Painkiller--why no coop?

[Toddy]

Not to get this argument going again, but I just finished Painkiller the other week and can't understand why People Can Fly couldn't have included coop. I mean, the gameplay is very, very similar to that of Serious Sam. Yet I read some comment by one of the devs that they'd have needed another year of development time to include coop. Why? What is there to do? Spawn in some more enemies? The levels would all easily accommodate two players (okay, the asylum might be a little cramped in spots, but so what?), there are no plot points to worry about if you cut the few between-level cutscenes, no triggered events other than spawning enemies, etc.

Painkiller would be a natural for coop. And without coop, there's little point in replaying the game, unless you're really into the whole tarot card thing (which I'm not). Great game in many ways, but it's only half-there without coop.

[McBain]

Intriguing post, and I agree that Painkiller Co-Op would be clutch. Maybe someone will mod it in, eventually?

[Matthew Gallant]

Maybe it's because of the physics, which would have to be synched across clients. Does normal multiplayer use physics of any kind beyond ragdoll corpses, if even? I've never even played the multiplayer.

[chumpface]

When you are building single player game, or just single player missions for a game there are so many things you just don't think about that become requirements for building co-op. For instance, in an FPS, you've got put in a player model (so the other character can see him), you have to make sure that no puzzles get broken by having two players (e.g. spawners that assume the player is by a spawn trigger, when now the other player may be who knows where). I've worked on a game where the publisher decided they wanted co-op rather late in the dev cycle, and it added 44 man months to the schedule (granted, this was a game with AI teammates, who were completely thrown off by another human in the mix).

And remember, all the time you spend building any other game modes, you're not spending on the core single player experience, which means, a lesser single player experience.

[Toddy]

That's a good point, Matthew. But if so, then why aren't the devs using this as a crutch to shut people up? The PK forums are filled with people demanding coop, yet the devs just ignore them. And if this were the case, wouldn't that just cause lag issues? So why not enable LAN coop support and tell everybody else YMMV?

And chump, have you played PK? There isn't anything in the game to be worked around, like you mention. There are no special triggers, no puzzles, not even enemy AI that goes beyond "see enemy and shoot." Maybe the physics would be an issue, but other than that, there doesn't seem to be any reason for ditching coop in this case. With an editor, I'll bet somebody cranks out a coop mod in a couple of weeks, tops.

But that's another problem. People Can Fly hasn't released any tools yet. Either PCF or DreamCatcher or both don't seem to want people modding the game, at least until the expansion pack comes out this fall. I can't see any other reason why they've held back the editor. Also, judging by some threads on the forum, PCF doesn't want people making mods with anything but officially released tools. They've actually said that PK wasn't designed to be modded.

Which is completely, totally idiotic. Who designs a shooter without considering mods? Especially an old-school rail shooter like this one. It's not like people are playing PK for the story and script. I really like this game, and want it to succeed, but at the same time I can't help but feel that DC and PCG have fucked things up in so many ways that the game deserves to go straight into the bargain bin.

[tronnc]

Yeah unless you design the game with Coop in mind it can be very time consuming to put it in afterwords. Its really a matter of rationing time, for every hour you spend on coop it could be a hour working on something else in the game, since far fewer people are going to play coop it usually seen better to use the time on something else.

Even with a game designed with coop in mind, if the're doing proper func testing its going to add alot of man hours to the testing which makes your test budget much higher.

Im not against Coop, i'd love for it to be in more games especially Painkiller. Though I did play the multiplayer demo of Painkiller when it was released and it sucked. It was just like quake 3 deathmatch only laggy.

[Creole Ned]

In retrospect, the time spent on the (largely ignored) multiplayer might have been better invested in adding co-op. But who knows how much more work that would have added? The multiplayer is pretty simple DM stuff with a handful of maps. Co-op would certainly be more difficult to put in.

Doesn't Serious Sam 2 have physics in it? Croteam will be crucified if co-op gets dropped from that game due to logistical problems. :)

[Jon R.]

But that's another problem. People Can Fly hasn't released any tools yet. Either PCF or DreamCatcher or both don't seem to want people modding the game, at least until the expansion pack comes out this fall. I can't see any other reason why they've held back the editor. Also, judging by some threads on the forum, PCF doesn't want people making mods with anything but officially released tools. They've actually said that PK wasn't designed to be modded.

