Playtonic Games talks making Yooka-Laylee more open, co-op, & local multiplayer

From the conversation Examiner recently had with Playtonic Games talked about how the game will be more open as well as their desire to implement local multiplayer.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
FSThree1099d ago (Edited 1099d ago )

Those are some huge quotes ...;)

From one Examiner to another.

-Foxtrot1099d ago

Really wished they just used that extra money on making the single player even bigger and full with more content then wasting it on multiplayer and the like.

That's something they should of kept for the sequel as they focused on establishing the franchise in the first game

RuleNumber51099d ago

Totally agree with you. I'm kind of tired of multiplayer invading games that are single-player experiences. It's nice to be able to say you have both if you're a developer, but some games should just be single-player only and Yooka Laylee is one of them. If they refrained from doing multiplayer, maybe they could've had eight distinct worlds instead of five. Oh well, still stoked for this game, multiplayer or not.

-Foxtrot1099d ago

It bugs me with this because it's a kickstarter and co-op/multiplayer wasn't in their original stretch goals.

How about instead of co-op/multiplayer they just work on what they were going to do as DLC and then bring online stuff in the sequel.

They are in a very good position because they don't have publishers breathing down their neck telling them to add online stuff....yet here they are putting up stretch goals for it when they could just add...oh I don't know maybe 1-2 new worlds to make the game a little longer.

Conker didn't have multiplayer on the N64 and neither did both Banjo games

RuleNumber51099d ago

@Foxtrot yep. It's unfortunately the gaming world we live in now. I think this is a bit of a product of a developer's fear of not having a multiplayer mode, which they probably think would result in lesser interest in the game. That could be part of their fear, and the aura surrounding what a game should be these days is responsible for that.

I'm glad there are still games like Witcher 3 and Shadow of Mordor that don't compromise the single-player experience just because they want to add in some meaningless multiplayer.

Having said that, I am interested to at least see what multiplayer looks like in Yooka. I'll give it a chance before I judge, everyone should.

Germany71099d ago

Well said, we were looking for a single-player experience, just like the good old 3D platformer. First the dlc stretch goal and now this news, kinda worried, to be honest.

-Foxtrot1099d ago (Edited 1099d ago )

The DLC thing bothers me aswell, it's mostly peoples reactions to it. Read the page or Facebook when they announced it. People getting excited for DLC when the game isn't even finished

They just assume because it's NOT the usual suspects like EA, Activision or Capcom that they will not (100%) cut content at all...I'm sorry but they will. We won't know it but they wouldn't of announced it now if they didn't plan to.

The reason for this is because it allows them to have a head start with their first DLC pack to get it out quicker. This makes them look like they are "supprting the game" and are "quick with content".

What about if they had a power up or special move we could have used in the main game and they decided to keep it for the DLC. Hell what about if it's a brand new world...something which could have been in the game if they SPENT THAT MONEY/TIME ON THE SINGLE PLAYER...not any online stuff.

Plus people are saying it's "free" when it's only free IF you've backed the project. I mean I've backed it but it comes off a little shady don't you think

"Oh hey guys, want FREE DLC, when fund our project"

"...but...then it's not really free though is it"

"But the DLC is free still"


Not fair on those who didn't back it.

This was one of those games where they didn't have a big greedy publisher telling them what to add online or to make DLC and yet here they are. Come on.

If EA (or any others) announced DLC when they haven't even gotten half way through their game then there would be bloody hell on

Imagine if EA game out now and announced DLC for Mirrors Edge 2 or Mass Effect 4 when we haven't even heard much on them

eworthington01099d ago

Conker actually had pretty sweet multiplayer on n64.

-Foxtrot1099d ago

My mistake, I always assumed it was just Live and Reloaded.

Summons751099d ago

You do realize that they probably had concepts of multiplayer ideas but it wasn't feasible with the budget they had. The extra money helps everything they originally wanted to be in the game AND MORE. For 25 bucks we are getting a ton of content so I won't complain. Banjo Tooie had multiplayer and that was fantastic on top of the single player experience being great. These guys know what they are doing, they aren't shoehorning anything in.

Sora_19941099d ago

I can't for the life of me understand why someone would complain about split screen multiplayer in this day and age. Look how beautiful this game looks why not want to play it with friends. Shoot I know ima enjoy this with my son and wife.

-Foxtrot1099d ago

I'm not saying they didn't have concepts, I just wanted them to focus on the single player and getting the game off the ground as an estsblished franchise before trying to add other stuff to it. You add things over time, you don't just go straiught in and add a shit load of stuffs, especially when there's DLC in the works where ideas that COULD have been done without multiplayer will now be kept for the DLC.

"Banjo Tooie had multiplayer and that was fantastic"

Proves my point....SEQUEL, it was the second game. Did the first game have it....nope.


Maybe because some of us like a bigger, single player.

This game could of been a lot bigger, more polished, more whatever without the money being wasted on doing multiplayer.

It just comes across like they got more money then they were expecting and quickly thought of multiplayer to spend the money on instead of adding more to the main campaign.

deathtok1098d ago


You say all that with the assumption that single player is suffering because of multiplayer.

That's an unfounded criticism at this point, no?

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1098d ago
Sora_19941099d ago

Sigh gamers are so whiney now man it's so sickening "ugh y'all other games didn't have multiplayer this shouldn't either" what?! Who complains about split screen multiplayer??

deathtok1099d ago

Agreed. Nothing wrong with local multiplayer! In fact, they're a staple of classic Rare games...

PhoenixUp1099d ago

Ratchet and Clank: Up Your Arsenal and Deadlocked had the best online multiplayer in a 3D platformer

Show all comments (18)