Anyone else think Co-op is hurting gaming?

Please hear me out.

Ever since 360 shooters like Halo and Gears started popularizing co-op, I've been dissappointed.

Most recently, one of my favorite game franchises of all time, Resident Evil, I feel has been ruined by co-op. It no longer feels like survival horror. I could not stand playing with Sheva in the demo. It just didn't feel like a Resident Evil game and this is probably the first RE game I won't buy.

I feel like all the development time being put into some shooters to put in co-op has also lowered the play time of single player campaigns, the main reason I play shooters.

Look, I LOVE competitive multiplayer online, but that has always been around. If I want to play a game with friends though, I'll go out and shoot 36 holes of golf or play some basketball. I simply feel like single player games, especially shooters, are going to start becoming shorter and less focused as co-op becomes more and more popular. Hell, it's already apparently a crime if you don't put co op in your shooters according to many reviewers of Killzone 2. How long before even more beloved franchises are completely changed because developers feel like they're being forced to put in co op? How about some developers make a game (non rpg) that is more than 6 to 10 hours long without coop? Are single player campaigns going the way of the Dodo?

Co-op is the game mode of the future to me, so long as developers don't short change the other modes. But competitive multiplayer is a zero sum game. One side wins, one side loses. That means its likely one side really had fun and the other didn't. Co-op on the other hand is a possible positive sum game. Both sides can win and enjoy it.SpruceCaboose

On topic, games with mandatory co-op are hurting some games and helping them at the same time, if you know what I mean. :?

Well I disagree, Co-op has been present since at least the 3rd gen and many games have managed to make co-op very fun.

Halo obviously comes to mind, this series gave co-op pretty much the popularity is has now and honnestly I love playing co-op with my friends and my cousin. I can see why co-op doesn't look too good in game like RE5 but it certainly doesn't ruin gaming.

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"]Co-op is the game mode of the future to me, so long as developers don't short change the other modes. But competitive multiplayer is a zero sum game. One side wins, one side loses. That means its likely one side really had fun and the other didn't. Co-op on the other hand is a possible positive sum game. Both sides can win and enjoy it.Aljosa23

On topic, games with mandatory co-op are hurting some games and helping them at the same time, if you know what I mean. :?

Co-op is the game mode of the future to me, so long as developers don't short change the other modes. But competitive multiplayer is a zero sum game. One side wins, one side loses. That means its likely one side really had fun and the other didn't. Co-op on the other hand is a possible positive sum game. Both sides can win and enjoy it.SpruceCaboose

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"]Co-op is the game mode of the future to me, so long as developers don't short change the other modes. But competitive multiplayer is a zero sum game. One side wins, one side loses. That means its likely one side really had fun and the other didn't. Co-op on the other hand is a possible positive sum game. Both sides can win and enjoy it.Xalaten

R2 does it very welll and it by no means ruined the game... well maybe off-line co-op for the single player campaign would have been great.. but still...GodofBigMacs

[QUOTE="Xalaten"][QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"]Co-op is the game mode of the future to me, so long as developers don't short change the other modes. But competitive multiplayer is a zero sum game. One side wins, one side loses. That means its likely one side really had fun and the other didn't. Co-op on the other hand is a possible positive sum game. Both sides can win and enjoy it.SpruceCaboose

[QUOTE="GodofBigMacs"]R2 does it very welll and it by no means ruined the game... well maybe off-line co-op for the single player campaign would have been great.. but still...Xalaten

[QUOTE="GodofBigMacs"]R2 does it very welll and it by no means ruined the game... well maybe off-line co-op for the single player campaign would have been great.. but still...Xalaten

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"][QUOTE="Xalaten"] They ARE changing the other modes. Resident Evil 5, as a matter of fact, has COMPLETELY changed and shooters this generation have continued to become shorter and shorter in their single player campaigns because co-op "adds more replay value". Are we ever going to see shooters like Half Life 2 anymore that have a good 15 to 20 hours of single player game play?Xalaten

[QUOTE="Xalaten"][QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"] There are shooters that have lengthy single player campaigns. And as for RE5, it seems like they took a logical extension from RE4, which was also a source of complaints for being too different than prior REs. What we are seeing is in effect that gamers will never be happy and will complain about anything that they can.sirk1264

In some games, like as you mention Resi 5, yes, I think it is hurting it, as it's taking away the what made the game so scary and fun to begin with (being all alone in a dark place, not knowing what lurks behind the next door or what the hell could jump through that window.) But to be honest, the most fun I had in 2008 was with games like Halo 3, Gears 2, LBP, Left 4 Dead, and Rock Band. I'm not saying I didn't enjoy games like Uncharted, Oblivion (put in at least 80 hours into it), or Brothers in Arms, but half the time I had friends over, and who want's to sit around and watch someone else play Oblivion when you could be fighting off a horde of zombies (oh **** a TANK!!!) or seeing how the Master Chiefs story ends (with 4 other people)?