Probably because it wasn't. They've also said something along the lines of how an SDK is something more suited to a "more mature" engine. The gist being that this was their first engine, their first shot as a new company, and they built the engine only with getting the game to work in mind.

[Jason McCullough]

Because nothing fun makes any money.

[extarbags]

That's a good point, Matthew. But if so, then why aren't the devs using this as a crutch to shut people up? The PK forums are filled with people demanding coop, yet the devs just ignore them. And if this were the case, wouldn't that just cause lag issues? So why not enable LAN coop support and tell everybody else YMMV?

And chump, have you played PK? There isn't anything in the game to be worked around, like you mention. There are no special triggers, no puzzles, not even enemy AI that goes beyond "see enemy and shoot." Maybe the physics would be an issue, but other than that, there doesn't seem to be any reason for ditching coop in this case. With an editor, I'll bet somebody cranks out a coop mod in a couple of weeks, tops.

But that's another problem. People Can Fly hasn't released any tools yet. Either PCF or DreamCatcher or both don't seem to want people modding the game, at least until the expansion pack comes out this fall. I can't see any other reason why they've held back the editor. Also, judging by some threads on the forum, PCF doesn't want people making mods with anything but officially released tools. They've actually said that PK wasn't designed to be modded.

Which is completely, totally idiotic. Who designs a shooter without considering mods? Especially an old-school rail shooter like this one. It's not like people are playing PK for the story and script. I really like this game, and want it to succeed, but at the same time I can't help but feel that DC and PCG have fucked things up in so many ways that the game deserves to go straight into the bargain bin.

The Painkiller I played was a first-person, as opposed to rail, shooter, and it featured quite interesting enemy AI.

[Toddy]

Are you kidding? There was no enemy AI at all, unless you're talking about those Ghost Rider guys using their fat buddies as shields in the City on Water (I think) level. Cool physics, and stuff blowed up real good, but this wasn't exactly a thinking person's shooter.

And Jon, all due respect to this being PCF's first game, but decisions like this will only make sure that it's also the developer's last. They really should have thought about options to make PK stand apart from all the other shooters this year. IMO, PK needs something like this. Otherwise, it's a sure bargain binner. Fun, sure, but if I'd paid full price for the game (I got a press copy), I'd have felt ripped off, not so much with the lack of coop, but with the contempt the devs and pub are showing to the mod community.

It's one thing not to make a coop mode OOTB, it's another to actively try and stop modders from making one on their own.

[Tom Chick]

Brett, AI isn't just stuff like squad flanking maneuver from Half-Life. AI is a pattern of behaviors that should simulate a personality, which isn't always necessarily 'intelligent'.

As such, I thought the AI in Painkiller was superlative. Not everyone ran straight at you. Some guys shot from a distance, some guys rushed you in groups, some guys fought other guys who accidentally hit them, some guys had wounded or death behaviors, some guys had multiple attacks, some guys were 'support creatures' like the banshee with her blinding wail, some guys had special moves like jumps, blur-movement, or defensive moves, and so forth. And the pathfinding was good, which is far better than you can say for many first person shooters!

Painkiller was a best case example of how AI doesn't mean the enemy being able to automatically headshot you with one bullet.

-Tom

[Jakub]

As such, I thought the AI in Painkiller was superlative. Not everyone ran straight at you. Some guys shot from a distance, some guys rushed you in groups, some guys fought other guys who accidentally hit them, some guys had wounded or death behaviors, some guys had multiple attacks, some guys were 'support creatures' like the banshee with her blinding wail, some guys had special moves like jumps, blur-movement, or defensive moves, and so forth. And the pathfinding was good, which is far better than you can say for many first person shooters!

Painkiller was a best case example of how AI doesn't mean the enemy being able to automatically headshot you with one bullet.

-Tom

In that case Doom 3 was an equally good example of that kind of AI.

[Hump]

That's a good point, Matthew. But if so, then why aren't the devs using this as a crutch to shut people up?

since when did rational explanations ever shut people up?

Randy Pitchford did a long, very well done post on the Shacknews forums as to just how time-consuming and complicated co-op can be yet two posts after his people were back to chastising gearbox for "screwing" the fans etc. for not including co-op.

personally, most co-op I've played gets worn out very quickly and while its nice to have, I'd much prefer a solid SP or a MP mode that has much more replayability.

