no.. But it's not a definite no.. If gameplay without multiplayer will improve dramastically then I would prefer it not to have multiplayer.

Since this game was made with focus to one player mode, I suppose its strong points favor single player moreso than multi player.

kick ass single player > forced multiplayer

If gameplay won't be improved on the otherhand, making a multiplayer option might be better then.

Haven't tried the game yet though...Release date is too long!!!!!!!!!!

I pray this game rocks..Since the first Kings Bounty is kind of decent for its time.. Would not want this game to go to the path of HOMM.. HOMM 1+2+3 rocks.. 4+5 not so...

[Zamolxis]

I agree with aldrich_gnat.

Sorry if I upset any MP addicts, but I voted "no" because I don't want to have the devs being pushed by the gamers to try to fetch some MP i/o focusing their efforts into developing a flawless SP.

Look what happened with H5 because of the pressures from both Ubi & the fans which raised the expectations to levels Nival just couldn't handle. From what looked like an amazing project on the paper, only 1/3rd of its potential made it to the game as it should have been. Another 1/3rd let's say made it but badly implemented (it was there, but either buggy, either working less good than in previous titles), and the rest not implemented at all.

They wanted to deliver everything possible in the first release w/o putting things in perspective. H3 raised the potential of working alignments to almost 10, but Ubival tried to put as many "cool" creatures as possible in their 6 initial alignments, that there wasn't room left for more than 1-2 others afterwards. They wanted to have SP, MP, map editor etc, as soon as possible, and ended up with a buggy SP, an unplayable MP and maybe one of the least user friendly map editors I have ever seen.

No, I want 1C to focus all their efforts into finding the last bug, adjusting what can still be adjusted to have things balanced, even correct all that needs to be corrected in their spelling. And if the release will be a real pleasure to play, not the headache H5 was, then I'm gonna start waiting for them to develop MP, map editor, work on a new alignment for the expansion etc.

[Urgos]

I would really like the option of testing my hero and his host vs other players. It does not have to be like heroesMM in that the players quest on the same map, and build armies. If only they made another "tournament" type system where you can just fight your army against another player i would be happy. They could base the fights on player level, you get in a queue determined by your lvl and fight players of the same level or near. Really enjoyed the demo, considereing the release.

[Zhuangzi]

Multiplayer?

Hey, the answer is sooo simple...

A duel-style single-battle mode is a MUST.

Maybe not with "duel heros", but with some preparatory mini-maps, single Castle per player, 10.000gp in Chests, some amount of Runes. Just to get some basic upgrade and hire the army someone prefers. Like the first Railag campaign in HoMMV.

A full-fledged multiplayer? I do not see how it is possible with this game. To make a multiplayer one has to change some fundamentals in the game. That would be a DIFFERENT game.

I agree with this. I am not a huge fan of multiplayer, and I rarely play multiplayer, but it could be fun in a limited sense. However, I am totally committed to the idea of improving single player first and adding multiplayer as a distant second.


But as the guy above says, a duel mode would be nice. I for one would like to be able to play a hotseat game with my wife. :-P

So I voted yes. I love you, Katauri Interactive. This is a freaking awesome game, and I haven't even played the full version yet. :cool:

[phoenixreborn]

Having played the demo I do not want multiplayer function in this game. It's a story rpg.