110 réponses à ce sujet

[marshalleck]

Bucky_McLachlan wrote...

God damn some of you people are stupid.

No reason why Bioware couldn't do something like this. They already got Pinnacle Station, that would've been a perfect opportunity for something like this.

If you don't like it, simply don't play the multiplayer.

The resources argument is nothing more than bs PR. Of course most of you people actually believe the PR, like that the DLC we're getting for ME2 isn't stuff that was cut out of final game. Lolz.

It's not stupid at all.

"Resources" are not infinite. Whether this comes down to salaries, time, or both, I have no interest in Mass Effect multiplayer. Zero. If it existed, I would never touch it. I am wholly focused on the story. Therefore any resources used in the creation of a multiplayer mode would directly detract from my experience in the single player campaign, since those resources could have been used to add to the story and further flesh out details of the story and level designs.

Liking Gears and Halo and the hundreds of derivative clones is fine. Go play them. Mass Effect can stay Mass Effect.

Modifié par marshalleck, 08 avril 2010 - 04:27 .

[Bigdoser]

No

[GodWood]

@ Bucky_McLachlan

The reason is simple, MP requires Bioware to spend resources (time and money) on something that is unimportant to the more important aspects of the game (Character development, plot, character interatcion/dialogue etc).

[GodWood]

Stupid double posting...

Modifié par GodWood, 08 avril 2010 - 04:31 .

[Bucky_McLachlan]

^x3Yes it is stupid, I mean are you really going to complain if companies stop being lazy and focus on making better games with more content that more people want instead of meeting their bottom line?

Other gaming companies don't have a problem with this, why is Bioware magically incapable of this?

Oh wait they're not.

So again I'm going to ask:

Bucky_McLachlan wrote...
Exactly why would you not be satisfied enough to simply not play the optional multiplayer?

Modifié par Bucky_McLachlan, 08 avril 2010 - 04:33 .

[themastakillah]

No.

[spacehamsterZH]

Bucky_McLachlan wrote...

So again I'm going to ask:

Bucky_McLachlan wrote...
Exactly why would you not be satisfied enough to simply not play the optional multiplayer?

The Mass Effect combat system is built around pausing and selecting options. You can't pause multiplayer games. Any game that has multiplayer usually builds its combat system around that, so if ME3 had multiplayer, we'd lose the power wheel. We don't want to lose the power wheel. Because MASS EFFECT ISN'T A F*CKING SHOOTER NO MATTER HOW MANY TIMES IDIOTS ON THE INTERNET SAY IT IS.

Clear enough? No? Thought so. Now hurry on back to the Call of Duty board or wherever you came from, quickly now, scram.

[sonsonthebia07]

Bucky_McLachlan wrote...

sonsonthebia07 wrote...

Sorry dude, I would prefer it if Mass Effect stays as far away from multi-player as possible.

No.

Exactly why would you not be satisfied enough to simply not play the optional multiplayer?

Because it often will deter from the final product of the game. If it was done as a side project or something like that I would not mind it

[Bucky_McLachlan]

spacehamsterZH wrote...

The Mass Effect combat system is better suited for the pc and the game has a much more inferior interface on the Xbox.

Fixed.

[Hackslice]

I am all for adding more to the next title but the main game story needs to come first. I enjoy the story too much to let multilayer distract the focus of the game. A co-op feature would work better into the story and would prefer to see something like that in ME3.

http://social.bioware.com/brc/1170982

[Puppet Doctor]

No! Leave the game as a single player the end.

[spacehamsterZH]

Bucky_McLachlan wrote...

spacehamsterZH wrote...

The Mass Effect combat system is better suited for the pc and the game has a much more inferior interface on the Xbox.

Fixed.

Wow, you're an even bigger idiot than I thought. Okay, I think I'm done with this thread. K THX BAI.

[Bucky_McLachlan]

sonsonthebia07 wrote...

Bucky_McLachlan wrote...

sonsonthebia07 wrote...

Sorry dude, I would prefer it if Mass Effect stays as far away from multi-player as possible.

No.

Exactly why would you not be satisfied enough to simply not play the optional multiplayer?

Because it often will deter from the final product of the game. If it was done as a side project or something like that I would not mind it

I'm trying to wrap my head around this idea that creating some multiplayer functionality could greatly effect the main campaign ina  detrimental way....can you cite some examples of games (shooters in particular) that had a sub-par single-player campaign simply because the developers choose to include multiplayer?

I'm sure it would be something that was separate from the main game. In fact I'm pretty sure it would have to be. I would expect it to be some kind of downloadable content. It might be a good opportunity to utilize Pinnacle station again and doing so would save a lot of resources and time, as they wouldn't have to develop all of the content from the ground up.

Hell creating new maps shouldn't be that difficult, and fans can already do that their selves using the Unreal Map Editor.

[Texaboose]

spacehamsterZH wrote...

Bucky_McLachlan wrote...

So again I'm going to ask:

Bucky_McLachlan wrote...
Exactly why would you not be satisfied enough to simply not play the optional multiplayer?