[Jakub]

What I find inexcusable is the lack of co-op in Doom 3 PC. We know it's being done for Xbox. Therefore it can be done and the network groundwork is already there. I think it's clearly id's decision to not included for 'artistic' reasons then - they want gamers to have the experience id planned.

[BDGE]

Tom touched on a good point, though it's hard for me to equivocate Painkiller as using ANY form of real intelligence (no matter how artificial), you never get the feeling that there is the ability for your enemies to 'learn or adapt' within combat, in my mind the definition of intelligence. Instead they follow scripting to their own death.

-However- Tom is correct that People Can Fly injected Painkiller with some extremely varying instructions to follow thanks in part to the sheer amount of creepy stuff coded into the game to kill. Doom has tossed Imps at me for a dozen hours straight, Painkiller switches gears on you every 30 minutes....

I particularly enjoyed the biker demons in chapter 5 whom would quickly snag a recently dispatched corpse to use as a personal riot shield whenever available.

The crippling spells of certain demons such as the staff wielding skeltons that temporarly prevented you from firing a weapon, or causing extremely slow movement changed up certain tactics.

Also memorable are the samurai knights that will commit sepuku once defeated, a feat which will annhilate most anything within a radius around them unless further plugged with ammo. The game is just filled with personality, but not exactly intelligence.

Oh and compared to Doom, it's nice to have 10 weapons condensed into 5 weapon slots; wheeling through the worthless flashlight/fist/pistol combo everytime I want to get my shotgun vs. rocket launcher is such a pain...

Not that I want to campaign the whole Doom Vs. Painkiller thing yet again... Co-op in either would be a fun diversion.

[BobJustBob]

My favorite Painkiller enemies are the crippled zombies. I love it when they try to balance on their stumps and walk towards you, then fall over.

Of course, then they lunge at you with frightening speed.

[Jon R.]

And Jon, all due respect to this being PCF's first game, but decisions like this will only make sure that it's also the developer's last. They really should have thought about options to make PK stand apart from all the other shooters this year. IMO, PK needs something like this. Otherwise, it's a sure bargain binner. Fun, sure, but if I'd paid full price for the game (I got a press copy), I'd have felt ripped off, not so much with the lack of coop, but with the contempt the devs and pub are showing to the mod community.

It's one thing not to make a coop mode OOTB, it's another to actively try and stop modders from making one on their own.

Can't disagree with you on any of that. This is the first i've heard of them actively trying to prevent mods though. I can understand them not releasing an SDK maybe because it's not all that stable and it'd take a while to shoehorn it into a game that wasn't meant for user modification, but to stop people screwing with it for fun in the meantime sounds like a good way to shoot themselves in the foot.

[BobJustBob]

I was on the official boards this weekend and one of the People Can Fly guys talked about the SDK. He said they were cleaning up the editor to make it suitable for public use, and that it would absolutely be out this month.

OMG CONSPIRACY!

Edited to include actual content:

Adrian]I read a few of posts, but I gave up, there's too many of them and some are just way too offensive, so let me just say that a couple of you guys really have no idea how this business works. I still cannot believe that some people think that the tools are not yet released because a) PCF are n00bs, b) money hungry scanners who don't care about the fanbase, etc.

So instead of explaining it all ONCE again and instead of turning this thread into a flame war, here are some news:

a) our lead programmer is finishing turning the editor from "only PCF knows how to use it" to "experienced gamers can use it". In other words, it's a bit more user friendly now.
b) Virt is finishing translating the documentation from Polish to English.

Bottom line: soon. I won't be giving any dates, but I will be very surprised if the tools are not out in the first half of this month.

[Drastic]

In my more crotchety moments, I have sympathy for the idea that the vast sense of entitlement many gamers have is very worthy of contempt. In line with that, I think they could have released the SDK simply as a collection of the impenetrable tools they originally used, with whatever fragmentary documentation mostly in Polish the designers came up with while beating it into submission.

All that said, it's probably best that's not the tack they're taking.

[Toddy]

Sense of entitlement? It's a simple shooter. It should ship with some kind of editor ready to go. It should be designed for modding. Period. And not because of some whiny sense of gamer entitlement--but because it makes perfect business sense to play up to the huge shooter mod community. If you want your shooter to have some shelf life, you have to include these features. You don't and you'd better be okay with landing in the bargain bin within a couple of weeks. DC clearly wants to turn PK into the next big shooter franchise, but this is a really, really stupid way to go about it.

