Asynchronous Gameplay

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for optimal_saint
#1 Posted by optimal_saint (25 posts) -
A big selling point of the Wii U is the asynchronous multiplayer gameplay. I'm a little curious and concerned about how exactly it will work. The absolute key is delivering on this : Different but Equal. Same game, 2+ players 2+ different experiences. It looks like the games that showcase it the best so far are Mario Chase and Metroid Blast. The issue with that is that in those two games each round looks like it last just a few minutes at best. In New Mario U player 2 helps out by adding blocks. That sounds a lot like in Galaxy when player 2 helped out by shooting Star Bits, and that was barely better than just sitting there and watching. That's hardly Different but Equal. You can't have one player having 90% of the fun. Can asynchronous play shine in a longer "hardcore" game? Can you think of scenarios where it will work great? It's late and sure I could think of more really thinking about it but what about a shooter/action style game each player is given a separate mission? You go rescue the prisoner, I'll go steal the code that unlocks the door, we meet at the door in 20 minutes. We go our separate ways with a 20 minute timer in the corner of the TV and Gamepad. I'll try to think of more, what ideas do you have?
Avatar image for trugs26
#2 Posted by trugs26 (7310 posts) -

A big selling point of the Wii U is the asynchronous multiplayer gameplay. I'm a little curious and concerned about how exactly it will work. The absolute key is delivering on this : Different but Equal. Same game, 2+ players 2+ different experiences. It looks like the games that showcase it the best so far are Mario Chase and Metroid Blast. The issue with that is that in those two games each round looks like it last just a few minutes at best. In New Mario U player 2 helps out by adding blocks. That sounds a lot like in Galaxy when player 2 helped out by shooting Star Bits, and that was barely better than just sitting there and watching. That's hardly Different but Equal. You can't have one player having 90% of the fun. Can asynchronous play shine in a longer "hardcore" game? Can you think of scenarios where it will work great? It's late and sure I could think of more really thinking about it but what about a shooter/action style game each player is given a separate mission? You go rescue the prisoner, I'll go steal the code that unlocks the door, we meet at the door in 20 minutes. We go our separate ways with a 20 minute timer in the corner of the TV and Gamepad. I'll try to think of more, what ideas do you have?optimal_saint


You should look at Rayman legends as a better example. The game pad player is a little more involved. Rather than just adding blocks on the screen, he can stun and manipulate the levels. Apparently 20% of the game is actually touch based.

On a more "harcore" level, there is the speed run element of Mario U with the two players.

My girlfriend doesn't really like to watch me play games. But if she can get involved with such a simple task as the one in Galaxy, it's actually sufficient for her to enjoy the experience as a "watcher" with some participation.

I'm not sure if BLOPS 2 supports this; but you can have multiplayer, with one person on the big screen and one player on the pad - meaning you don't have to split the TV (or get screen watching).

I like your idea with the seperate mission, and I hope devs put these sorts of ideas into their games.

Personally, I actually haven't thought about multiplayer ideas with the game pad.

Avatar image for psymon100
#3 Posted by psymon100 (6835 posts) -

It's called asymmetric gameplay. Asymmetric and asynchrnonous mean two different things.

I can see lots of room for new types of gameplay, in particular in hardcore games.

You could have a shooting game where it is 4 weak players vs one powerful one. Eventually they will allow for two gamepads per system and this will change the game again. You could have games which are 4v2, 2v2v2, 3v3 (One gamepad + two traditional players per team), 5v1 etc etc. And of course options like 6 player coop.

I've seen someone else mention gameplay in the style of D&D. The gamepad player is the dungeon master, traditional controllers are the players.

Personally, I'd love to see a driving game which supports 4 players on the TV, with 2x gamepads, allowing for a field of six from one console. Even if the graphics got turned down to the level of Forza 1 on the Xbox, it would still be enough for all 6 players to enjoy the game.

I think the Wii U has the potential to offer lots of little gameplay surprises over the 8th gen.

Avatar image for LoG-Sacrament
#4 Posted by LoG-Sacrament (20397 posts) -

we've already seen something similar to asymmetrical gameplay before the wii u. halo has a juggernaut mode where one player has a ton of health and does extra damage while other players basically have to defeat that player to score points.

i think that's the sort of thing 3rd party developers will aim for. one player will have an advantage (likely through information on the touch screen) but the other players will be evenly matched altogether.

Avatar image for xeidog69
#5 Posted by xeidog69 (1453 posts) -

Actually upon reading into this more and more your right and your wrong, the person with the gamepad in Mario multiplayer has optinos on how to play as additional player either play classic or in the other mode it is not forced that player 2 simply drops blocks. The only ime I believe your forced to play dropping blocks is when there are 5 ppl, 4 playing the game and the 5th then being on the gamepad dropping blocks etc.

