Do We Know How The Division's Multiplayer Actually Works?

[Something Amyss]

So I've got friends who are interested in The Division particularly because of co-op, which means they're trying to rope me in. Thing is, the co-op seems inconsistently explained. What initially drew them in, and what they pitched to me, was that this was a persistent co-op experience. Then I started seeing data on "zones" where you multiplayer, and not even necessarily co-op. Thing is, looking at their site, they still sort of make it sound like a co-operative game, even as it looks like story mode isn't so much MP in any sense.

I mean, if it's a co-op experience, I can probably justify the cash for it. If it's a single-player Ubisoft game with MP elements, I'm pretty sure I can't.

Anyone know?

Is this game being marketed inconsistently, or are we just reading too much into it? Like, anyone else been confused? Anybody even care? This game wasn't really on my radar until my friends took interest. Just curious on that front. Plus, you know, added discussion value, of course.

 

[EternallyBored]

Kind of works like destiny from what I've seen, you can see other groups of players wandering around in certain areas whether they are in your group or not, each zone likely has a cap for how many players persist in it at once.

Story missions are single player or co-op, up to 3 people I think? There's a match making service in game I remember seeing, where the player was standing outside the building reading a mission description and there was a button to start matchmaking for that mission.

There is also the dark zone that works kind of like an MMO PvP zone, there are elite enemy NPCs and anyone can attack anyone. The gimmick behind the dark zones is that it has high level enemies and loot, but the loot needs to be extracted by helicopter which alerts everyone in the area when you summon it basically attracting anyone that wants to steal your loot, or giving teammates a chance to betray you and take the loot for themselves.

 

[Tohuvabohu]

I mean, if it's a co-op experience, I can probably justify the cash for it. If it's a single-player Ubisoft game with MP elements, I'm pretty sure I can't.

A majority of The Division heavily revolves around cooperative play. In the sense that playing alone is feasible, but you're probably going to have a bad time. In that sense, it's definitely not a single-player game with MP elements (Also worth noting that even though the game has the unholy Ubisoft stamp all over it, it's not being developed by them. But by Massive.)

It's closer to an MMO, really. The game takes place in a persistent online setting (thus being always online.), and you and your friends can team up to take care of a myriad of activities from story missions to side quests to beef up your "Base of Operations", which is how you progress your character. Maximum group size right now is 4 players.

The "zones" you speak of, might be referring to the Dark Zone. Right now, there's a single Dark Zone in the game that spans multiple districts in the middle of the playable map. The Dark Zone is basically a PvPvE enabled zone that's contaminated, and requires varying levels of gas-masks to enter and survive in at all. There's going to be high ranking enemies, high quality loot, and players can attack each other. Beyond hub-zones, this is the only place you'll see other players who are NOT in your group. Anyone who attacks another innocent player is marked as a "Rogue agent", and is flagged as hostile to the rest of the zone.

I've been following The Division for awhile, so I can give you some more details if you'd like. If you and your friends would like to try the game for yourselves, there's a closed beta test coming up - January 29th - you can get into if you preorder the game. If you don't want to commit to a preorder, you could always just preorder through Amazon, and cancel - So you won't actually get charged.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

It's an interesting idea for a game, but massively multiplayer experiences aren't in a particularly healthy spot right now. Be curious to see how it does.

 

[EternallyBored]

It's an interesting idea for a game, but massively multiplayer experiences aren't in a particularly healthy spot right now. Be curious to see how it does.

I think this games biggest hurdle is going to be its endgame. What do players do after they inevitably hit the level cap, also how long will just fighting variations on normal human enemies stay interesting. Unlike most MMO's, the enemies in the divisions are just guys with guns, there's some sort of future tech with hand held drones and mini turrets, but the only enemy type is just differently dressed guys with guns, fine for a single story, but I don't know how they are going to make that compelling through any kind of Destiny style expansions.

Right now, the only endgame I've heard of is that they repopulate the zones with max level enemies, I'm unsure if there's even any sort of prestige or post leveling system to try and keep people on that MMO style loot treadmill.