The Mass Effect combat system is built around pausing and selecting options. You can't pause multiplayer games. Any game that has multiplayer usually builds its combat system around that, so if ME3 had multiplayer, we'd lose the power wheel. We don't want to lose the power wheel. Because MASS EFFECT ISN'T A F*CKING SHOOTER NO MATTER HOW MANY TIMES IDIOTS ON THE INTERNET SAY IT IS.

Clear enough? No? Thought so. Now hurry on back to the Call of Duty board or wherever you came from, quickly now, scram.

^
This

[Kaiser Shepard]

I certainly wouldn't mind if DICE would develop the multiplayer component of Mass 3 while BioWare is allowed to fully focus on the singleplayer, akin to what's being done with the new Medal of Honor. Seems like one of the better ways to use EA's resources as well.

Modifié par Kaiser Shepard, 08 avril 2010 - 04:58 .

[Bucky_McLachlan]

spacehamsterZH wrote...

Bucky_McLachlan wrote...

spacehamsterZH wrote...

The Mass Effect combat system is better suited for the pc and the game has a much more inferior interface on the Xbox.

Fixed.

Wow, you're an even bigger idiot than I thought. Okay, I think I'm done with this thread. K THX BAI.

I'm a total idiot because I realize you don't need "tactical pausing" on the pc version because you can keybind everything? Ya okay bro.

You could've just said "I suck at video games and can't play Mass Effect if I can't pause in the middle of the action."

[marshalleck]

Bucky_McLachlan wrote...

^x3Yes it is stupid, I mean are you really going to complain if companies stop being lazy and focus on making better games with more content that more people want instead of meeting their bottom line?

Other gaming companies don't have a problem with this, why is Bioware magically incapable of this?

Oh wait they're not.

So again I'm going to ask:

Bucky_McLachlan wrote...
Exactly why would you not be satisfied enough to simply not play the optional multiplayer?

The answer to your question is this: go play MW2's single-player campaign. Oh that's right, it barely has one. "Optional multiplayer" has a way of becoming not entirely optional. There are plenty of multiplayer shooter games to choose from which are entirely dedicated to the multiplayer part, and they'll do it far better than Bioware will. I prefer specialization in my gaming over homogenization. I'd rather Mass Effect excel at the single player experience than introduce a bland and completely irrelevent (and it would be if as you said it's entirely optional) multiplayer mode. Let the multiplayer shooters be multiplayer shooters and perfect that format.

[Marta Rio]

sonsonthebia07 wrote...

Bucky_McLachlan wrote...
Exactly why would you not be satisfied enough to simply not play the optional multiplayer?

Because it often will deter from the final product of the game. If it was done as a side project or something like that I would not mind it

What he said.  If they finished development on ME3, i.e., had already spent all the time and money and resources they were ever going to spend on ME3, then sure, adding a DLC or something that allowed multiplayer would be fine.  You're saying we're idiots for buying into the resource "PR", but some amount of money still has to be spent on developing a (not terrible) multiplayer campaign, and you have to assign people to the project.  I think most of us would rather that any money was just spent on the single-player aspects of ME3.
I suppose if EA said something like: "Here's a bunch of extra money Bioware, in addition to what you're already getting for ME3, so you can hire additional people and develop a multiplayer campaign, which would be totally separate from what you already plan to do" then I guess I'd be ok with it.  (But I still probably wouldn't play it, just out of a personal dislike for multiplayer...)

[Ray Joel Oh]

Voted one star, frowning, moving on.

[Bucky_McLachlan]

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

I certainly wouldn't mind if DICE would develop the multiplayer component of Mass 3 while BioWare is allowed to fully focus on the singleplayer, akin to what's being done with the Medal of Honor. Seems like one of the better ways to use EA's resources as well.

I totally agree with this. I actually don't trust Bioware to create a good multiplayer experience anyways since they can't even balance combat in their single-player games.

[LOLandStuff]

What is it with some people obsessing over MP?

[megatron999]

well with respect to everyone here most games in the future will require users to be continuosly connected to the internet so will likely have some form of MP on them anyway.



Due to certain "people" who illegally fileshare games with the express purpose of pissing companies off.

[Bucky_McLachlan]

marshalleck wrote...
The answer to your question is this: go play MW2's single-player campaign. Oh that's right, it barely has one. "Optional multiplayer" has a way of becoming not entirely optional. There are plenty of multiplayer shooter games to choose from which are entirely dedicated to the multiplayer part, and they'll do it far better than Bioware will. I prefer specialization in my gaming over homogenization. I'd rather Mass Effect excel at the single player experience than introduce a bland and completely irrelevent (and it would be if as you said it's entirely optional) multiplayer mode. Let the multiplayer shooters be multiplayer shooters and perfect that format.

Who said that I wanted bland homogenized multi-player and a ****ty single-player campaign?

Bringing up MW2 is a bad argument as far as I'm concerned because I completely hate COD and everything else developed by Activision.

I'm for Bioware creating better games in general, because as far as gameplay goes...they're still really lacking. They need some work in this area. We'll have to wait until SWTOR comes out to see how well they can handle pvp. But in general I think that focusing a bit more on pvp will help them making more balanced games.

Modifié par Bucky_McLachlan, 08 avril 2010 - 05:05 .