Avatar image for optimal_saint
#6 Posted by optimal_saint (25 posts) -
I thought about it and came up with a few more ideas. IDEA 1. Back to the Future 2 has been on a lot lately and I always thought that the part when Marty had to go back to 1955 was a cool idea. So that got me thinking: A time travel game. Player 1 has a long quest, mission or whatever. Player 2 starts out in the future for a bit something disrupts the timeflow and has to travel back to Player 1's time. Bad Guys from Player 2's time also go back Player 2 must make sure that Player 1 accomplishes his mission but (like Back to the Future 2) has to do it without being seen or discovered by Player 1 Player 2 has a link to his own time (Like Al from Quantum Leap) saying what changes to time has happened, where player 1 will be, at what time and what player 1 is supposed to do, what Future Bad Guys are doing and what you need to do to stop them. (Player 1 must be at this town at this time for the Great Battle of Such and Such, Future Bad Guys have blown up the only bridge there, travel back in time stop the bad guys and you only have 15 minutes because player 1 is on his way, must clear out the bad guys, defuse the bomb and be out of sight before player 1 gets there) (Future Bad Guys have killed the Sherriff who joined Player 1 for this crucial mission. no time to go back in time to fix, assume the Sherrif's identity and join Player 1 to do the mission) So player 1 has a long linear adventure. Player 2 is constantly traveling back and forth within Player 1's game. Something that happens to player 1 early in the game is done/caused by Player 2 but until midway through Player 2's game) I know this is a bit rambling but I think that if something like this was done well it would be a blast to play. If you are playing by yourself you decide if you want to be player 1 or 2.
Avatar image for optimal_saint
#7 Posted by optimal_saint (25 posts) -
IDEA 2 - There was an old Playstation 2 game called Cookie & Cream it was a puzzle game player simantaneously by both players. Something like that would work great using the TV and gamepad. I was thinking something like a giant co-op castle/dungeon. Like 10 Zelda dungeons together. Sometimes both players have to be in the same room, to solve the puzzle, sometimes they have to split up. (Like one player raising and lowering the water level in the Water Temple from Ocarina of Time) (God, I hated that temple!) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBUwwpaRxRQ
Avatar image for optimal_saint
#8 Posted by optimal_saint (25 posts) -
IDEA 3 - Another idea from a Playstation 2 game. this time it's Mark of Kri. Player 1 is a warrior. Player 2 on gamepad is the bird. Gamepad is using the Panarama View In Mark of Kri the bird was used very sparingly. For this it would a much more integral part of the game.. Player 2 can scout around for recon. Can fly in windows grab keys, etc to bring back to player 1. Can pick up and drop bombs (like Zelda Skyward Sword) Player 2 can drop some sort of marker (paint etc) on a particular ememy to single him out If a sniper is taking shots at Player 1, Player 2 can go and distract long enough for Player1 to get away. Lot's of gameplay possiblities here. The panarama would be great http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BqBPuUidk8Y
Avatar image for optimal_saint
#9 Posted by optimal_saint (25 posts) -

It's called asymmetric gameplay. Asymmetric and asynchrnonous mean two different things.

I can see lots of room for new types of gameplay, in particular in hardcore games.

You could have a shooting game where it is 4 weak players vs one powerful one.

psymon100
I've heard both terms used. How are they different?
Avatar image for goblaa
#10 Posted by goblaa (19304 posts) -

Could make a really cool lost vikings game this way.

Avatar image for psymon100
#11 Posted by psymon100 (6835 posts) -

[QUOTE="psymon100"]

It's called asymmetric gameplay. Asymmetric and asynchornonous mean two different things.

I can see lots of room for new types of gameplay, in particular in hardcore games.

You could have a shooting game where it is 4 weak players vs one powerful one.

optimal_saint

I've heard both terms used. How are they different?

Well, when something is asymmetrical, it violates symmetry - meaning that it isn't balanced. 'Asymmetric Gameplay' should be the only phrase Nintendo et al use, as it's correct. The player with the gamepad does not have the same view into the gameworld as the other players. Also, it can be 1v4 etc, it's unbalanced, it's asymmetrical.

You're probably heard of chronological order, meaning ordering things by time, ancient Greek 'chronos' meaning 'time'. When things are synchronised they're running at the same time. So a-synch-chronos means things which aren't running at the same time. This doesn't describe the type of gameplay the Wii U gamepad brings.

Many get this wrong, like about.com.Here is an example which pre dates the Wii U by 9 years.