450 réponses à ce sujet

[hex23]

Quintega wrote...

Wow your facts are way off first this game isn't a TPS its an RPG ROLE PLAYING GAME its a futuristic rpg. and you don't know why RPGs like Morrowind Oblivion, Fallout, Secret of mana, Illusion of Gaia, Tales of Symphonia, Soul Blazer, Terranigma, and so on and the thousands there are legends. Its because they are single player ROLE PLAYING VIDEO GAMES are ment for the player to control the story based on actions. A TPS Third person shooter, Would focus on a story that has been lane before you no variation based on play minus the things that don't effect the story.

It does The better the game the more time money and man power it takes. IF a full blown MP was added it would severely demising the game play and for you information Bualders gate is mprpg

but let look at the amount of disks first shall we


Waisted resources would not function on a system too much IMO

next a game screen you would never see in an epic RPG *An epic is the correct usage as it is a noun*



wow nice game screen *sarcasm*


I assume this is actual footage of a quest?



pkmn

Learn your place if you gonna be a gamer and keep up with the veterans who have been playing long before you were born back when we were outcasts.

DO you research and learn the definition of time and money

Also if its an insult why did you play the second one if the first one pissed you off. Second why did you play the first on. ON THE BOX IT SAYS ONE PLAYER

Those images I posted are an example of a different game engine being used to support multiplayer second the game is a MPrpg  multiplayer rpg. NOt an mmo or standard rpg. I don't doubt bualders gate is good but your getting your facts mixed up

"Mass Effect" is a TPS with RPG elements. The second game should've made this crystal clear if the first game didn't.

And to definitely say what a TPS should focus on as opposed to an RPG is silly. That's like saying FPS are all the same. They aren't. There is a huge difference between "Half Life 2" and "Halo". The same goes for a straight up TPS like "Gears Of War", and a TPS with RPG elements like "ME". Also most of those RPGs you named aren't legendary.....they're decent/good games from 20+ years ago that rarely get mentioned nowadays. I'm 33 and you're placing a lot of importance on games that at the time didn't exactly set the world on fire.

[They call me a SpaceCowboy]

I don't see how it could be converted to multiplayer and still folow the same story. Its not like they are going to let 6 shepards log on and group up. It would be silly. It has to be a separate game not revolving around Shepard.

[Quintega]

Gah I wasn't doing that I Also think Halo is an abomination This is not the forum or the place to argue this if what your replying with is what you think you read you completely misinterpreted what I said. And your accusation would mean any futuristic game that didn't play like KOTOR is a tps rpg your wrong it is an RPG with tps elements. Just because it has third person and shooting and isn't turn based does not make it a tps now please this is not what this forum is about. and If you think Im wrong about this being not classified as a tps then what would you call every fantasy medieval game a third person slasher? now please this is a forum about ME being not being co op . Also tps is a style RPG is a story style. Now please get on topic before this is closed

[Serpenttt92]

Multiplayer on a separate disc.

[HCS01]

charmingcharlie wrote...

If ME3 even so much as carries a mere whiff of MP then I will call it a day with Mass Effect even if that means I never get to finish the story.

I don't mind if they want to do a SEPARATE game set in the Mass Effect universe with MP but god no leave the Mass Effect series MP free please. I bought ME and ME 2 because they were excellent single player experiences and I do not want the third one to be anything but an excellent single player experience.

Still all I can do is vote with my wallet and I will certainly do that if you add MP into Mass Effect 3

+1...

I wanted an immersive single player RPG.  I like action, but an MMO (or shooter) is a different game all together.  I will not be purchasing ME 3 if it is multiplayer.  At least it was good while it lasted

[superimposed]

ME 3 will be single-player, anyone who believes otherwise is absurd.



It may have an additional multiplayer component, or it may not

[Kileyan]

I don't really care if ME3 had mplay elements. I do hope it is not a job for the ME3 game though. I'd like to think it means they are expanding the franchise into other things. I'd personally like a RTS or or space exploration sim. I would not get very excited about a multiplayer shooter, but I'm all for this fun franchise in expanding sideways, not just toward the end.