 

[Fappy]

It's an interesting idea for a game, but massively multiplayer experiences aren't in a particularly healthy spot right now. Be curious to see how it does.

I think this games biggest hurdle is going to be its endgame. What do players do after they inevitably hit the level cap, also how long will just fighting variations on normal human enemies stay interesting. Unlike most MMO's, the enemies in the divisions are just guys with guns, there's some sort of future tech with hand held drones and mini turrets, but the only enemy type is just differently dressed guys with guns, fine for a single story, but I don't know how they are going to make that compelling through any kind of Destiny style expansions.

Right now, the only endgame I've heard of is that they repopulate the zones with max level enemies, I'm unsure if there's even any sort of prestige of post leveling system to try and keep people on that MMO style loot treadmill.

Yeah, I have the same concerns. I am still trying to hammer down how ME3's multiplayer had such a well done (and seemingly 'fair') treadmill compared to, say, Destiny. Despite the fact that there was only one gametype, the combination of multiple playable characters (that could all be leveled/built), enemy variety, difficulty variety, achievements and maps, coupled with the slow content trickle, made for a fairly strong multiplayer experience. It held my interest for far longer than I would have expected.

I have been playing Destiny for a month and I am already basically out of content. I already beat the endgame raid on the hardest difficulty and all that's left to do is grind for exotics I don't have so that I can... grind for exotics I don't have? Bleh. At least Crucible is fun I guess.

I have a feeling this game will be very much the same.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Yeah, I have the same concerns. I am still trying to hammer down how ME3's multiplayer had such a well done (and seemingly 'fair') treadmill compared to, say, Destiny. Despite the fact that there was only one gametype, the combination of multiple playable characters (that could all be leveled/built), enemy variety, difficulty variety, achievements and maps, coupled with the slow content trickle, made for a fairly strong multiplayer experience. It held my interest for far longer than I would have expected.

I have been playing Destiny for a month and I am already basically out of content. I already beat the endgame raid on the hardest difficulty and all that's left to do is grind for exotics I don't have so that I can... grind for exotics I don't have? Bleh. At least Crucible is fun I guess.

I have a feeling this game will be very much the same.

I don't think loot/level treadmills have any realistic hope of sticking in today's market. Blizzard refines concepts, they don't pioneer them. WoW was the fat lady singing the loot level treadmill off the stage. In 2004.

Games like DOTA or LOL or TF2 or Hearthstone have staying power because the PvP element keeps things dynamic, but The Division doesn't have that e-sports shine on it. It seems like the kind of multiplayer that can slightly extend the lifespan of a single player product, but hardly has anyone playing it six months after release.

 

[Fappy]

Yeah, I have the same concerns. I am still trying to hammer down how ME3's multiplayer had such a well done (and seemingly 'fair') treadmill compared to, say, Destiny. Despite the fact that there was only one gametype, the combination of multiple playable characters (that could all be leveled/built), enemy variety, difficulty variety, achievements and maps, coupled with the slow content trickle, made for a fairly strong multiplayer experience. It held my interest for far longer than I would have expected.

I have been playing Destiny for a month and I am already basically out of content. I already beat the endgame raid on the hardest difficulty and all that's left to do is grind for exotics I don't have so that I can... grind for exotics I don't have? Bleh. At least Crucible is fun I guess.

I have a feeling this game will be very much the same.

I don't think loot/level treadmills have any realistic hope of sticking in today's market. Blizzard refines concepts, they don't pioneer them. WoW was the fat lady singing the loot level treadmill off the stage. In 2004.

Games like DOTA or LOL or TF2 or Hearthstone have staying power because the PvP element keeps things dynamic, but The Division doesn't have that e-sports shine on it. It seems like the kind of multiplayer that can slightly extend the lifespan of a single player product, but hardly has anyone playing it six months after release.

I think you're right.

Loot for the sake of loot can only get you so far. If MMO's are going to succeed in the future they really need to capture the "Massively Multiplayer" aspect of their genre. Players should drive the content, which doesn't have to mean PvP necessarily.