7 Reasons Why Fallout 4 Shouldnt Have Co-Op Multiplayer

August 2015 Update: We've added a couple more reasons why Fallout 4, which was announced at E3 2015, should not have co-op multiplayer. 

Cooperative multiplayer experiences are all the rage these days, especially with traditionally single-player franchises injecting cooperative multiplayer modes into the titles—from the ground up, even. 

Dead Space and its sequel, Dead Space 2, were fantastic single-player games that saw a coop-heavy sequel in the form of Dead Space 3. No one asked for it, but its developers at Visceral and its publisher at EA decided to get in on the trend by making it a primarily co-op experience. It was pretty lackluster. 

The same thing happened with Capcom and Resident Evil 5. All of the previous titles in the series, from Resident Evil to Resident Evil 4 and its assorted spinoffs, were single-player titles, and no one in their right mind would’ve expected RE5 to shake things up by taking the co-op route, away from its survival-horror roots, embracing action and co-op for a perceived “Western audience.” 

The latest franchise to adopt this co-op mantra is Assassin’s Creed. Arriving in the form of Assassin’s Creed Unity, players are tasked to combine their efforts with three other players online. This is despite the fact that each of them takes on the role of the same character—Arno Dorian. 

Even the traditionally single-player series, Far Cry, is getting multiplayer co-op from the ground up in the upcoming Far Cry 4. 

No one saw it coming, but even BioWare is jumping on the co-op bandwagon with Shadow Realms, which was just announced at gamescom. 

Needless to say, the same thing could happen to Fallout 4. No one can see it coming, but the possibility that the next Fallout game from Bethesda could be co-op based exists. Here are a few reasons why I don’t want that to happen:

1) I like being a lone wanderer. Fallout has been a traditionally solitary experience, following the exploits of a single main character (the Vault Dweller, the Chosen One, the Lone Wanderer, the Courier) as he or she travels throughout the wasteland. 

The impact of playing a single character in the world would have been reduced had the player had to contend with others in the world. After all, you don’t feel like much of a hero in an MMORPG, especially when everyone else running around the world is a hero, too. 

2) All of the game’s quests should be completable alone. Making it mandatory for the player to cooperate with others would take away from completionists’ achievements. 

There’s nothing enjoyable about having to wait for hours for your friends to come online to play the game with you, especially when you’re trying to stay immersed in the experience. 

3) VATS, which was introduced in Fallout 3, would be difficult to implement in a cooperative multiplayer environment. The game has to retain something of its turn-based roots. 

Since Fallout 3, VATS has become a staple of the franchise, especially with the release of Fallout: New Vegas. Removing it would detract from the game’s tactical feel and turn it into a plain old first-person shooter--which isn’t something I’d want to get out of a Fallout game. 

4) You can’t have two main characters, unless the game is built from the ground up as a cooperative experience. If so, this would limit who gets to play the game and how. Giving both players agency would be interesting, but difficult to pull off correctly.

Granted, it’s doable to an extent--as Divinity: Original Sin plainly exhibits--but once again, it’s not something I’d want to get out of Fallout 4. 

5) Inane chatter. As in, I don’t want it. A huge part of the appeal of Fallout is the quiet and the solitude. Having a co-op partner would mean having to talk a lot to coordinate who takes what course of action. The discussions would hugely detract from the silent focus that makes Fallout’s atmosphere as impactful as it is.

6) Solving Fallout quests as a group would be a nightmare. Fallout has always been about the player using their instincts to decide how to affect the wasteland in the long or short term. A co-op experience would turn that into a committee, one that would only become more difficult to manage and maintain as additional team members were added. 

Most co-op games allow up to four party members. Can you imagine trying to decide how to solve a lengthy Fallout quest with that many people, given the many possibilities of carrying out each mission, and how delicate in execution some of them are? It would add endless hours to an already endless game. 

7) And finally, if the game ISN’T built from the ground up as a co-op experience, it would add little to the game and serve as a distraction to the game’s developers, who would be better off spending their time on actual content. Development time could instead be spent on world-building and character development.

Making the game cooperative would essentially double the load of the developers, as they’d have to make sure every quest in the game is built for two players in mind. Streamlining it and limiting certain quests would only lead to a poor co-op experience and an even poorer single-player experience.