this post was submitted on 17 Dec 2024
58 points (93.9% liked)
Games
32908 readers
1291 users here now
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Weekly Threads:
Rules:
-
Submissions have to be related to games
-
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
-
No excessive self-promotion
-
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
-
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
-
No linking to piracy
More information about the community rules can be found here.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It's still unclear to me if you are always a trio.
Is "solo" you + 2 bots?
Can you play as 2 friends + 1 bot or 1 random player?
From the original interview:
So it's either single player or three humans.
I don't know what it is with Japanese devs and arbitrary multiplayer decisions. The way Capcom handles Monster Hunter's multiplayer continues to baffle me.
From a PC gaming perspective, it feels like Western developers decided to just give players multiple options to play together all the way back in the 1990's. This sort of thing always feels badly regressive to me.
That's so weird. Why not give an option for two? What if a lot of players only know one other player? What's the reasoning for "one, or three players"?
Just their artistic vision and game design philosophy, which I can both respect and go WTF at the same time. Like with their steadfast refusal to provide the option to turn off invasions.
Turning off invasions while still playing coop you mean? Cause offline mode turns off invasions (duh). I guess invasions are part of the thrill in their mind and after a random coop sunbro and I were invaded by a phantom while super low health and outta potions way into a dungeon in Dark Souls and managed to survive by hiding away together with no voicecomms, it‘s hard for me to disagree with them lol
Because From. That's the kings of nonsensical stuff like that.
I can already hear Fromsoft fans say “it’s for lore reasons”, “it’s Miyazaki’s vision”, “git gud”, etc.
Stupid, but at least better than for example Helldivers 2.
No, because Helldivers 2 will let you play with any number of up to 4 players. 1,2,3,or 4. Not only 1 or 4.
Yes, but the gameplay is absolutely not tailored towards solo players. I tried and it was a mess.
So far we don't know this'll be tailored for solo, either.
I don't know, I usually play duo and 5-6 is overtuned, and nearly impossible. Especially on automatons, because it just spawns infinity low levels. But then diff 9-10 feel like diff 3-4 because even though they spawn the big enemies, for some reason it spawns less of the low levels.
The game feels like it has automatic scaling, but it always feels like it is set up wrong.
I think I just did automatons back then because that's where the rewards were but it was a completely overwhelming number of enemies spawning in non-stop. Combined with the sort of time limit I just did not enjoy that experience at all. Maybe you can kinda get better and grind through it I feel I'd rather waste my time and money on something that's balanced around singleplayer, even if just optionally.
I remember reading that bosses just scale to the amount of players so my guess is solo is actually solo. This would make the solo or trio only decision even stranger...