A co-op mode

[Russian Momfia]

A game can only be so exiting in single player mode. Why not make a fun game more enjoyable by playing it with your friends. It could be the coolest thing ever to explore the vast game with a good friend of yours in co-op mode. You both try to survive The Long Dark.

[Djj24_rebel]

I agree so much.

[Walker]

It seems good now, until people will just grief you. On the other hand Two People Co-op, now that could work. Especially if these two people will NOT spawn in the same area. Fighting through the snow, the wild life to reunite... And then celebrate with homebrew whiskey =D

[Cryo Angard]

I think it would be cool if it was co-op friend only. my brother is thinkin about getting long dark and it would be cool for the both of us to be able to play together!

much agreed

[cameronfreitas90]

I have no idea how difficult it is to implement a co-op mode in game, but I strongly agree that this would be a nice game play option. Not sure how hosting and all that works. If it only worked in a way that either you or your friend were the host then perhaps that would be easier. Starting off in completely different locations would be fun too. However, this may be completely against the game developers intentions. The game seems to be designed for the lone survivor experience. Maybe wolves and bears become more difficult to deal with when both players are on the same map?

[Hesha]

One major problem with more than one player would be the fact the certain actions in-game speed up time. Now in multiplayer that wouldn't work unless both players happen to be doing something at the same time...

[Enas1]

Pshh!! I started playing a few days ago. Trial, led to me buying the game. So addicting and so fun!! Told other friends about it and now I have 5 friends strictly addicted to it! Of course the co-op mode has ran through my mind so many times .. Being able to survive with a buddy or 2! "Johnny go get wood, David find shelter, and I'll look for food." Ugh that right there explains what runs through my mind. Co-op mode please.☺

[Dirmagnos]

Johnny, go get wood.

David, go get some meat.

Albert, youre on scavenging duty.

And i dont care that theres only 3 hours of daylight left and blizzard outside.

Natalia stays with me.... for entertainment....

Why ??!?! WHY ?!?!!?

Because i got a rifle and you suckers only got sticks ! Now get moving be4 i decide to make an example from one of you.

[Hesha]

In Soviet Russia, snow shovel you.

[JACKHAMMERMC]

I'm very decisive as of what I'd like to see in the future but remember it's just an opinion.

I hate the idea of full on multiplayer cause it will completely mess up the immersive aspect of the game and with permadeath it would just kill the enjoyment after being killed by other people all the time.

That's all I have to say about multiplayer cause it's off topic slightly.

Now onto the good stuff, I'd love to see 2 player co-op! Why only 2 players??

Well 2 player co-op will mean Hinterland Studios will not need to change anything to the spawning system cause the amount of loot dropped would still be sufficient to get you through the struggle, having a friend at your side might just make it fun to organise the survival to see if you can work together to get hunting gear and attempt to keep going until all supplies are out and it's only man vs wild left .

I'd even suggest that the Co-op mode would require both players to be alive for it to keep going, one dies=game over. Makes you really care about your friend and see if you can work together as a team.

Conclusion: I'd love to see Co-op so hopefully it will come one day, thanks for making this awesome game!

[illanthropist]

Don't think the game engine supports it, it would require a total rework from the ground up

[totorbanana]

THE LONG DARK NEEDS COOP. I would love being able to play with a friend or two. Although there would need to be increased loot spawns and a system where both players need to be crafting at once to craft.

[Cog]

+1 for the co-op mode!

[oldsoldier181]

I just posted something similar. I suggested up to 4, but, honestly, who cares. I wouldnt want any more than 4 though. And, the game stays completely open. You can all cooperate, pair up, hunt each other, do your best and see who lives longest-there are a LOT of possibilities. I just started playing, but, I can see, doing the same things over and over again, alone, gets repetetive and boring. I mean, I spend a LOT of time in the outdoors now. This is simply me playing a game of, well, what I like to do, lol. (Minus the wolf attacks, looting, freezing to death, etc). I think having others in the game would be fun.

As to the sleep, crafting, etc, passing time differently-I think that there should be a prompt of some sort to the other player(s) to accept the time, with the possible exception of sleeping. Then, it should be a group decision. I dont know. Crafting I guess could be passed in real game time-your character is stuck doing that, while the others continue whatever they are doing, with the option of the character stopping, to resume it later. I suppose the same could be with sleep-with the caveat that, when all are doing something, then the time advances to the next finished project.

[Sjstriker]

It would make this game a lot of fun, even if just through LAN or from a personal invite only or something. Random Co-op doesn't sound as enjoyable for some reason

[toebar]

first answer -- what happens when one person sleeps or does one of the many other tasks for which time fast forwards?