And PCF actually designed the game to be modder unfriendly, and have apparently changed the the pak archive format twice since the demo. PCF doesn't seem to want people to open PK paks. The stated reason seems to be to stop hacking and online cheating, which seems bizarre since the MP in PK is pretty much worthless, and no other shooter devs are fighting cheaters by locking down game code.

This has been a frustrating process for people who really love the game and want to mod it. It's one thing to hold back the release of an editor, it's something else to actually fight the people trying to edit the game. The cheating excuse seems patently ridiculous, and the expansion coming out certainly gives PCF and DC a reason to hold back an editor so people have to pay for added content. But even if PCF puts out an editor soon, it's already lost a huge opportunity.

Anyhow, read this thread for more.

http://dreamcatcherinteractive.com/f...highlight=coop

[Toddy]

Tom, I wouldn't call that AI at all. PK enemies have strictly defined, extremely limited routines that mix up the straightforward combat and make the game a blast, but it's not like you have to vary your playing style. I didn't change my tactics no matter which enemy I was fighting. I only varied my approach when forced to do so by the map architecture. Yeah, between shotgun blasts I did notice that some of the baddies were doing some interesting things, but this didn't change the way I was playing the game at all. Surely good, varied enemy shooter AI should force you to change tactics depending your opponent.

[Tom Chick]

Brett, a few of us have explained how Painkiller's AI lends it variation and personality. There's a lot more going on that what you said:

There...[is no] enemy AI that goes beyond "see enemy and shoot."

This is wrong and a few posts have made that clear. But instead of acknowledging that, you're now redefining AI as something that makes you change your tactics?

Okay, that's stretching it, but even then, you're still wrong. You approach different monsters in Painkiller in different ways. You're telling me you didn't have to vary your approach at all, whether you were facing turrets, flamethrower dudes, jumping ninjas, slow moving flesh tossing zombies, shock therapy hulks in straightjackets who explode, charging devil dogs, indestructible ghosts, dudes running at you with barrels of gunpowder and lit fuses, witches flying on brooms, and crawling people with their limbs cut off? You're saying there's no varied interplay between monsters and weapons, and how you react to how they react? You're saying you can adopt a single tactic, say the freezer/shotgun one-two, or the Painkiller ragdoll pull, or the flaming long-distance stake, in all of those situation?

That's just silly. You might as well argue that the sky is orange.

As for your stuff about People Can Fly apparently discouraging mod-makers, I don't know the first thing about what's going on. But I agree with Drastic's comment about gamers having a sense of entitlement, which you seem to share when you insist:

It's a simple shooter. It should ship with some kind of editor ready to go. It should be designed for modding. Period.

I don't make games, but I've been around the process long enough to know that those kind of pronouncements demonstrate a lack of appreciation for how the industry works. I'm sure you think you know what's best for a game company, but you might consider that perhaps they don't share your opinion.

-Tom

[Tom Chick]

Anyhow, read this thread for more.

I just read the thread.

Some guy complained that a patch disabled his mod, someone named Matt from Dreamcatcher apologetically explained that it wasn't intentional and the company couldn't offer official support for his mod, and everyone seemed happy.

I don't understand where you're getting this stuff about PCF "actually designing the game to be mod-unfriendly" and "fighting the people who want to mod the game".

-Tom

[Toddy]

Well, I could be getting "this stuff" from the PCF guys' admission that they intentionally designed the PAKs so that modders wouldn't be able to open and edit them.

And, no, Tom, I'm not wrong. I just don't see PK as having a strong AI and you do, and you're resorting to putting words in my mouth about how I think AI has to mean the game can "automatically headshot you with one bullet."

For the record, no, I didn't have to vary my approach in PK at all, whether I was taking on the shock-therapy Frankensteins, the Ghost Riders, the witches, and so on. It was all run and gun. I reacted, moved, opened fire, over and over again. It was a great arcade experience. But I never once stopped to think about what I was doing. I didn't say "oh, that Ghost Rider guy is picking up the fat guy as a shield, so I'd better react to that cunning maneuver by blah, blah, blah..." I just reacted, moved, and opened fire some more. I mean, what other options are there?

