110 réponses à ce sujet

[MegWithAMouth]

Valmy wrote...

Two thoughts:

1. The regular part of the game, the story single player mode would remain unchanged and undiminished.

2. It would be a great way to introduce my wife and other people to the Mass Effect universe.

Color me intrigued by the idea. It could be good for us. But I guess it depends on how difficult it would be to do. Naturally none of us want any focus taken away from our beloved RPG franchise.

QFT. Minus the bit about introducing my wife as I don't have one.

I can always count on you for rational and well-reasoned thoughts, Valmy.

[Luke Bioware]

marshalleck wrote...

I want 100% of ME3's budget going to concluding the story in dramatic and memorable fashion. Developing a multiplayer mode does not facilitate that, so I regard it as extraneous and wasteful.

This. I wouldn't mind a multiplayer, but I'll play MW2 or BC2 if I want that. BW games I play for different reasons.

[Kabraxal]

I'm up for this idea if and ONLY IF the story is not gimped to support.



But I would enjoy being able to play online with friends if it were there.

[marshalleck]

Valmy wrote...

Two thoughts:

1. The regular part of the game, the story single player mode would remain unchanged and undiminished.

2. It would be a great way to introduce my wife and other people to the Mass Effect universe.

Color me intrigued by the idea. It could be good for us. But I guess it depends on how difficult it would be to do. Naturally none of us want any focus taken away from our beloved RPG franchise.

It sounds great as a forum post until you collide head first with the practical reality of trying to do what's being suggested here.

Until now, Mass Effect as an IP has been developed as a thoroughly single-player experience. 100% of resources are dedicated to single-player campaigns.

The only way for point 1 to be true is for resources to exceed 100%. That means finding a third party willing to financially subsidize the project by recruiting more developers and providing the development infrastructure (offices, computers, etc. etc.)

[Amairmeh]

I think after the 3rd installment they should take a wack at an mmo, with all the different species, colonies, planets, possible threats, missions, being good or bad could be worth a shot atleast.

http://social.bioware.com/brc/1529357

[Luke Bioware]

It's just a strange idea and I don't think (read: hope) it would happen.

1: it absolutely would grab somewhat from the available funds for the game, do not want.
2: like I said, if I want to play MP there are other games for that.
3: it wouldn't attract the crowd it needs for a solid player base anyway I think. Why buy the MP of Mass Effect when there are games like MW2?
4: release the Incisor >:3.

Modifié par Luke Bioware, 08 avril 2010 - 06:02 .

[padaE]

SURE!

.

Actually, they need to realease a mode like that as a DLC for ME2.

[Delduwath Mordion]

Absolutely not!

[Bucky_McLachlan]

marshalleck wrote...

Valmy wrote...

Two thoughts:

1. The regular part of the game, the story single player mode would remain unchanged and undiminished.

2. It would be a great way to introduce my wife and other people to the Mass Effect universe.

Color me intrigued by the idea. It could be good for us. But I guess it depends on how difficult it would be to do. Naturally none of us want any focus taken away from our beloved RPG franchise.

It sounds great as a forum post until you collide head first with the practical reality of trying to do what's being suggested here.

Until now, Mass Effect as an IP has been developed as a thoroughly single-player experience. 100% of resources are dedicated to single-player campaigns.

The only way for point 1 to be true is for resources to exceed 100%. That means finding a third party willing to financially subsidize the project by recruiting more developers and providing the development infrastructure (offices, computers, etc. etc.)

So you're saying Bioware would have to spend more money and time to make this happen.
Sounds great. I am completely sold on the idea of Bioware spending more time and money on their games.

Few things this will likely accomplish.

• Better games
• Games that are more worth my money
• Games that are more enjoyable to play

Modifié par Bucky_McLachlan, 08 avril 2010 - 06:14 .

[marshalleck]

Bucky_McLachlan wrote...
Sounds great.

I'm sure it does to people whose minds are completely divorced from reality.

[Bucky_McLachlan]

What's this reality you speak of? The reality where Bioware doesn't now sh*t their games out as fast as they can and release them before they're even finished?

[Onyx Jaguar]

Anyone bring up Pinnacle Station in this thread?



It could work better with ME 2's system, but I don't think I would really play it. ME is better with forward momentum not in arena's.

[marshalleck]

Bucky_McLachlan wrote...

What's this reality you speak of? The reality where Bioware doesn't now sh*t their games out as fast as they can and release them before they're even finished?

The reality where development studios don't have infinite funds and manpower.

[Bucky_McLachlan]

marshalleck wrote...

Bucky_McLachlan wrote...

What's this reality you speak of? The reality where Bioware doesn't now sh*t their games out as fast as they can and release them before they're even finished?

The reality where development studios don't have infinite funds and manpower.

Right I'm not denying that reality. I just want Bioware to concentrate on making better games in general. This means not developing several games at the same time and stretching their resources thin. This means not trying to sell us half-baked ideas like planet scanning and loading screens with cool graphics in place of elevator rides, and in general dumbing everything down as how they're improving their game.

That is the only argument to be made about Bioware's resources, they're EA now they can pretty much afford anything within reason and there's nothing unreasonable about possibly getting a little multiplayer with ME3.

[Timmibal]

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 can think of a bunch. Most of them have already been mentioned though.



You spoke of those who are against this idea as people ...who know next to nothing about about the process of developing a loaf of bread, let alone a video game.



Firstly, how ad hominem of you.



Secondly, I'd LOVE to hear the RPG companies whom you have beta tested or developed for. What? You play shooters? Did you happen to catch the niggling difference between shooter classes and RPG classes? No? Didn't think you did.