[Dirmagnos]

So far ive seen only one game(Dont Starve) that were conceived as single player survival, that benefited when they introduced co-op/multiplayer mode into originally single player(even most multiplayers/mmos, like H1Z1, turned into primitive lame pvp arenas) game.

Generally when its done devs casualizing game, sacrificing most important elements of the game to fit it into multiplayer boundaries and as result game doesnt improve even a single bit, but turns into pseudo-survival griefers paradize with various bugs and exploits from wall to wall.

Making this game coop would require complete reworking of literally every game element and i dont really see any way it wont turn into casual shit as result.

Example: player 1 starts game and proceeds to explore; player 2 joins in, dies somewhere(since its fairly easy; or simply stores all his starting stuff somewhere), leaving his corpse to loot, and then quit server and repeats the process; if there is 4 players, they can create enough loot in an hour to last them for months, without actually looting any container and after all that loot is created they join in and play "normally"(often such losers would even boast how pro they are, that is even more pathetic).

[JACKHAMMERMC]

first answer -- what happens when one person sleeps or does one of the many other tasks for which time fast forwards?

My suggestion for this "issue" would be that time goes at 1x speed for the sleeping person as long as the other is still awake and doing stuff. It will stay in sync. Now I can hear you think, well that's gonna be annoying but that's why I suggest it should be a 2-player co-op only and if you play it with a friend you can either go to sleep at the same time or you can just ask your friend how long he'll be awake for still and go and have a drink or so...

This is all just random thoughts of me brainstorming, but could work.

[EternityTide]

Sigh. Why.... WHY do people insist on adding multiplayer to a game that:

A) is specifically centred around a singleplayer gameplay

and

B) is designed in such a way that multiplayer is impossible in its current state

It baffles me, it honestly does.

The time mechanics, game balancing, resource distribution... all designed with singleplayer in mind.

There is not even the primordial embryo of a multiplayer netcode present (why should there be? it's designed to be single-player).

There are dozens of multiplayer survival games out there, dare I say hundreds if you included the half assed (truly) indie developments (as in, the work of someone and their cousin one summer holiday). There are many games out there which already cater to your wish.

Besides, not only does multiplayer bring a host of technical problems, it also ropes in a bunch of sociological problems.

Problem: Who hosts the game?

Answer 1: Friend, however this leads to that friend being given immortal status or respawns because they cannot be killed and booted out via permadeath because they host the game. Kinda game breaking.

Answer 2: game server hosts, however this leads to your friends dying and never being able to come back, ever, unless you introduce a horribly jarring, game breaking mechanic which ruins the immersion and dumbs TLD down to DayZ.

Problem: Game will be dumbed down to DayZ

Answer: prevent PvP - horribly jarring gameplay mechanic ahoy, mateys!

I could go on, but what's the point? The game just doesn't fit with the way TLD is built. Multiplayer does NOT automatically improve a game. Stop thinking it does. It works for Don't Starve (resulting in the SEPARATE game, Don't Starve Together) because Don't Starve's whimsical, simplistic style is very forgiving. It's like a tree. Hack into it with an axe and shove the dismembered limb of another tree into it and you just by chance, luckily, succeed in grafting the tree. Do that with TLD and all you get is a nasty fungal infection and a dead animal, because trees and animals, like TLD and multiplayer, are biologically (or gamealogically) incompatible.

[Barretts Privateer]

EternityTide is right folks. Co-op IS NOT POSSIBLE. Not with the game engine. Also, if implemented, teh way the game would be in co-op would be so deeply convoluted and complicated that it would be nearly impossible to play.

Due to all the different processes you can do taking different amounts of time, the game would have to be slowed down to real time, meaning that if you want to start a fire, you'll actually have to wait 10-15 minutes. Chop wood? Half an hour. And so on, so forth. For me, it'd be a miracle if I could find enough to do during the time it takes to roast a venison steak.

[Kichigai]

This would be great!

[quadgamer]

I was thinking this same thing! Like another reply, I too think it should be a two person co-op. Maybe add two lead boxes somewhere that have a walkie talkie inside each?

[EternityTide]

I do like the fact that people are completely ignoring every single valid reason why coop gameplay cannot work.

Yes, it would be a nice, but it's not possible.

[Dirmagnos]

Well, it would be possible, but i have serious troubles to see it working without introducing some serious changes to the game, that i dont think would improve it even a little bit.

Its a domino effect, change one thing and it will affect everything else. Greater the change, bigger the effect.

[EternityTide]

why bother making a multiplayer which is radically different from single player when you can just pop onto steam and play one of the 101 multiplayer survival games on there