Sure, there are different ways of reacting, moving, and opening fire, including some really novel ones, but come on. This is just the same old arcadey shoot-em-up stuff at heart, with monsters that move in different ways from the norm. I wouldn't call rigid movement patterns evidence of outstanding AI. Neither should you. If PK were an RTS, and the enemy units moved in limited, predictable ways according to type, you'd be the first one to hammer the game for being shallow, simple, and lacking in AI.

And I've been around the industry as long as you have, Tom. I've also been covered mods for over two years now for CGM, and following the mod scene for at least five years, so I know that a shooter, especially an arcadey one without a strong single-person narrative or tactical elements or WWII or all three elements, HAS to come with mod tools today or it's DOA. Every company that develops a shooter acknowledges this and demonstrates it by releasing toolkits, tutorials, etc. Well, every shooter developer except for PCF.

I know you've adoped PK as your Game of the Moment and are wetting your pants over it like it's Flying Heroes 2004, but come on. You know better. PK is a great game, but you can admit that it's a great game without making it into more than what it really is.

[Tom Chick]

And, no, Tom, I'm not wrong.

You must have forgotten about writing the following earlier in the evening:

There are no special triggers, no puzzles, not even enemy AI that goes beyond "see enemy and shoot."

You're free to carry on the discussion using whatever narrow definition you want to use for AI, but the above comment is wrong. The enemies do more than 'see and shoot'. I don't know why that's so hard for you to understand.

And this has nothing to do with how much I like Painkiller, although nice try. I'd make the same argument about Doom 3, Deus Ex, Jak II, Half-Life, or whatever. Okay, maybe not Jak II.

For the record, no, I didn't have to vary my approach in PK at all, whether I was taking on the shock-therapy Frankensteins, the Ghost Riders, the witches, and so on. It was all run and gun.

Okay, now you're just being willfully obstinate. Just because a game is "all run and gun" doesn't mean you don't have to vary your approach. How about I take your quote and plug in a few terms to show you how utterly ridiculous that sounds?

"For the record, no, I didn't have to vary my approach in chess at all, whether I was taking on a bishop, a knight, a queen, and so on. It was all moving pieces across a board."

Well, I could be getting "this stuff" from the PCF guys' admission that they intentionally designed the PAKs so that modders wouldn't be able to open and edit them.

I didn't see that in the thread you suggested we look at, which is why I ask where you're getting this. Where did they admit that they intentionally made Painkiller to discourage mods?

-Tom

[Kevin Grey]

And I've been around the industry as long as you have, Tom. I've also been covered mods for over two years now for CGM, and following the mod scene for at least five years, so I know that a shooter, especially an arcadey one without a strong single-person narrative or tactical elements or WWII or all three elements, HAS to come with mod tools today or it's DOA.

What shooter in recent years that doesn't have a strong single-player narrative, tactical elements, or WWII setting has been a success because of the strength of its mod community? I can't think of any. Then again, I can't think of a successful shooter without one of those elements at all, mod community or no.

[Drastic]

Painkiller seems to be DOA (or DOOMED!!!) enough for an expansion to be in the works. That's the kind of DOA that I can live with.

On second thought, it does have that undead Nazi train station that I never was patient enough to do without collecting a single soul. That's sort of a WWII setting. That's probably why they can talk about getting that expansion out.

[Timemaster Tim]

From my non-fps playing point of view, what I see is:

Painkiller has not followed the feature set of other successful FPs games with having co-op multi-play, and modding tools.

Some people are claiming that this is an affront, and that without these features, the game cannot be successful.

Painkiller has sold enough that they are doing an expansion pack.

Question: Does every game in the same genre have to step up to the bar with the same feature set? It seems to me that they did a very good job on the setting, graphics, and variety of enemies. As I said, I'm not much into FPS games. I tried out the Serious Sam demo and had some fun with it. I tried out the Painkiller demo and found it was much more fun. Working on honing the feature set that they did have seems to to have worked well for the devs as they produced a polished game that has sold well.

[Boss]

Painkiller has not followed the feature set of other successful FPs games with having co-op multi-play, and modding tools.

This is flat out wrong. The only major first person shooters to have co-op in the last... jeez... ten years?... are Halo and Serious Sam. It is absolutely not an expected feature of first person shooters.

Brett's also off his rocker about the necessity of modding tools as the success of Painkiller proves. Most gamers do not play most mods.

--Dave