Page 1 of 1

RA3 Co-op gameplay

Posted: 2008-08-31 02:52pm
by Ace Pace
Link
Co-op play looks to be a huge part of Red Alert 3; in fact, all of the solo missions in the game will be playable cooperatively with a friend. Because the missions are designed with multiple commanders in mind, even if you're playing a mission solo, you'll have a friendly AI commander on your side with whom you'll need to coordinate your tactics.

For today's purposes, we watched as two human players went through a Soviet faction mission, whose ultimate aim was to take down a science facility being used by the Allied forces to research experimental technology. Doing so, however, wasn't simply a matter of building up units and rushing the gates; thanks to some clever restrictions, it was immediately apparent that only cooperative strategies between the two players would result in victory.

The main restriction was an enemy doohickey known as a technology inhibitor, which limited the types of units each player could produce in their individual HQ. One player could only produce land units like transports and troops, the other was limited to battle helicopters. The first step to strategic success was to establish ore-mining operations on nearby islands. Each island featured very different defense structures; one designed strictly to deal with land units, the other decked out with antiair weaponry. Naturally this was the first point where cooperation kicked in; with the player with the battle copters sending in his forces to take out the ground weapons, and the player with the ground units looking to take down the antiaircraft tech.

With those island defenses clear it was time to set up new bases. To do so, you use Sputniks--which can travel over land and sea but do so very slowly and don't stand much of a chance against an enemy. To keep things moving quickly, you can request that the player with the flying units transport the Sputnik across the water and drop it off on the next landmass.

You can also set beacons to signify areas you need destroyed by an allied player. In the example we saw, one player set a beacon at a nearby island; once the helicopters gave a fly-by to eliminate the fog of war from the area, the ground troops were able to attack the antiair guns on the island with long range weaponry and prepare that island for an all-out assault. The final attack on the tech inhibitor featured both players working together--with the battle copters airlifting troops into the area, resulting in a quick and effective victory.

Though the gameplay is still being tweaked, Red Alert 3 producers told us that the game will provide a challenge for experienced players and capable AI allies if you can't find a friend to join you in the fray. That's great news, as is the game's gently mocking take on the RTS genre. After all, it's not every day you see enemy units in the form of enlisted dolphins, who fight wearing vests strapped with high-tech weaponry. The way we see it, heavily armed, fightin'-mad dolphins are why video games were invented in the first place. Look for more on Red Alert 3 in the near future.
This looks very promising. Co-op being built in from the ground up, along with a friendly AI in SP. It also smells of being planned around the Xbox360 headset or anything else that lets you do tight co-op.

However, the example mission makes me worry for the AI. It's going to have to be very good or cause innumerable numbers of single player only players to rant about this on every single net forum.

Posted: 2008-09-01 06:39am
by PREDATOR490
This sounds like wishful thinking and over-hype on the part of the AI's abilities.
The AI is going to be nothing more than scripited events in a campaign that will be completely controlled and built to accomodate the situation.
This is nothing new and has been done since the first RTS genre so I hold no faith in this pitch.

I really doubt many missions will really be that difficult for one player to need help without this 'tech' restriction angle and that seems like a disaster for an AI. Is the player gonna need to micro manage the AI into course's of action as well as their own forces without the actual ability to control the AI ?
How is the player supposed to tell the AI he needs an airlift of these 'sputnicks' and can the AI refuse ?

This sounds like its being designed strictly for co-op play with another player which probably means the campaigns will be designed to be extremely fucking hard for a single solo player to do with a retarded AI or the campaign will be easy to do making another player overkill.

Posted: 2008-09-01 02:24pm
by Superboy
I can see this possibly working if it allows you some control over the allied AI units. It should allow you to give them certain commands just like you would your own units (to attack something, or airlift your unit, or board one of your carriers) but have the unit go back to being AI controlled once your order is carried out. This is the only way I can imagine it being playable if you really do need to really on the AI, but even then, it would be an annoying requirement.

The other downside is that this will effectively eliminate any stealth missions. Some of my favorite missions from the old games were the ones where you control just one unit (like tanya) or one squad and have to sneak around base defenses and not alert more powerful units. These units would be hell if you have to rely on allied AI to not get killed.

Posted: 2008-09-01 02:42pm
by Covenant
The friendly AI is probably, as stated, going to rely on combat AI layered on top of scripted events. Since the enemy AI is going to be relying on scripted events too, you can script them together to create the illusion of intelligence more easily. I bet the singleplayer AI will be fine, but you'll see a remarkable drop in AI brainpower in skirmish and compstomp modes.

Posted: 2008-09-01 08:50pm
by Stark
At least in SP, WiC had 'functional' teammate AI in missions (run with scripting) although it involved a fair bit for jiggery-pokery with reinforcement points. In multi, however, the AI is unimaginative but extremely competent; more so than most players. This CAN work, I'm just not certain it's worth the dev time.