One thing that does irk me though, is when a game features only online coop and no splitscreen... Why must I ask?? Is it that hard to let my buddy right next to me enjoy a nice game of Two Worlds together, or let all for of my buds play gears vs together, instead of limiting it to one on one? No splitscreen coop on Crackdown really hurt it's playtime in my xbox.

[QUOTE="sirk1264"][QUOTE="Xalaten"] Name one shooter from the past three or four years besides Crysis (that actually DID have a long single player campaign...but no coop...see what I mean) that has had a longer than 6 to 8 hour campaign AND coop? Developers are cutting back on the campaigns because they are basically saying "the single player campaign may not be long but you have coop so the replay value is great!".Aljosa23

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"][QUOTE="Xalaten"] They ARE changing the other modes. Resident Evil 5, as a matter of fact, has COMPLETELY changed and shooters this generation have continued to become shorter and shorter in their single player campaigns because co-op "adds more replay value". Are we ever going to see shooters like Half Life 2 anymore that have a good 15 to 20 hours of single player game play?Xalaten

[QUOTE="Xalaten"][QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"] There are shooters that have lengthy single player campaigns. And as for RE5, it seems like they took a logical extension from RE4, which was also a source of complaints for being too different than prior REs. What we are seeing is in effect that gamers will never be happy and will complain about anything that they can.sirk1264

It's not hurting gaming but other old franchise games that aren't meant to be played co-op, like RE5.

Capcom could have just called it RE Outbreak 3 which would have made much more sense.

Honestly, I see RE5's co-op as a natural progression of the series... Most of the RE games have had two protagonists (wihich is why co-op for Umbrella Chronicles kinda made sense), RE5 just has both protagonists together constantly, rather than picking a character at the beginning of the game...

As far as co-op hurting gaming? Not as I see it, I'd say competitive multiplayer is doing more to shrink single-player campaigns...

[QUOTE="sirk1264"][QUOTE="Xalaten"] Name one shooter from the past three or four years besides Crysis (that actually DID have a long single player campaign...but no coop...see what I mean) that has had a longer than 6 to 8 hour campaign AND coop? Developers are cutting back on the campaigns because they are basically saying "the single player campaign may not be long but you have coop so the replay value is great!".Xalaten

[QUOTE="sirk1264"][QUOTE="Xalaten"] Name one shooter from the past three or four years besides Crysis (that actually DID have a long single player campaign...but no coop...see what I mean) that has had a longer than 6 to 8 hour campaign AND coop? Developers are cutting back on the campaigns because they are basically saying "the single player campaign may not be long but you have coop so the replay value is great!".Xalaten

[QUOTE="killerfist"][QUOTE="skrat_01"] Tacked on is a major minus. *COUGH COUGH* Halo 3 4 player.skrat_01

You shouldn't put the blame on the entire game industry but CAPCOM for the time being. They have become so greedy about money these days that they would do anything to butcher their old game franchises to make them appealing to the new generation gamers. Take SF4 for example, it could have still been in 2D, but 3D is more popular than ever today with gamers which is why they had to sacrifice it. Like I said, CAPCOM is no longer the same company as we knew back in the 90's. They'll do anything to make more money from now on.

Please hear me out.

Ever since 360 shooters like Halo and Gears started popularizing co-op, I've been dissappointed.

Most recently, one of my favorite game franchises of all time, Resident Evil, I feel has been ruined by co-op. It no longer feels like survival horror. I could not stand playing with Sheva in the demo. It just didn't feel like a Resident Evil game and this is probably the first RE game I won't buy.

I feel like all the development time being put into some shooters to put in co-op has also lowered the play time of single player campaigns, the main reason I play shooters.

Look, I LOVE competitive multiplayer online, but that has always been around. If I want to play a game with friends though, I'll go out and shoot 36 holes of golf or play some basketball. I simply feel like single player games, especially shooters, are going to start becoming shorter and less focused as co-op becomes more and more popular. Hell, it's already apparently a crime if you don't put co op in your shooters according to many reviewers of Killzone 2. How long before even more beloved franchises are completely changed because developers feel like they're being forced to put in co op? How about some developers make a game (non rpg) that is more than 6 to 10 hours long without coop? Are single player campaigns going the way of the Dodo?

Resident Evil 5 isn't even out yet. How do you know it's ruined. I'll admit the demo was less than thrilling for me, but I keep hearing from people who have finished it, that is really good.

As for coop hurting gaming, Don't be silly. Left 4 Dead, Crackdown, COD 5, Halo 3, Rainbow 6:Vegas, Saints Row 2 and Burnout Paradise are all a friggin blast to play with friends.

Co-Op practically ruined games like RE5 and Army of two. But in most cases its a welcomed edition.Gh0st_Of_0nyx

It's exact opposite with Army of two. That game is practically unplayable by yourself.