Ever spent much time on an MMO? Get sick of hearing all the "Nerf Fighters!" "Nerf Mages!" arguments? Get sick of seeing every class rendered down to the same homogenous shade of beige to appease the PvP crowd? You stick Multiplayer in ME, that's what you'll get.



Mass Effect is not designed to facilitate multiplayer. Period. It is a single player game which focuses around a... get this... SINGLE PLAYER. Shep and co will ALWAYS be OP. There is NO way you could realistically balance it without completely demolishing the entire premise around which the game was based. Your desire to play the game with your friends is understandable, but I think you need to come to the realization that the game is a single player, squad based action RPG, and that's the way it's likely to stay until the conclusion of Shep's storyline.



Finally, going "STFU! L2P N00BZ" when presented with an argument you cannot accept/understand does not present you as a person of any kind of authority on matters of development and design.

[Bucky_McLachlan]

Timmibal wrote...
Ever spent much time on an MMO?

Dude I have a two time glad hunter. STFU.

Modifié par Bucky_McLachlan, 08 avril 2010 - 06:29 .

[marshalleck]

Bucky_McLachlan wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

Bucky_McLachlan wrote...

What's this reality you speak of? The reality where Bioware doesn't now sh*t their games out as fast as they can and release them before they're even finished?

The reality where development studios don't have infinite funds and manpower.

Right I'm not denying that reality. I just want Bioware to concentrate on making better games in general. This means not developing several games at the same time and stretching their resources thin. This means not trying to sell us half-baked ideas like planet scanning and loading screens with cool graphics in place of elevator rides, and in general dumbing everything down as how they're improving their game.

That is the only argument to be made about Bioware's resources, they're EA now they can pretty much afford anything within reason and there's nothing unreasonable about possibly getting a little multiplayer with ME3.

So are you retracting the statements made here, in particular about resource arguments?

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.

[Timmibal]

Dude I have a two time glad hunter. STFU.

Out of the entire post... This is what you pick out.



Yeah, we're done here. Show's over, nothing more to see.

[ROD525]

Give me Pinnacle Station Mass Effect 2 style and Im buying it like yesterday. If the story doesn't suffer Im all for a multiplayer option or a "horde mode". I really dont understand all the ****ing and moaning, if you dont want multiplayer then just dont select the option. I have all 3 Halo's and never played online...not once, and it didn't detract from the story,but I would kill for a cool ME multiplayer option that I could play with my son.

[Bucky_McLachlan]

marshalleck wrote...

So are you retracting the statements made here, in particular about resource arguments?

My argument has not changed. Not my fault you can't see the forest for the trees m8.

Modifié par Bucky_McLachlan, 08 avril 2010 - 06:48 .

[Bucky_McLachlan]

Timmibal wrote...

Dude I have a two time glad hunter. STFU.

Out of the entire post... This is what you pick out.

Yeah, we're done here. Show's over, nothing more to see.

Do you know anything about Hunters in WoW? Do you realize that right now they are considered the weakest pure dps class in the game?

Hell they were always weak in arenas just going by rankings, so ya actually getting glad with one means something.

In short, I have a very strong point of view about balancing pvp in MMO's: a good amount of people crying for nerfs just suck. Not that balance hasn't been a major problem in WoW.

But Mass Effect is not an rpg. It is a squad-based tactical shooter with rpg elements. Balancing a game like this for pvp would not be nearly as problematic. And FYI many problems with balance in wow could be solved if they simply had different abilities and forced/limited gear etc for pvp.

Not as much of a problem for a game like Mass Effect where everyone has relatively the same weapons and gear.

[Timmibal]

My argument has not changed. Not my fault you can't see the forest for the trees m8.

There was an argument? All I saw was a bunch of "HERP DERP WANTZ MP STFU NOOBZ".

There are three primary points which you have yet to come to take a firm position on.

Firstly Resources - You belittle the abilities of your naysayers at thinking like a dev. I pass the torch back to you. Do a theoretical business model. Give us a ballpark figure of how much in terms of both time and money would be spent in purely designing and implementing multiplayer. Now present an argument why that should be taken away from the other X% of the game.

Secondly, Balance Issues - Assuming that abilities stay relatively similar and ME1 style weapons specialities are not re-introduced, how long is it before the entire game turns into AP snipers with heavy biotics? ME classes are NOT balanced for multiplayer, and I have yet to see a convincing argument stating that they could, or should be.

Thirdly, Developmental and Stylization modifications - The game is currently level based. To use your example from the OP, in gears, all players enter the game with the same power. Ability is based on skill alone. How would you tier a levelled system to compensate for that?

This also ties into the original resource point. Taking out a chunk of resources from initial development for an endless pinnacle station option? (Since that's the only concrete example where multiplayer could even possibly fit) Booooorrrriiiinnnngggg. That's the sort of thing any tester worth his/her salt would give an instant thumbs down to.

Keep digging.

Mass Effect is not an rpg.

Edit: Fail. Bioware themselves call ME2 an action RPG, ME1 could not get any more RPG if it tried.

Modifié par Timmibal, 08 avril 2010 - 06:58 .

[marshalleck]

Bucky_McLachlan wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

So are you retracting the statements made here, in particular about resource arguments?

My argument has not changed. Not my fault you can't see the forest for the trees m8.

Your position has changed or shifted several times throughout this thread. If I am failing to adequately perceive your argument, it's because you're consistently failing to post anything cogent.

[thompsonaf]

Alanosborn1991 wrote...

I mean really because this is coming from a guy who cant get enough of the Mass Effect universe and has beaten ME1 like 5 times and ME2 10 times.

THE POSSIBLITYS ARE ENDLESS! PLEASE NOTICE BIOWARE WE WANT MULTIPLAYER!
So who supports this idea?