[mass_zotz]

Oblarg wrote...

I don't think I could stomach another promising-single-player-RPG-franchise-gone-MMO after TOR.  I'm still pissed at BioWare for ****ting all over the cliffhanger ending of KotOR2 so that they could make a cashcow.

nvm someone ready said it.

Modifié par mass_zotz, 31 mai 2010 - 06:05 .

[Wolverfrog]

Pocketgb wrote...

cyberwaste13 wrote...

So you're saying fans of Gears of War, Halo or Half-life don't care about story, or lack the attention span to sit through anything not related to shooting or blowing something up for more than 30 seconds?

Honestly and IMO? I'd say that people who actually appreciated GoW and Halo's ballstastic storylines have terrible taste. Of course that's just me.

www.bungie.net/Forums/posts.aspx

Halo has a ballistic storyline? It's as deep, or perhaps deeper than Mass Effect's Universe.

[CrazyShuba]

Knock GoW all you want, there's almost no story, and the developers know that.

Why do you think at E3 and stuff, when they were showing off GoW2, they just kept going on about how you can curb-stomp people?



Halo, however, has a very deep story, so don't think that people who play Halo are dumb. You try understanding all the different things going on in that one universe.



As for Mass Effect being multiplayer, it'll probably be it's own separate thing. Like, in Red Dead Redemption, you're not playing as John Marston in the multiplayer, you're playing as a random character model that you can buy.

Probably gonna be similar, being able to create a new character JUST for the multiplayer.

It's impossible to try and make everyone's Shepard be in the same universe.

Bioware isn't dumb. Stop insulting their intelligence.

[Thatguy38]

Mass Effect 3 multiplayer? I only have one thing to say : DIBS ON THE REAPERS!

Modifié par Thatguy38, 31 mai 2010 - 01:49 .

[Stompi]

DLC would be the best way to add multiplayer content.

This way, Bioware could focus on the best possible singleplayer experience, as Mass Effect is a singleplayer series. And those who really can't live without a multiplayer in every single game are certainly willing to pay extra. If you don't want to pay additional money, the feature can't be that important.

Problem solved.

[Dinkamus_Littlelog]

Stompi wrote...

DLC would be the best way to add multiplayer content.
This way, Bioware could focus on the best possible singleplayer experience, as Mass Effect is a singleplayer series. And those who really can't live without a multiplayer in every single game are certainly willing to pay extra. If you don't want to pay additional money, the feature can't be that important.
Problem solved.

Agreed. They are possibly willing to charge someone like me money for addiontional story driven content in a possible expansion pack thats done after the game itself. Why cant they simply have multiplayer as an added DLC afterthought and charge people extra?

The only downside with this is, if they released a multiplayer DLC for ME2, it would probably be in the same style as the Hammerhead vehicle, and be about trying to get a handle on something that can be used in ME3.

Id rather have it as either:

1. An optional DLC sold after ME3 when everything is done and dusted.

2. For a spin off game that can afford to give up the extra time, space and resources required without spoiling what was supposed to be a single player trilogy.

Modifié par Dinkamus_Littlelog, 31 mai 2010 - 03:18 .

[MonkeyChief117]

Well it seems that BW ignored my previous pleas - I started a thread begging them not to touch multiplayer:



http://social.biowar...3/index/2588132



Ah well...

[TheGreenLion]

Fable 2 can be somewhat used as a basic example of how MP action in the ME universe would turn out I think, being that only one can be Shepard at any given moment the other players would have to be henchmen, there to bolster your experience but not to remove your spotlight. Unless they go the Halo route, which I think they should not do (we don't need to evolve it into the MP FPS arenas and all shoot no RPG style, it's alright but it gets boring FAST).



An MMO would pose more intricate problems than just multiplayer co-op or what have you. The MMO can be great, good story and all that but it truly is the players that can change the entire mood, or even alter how you yourself play the game. Leaking info about stuff you've not seen yet or players finding any excuse to argue about anything, any number of ways to degrade your experience as you like it to look and feel. It'd be nice if all gamers would be polite, understanding and possibly even intelligent but that may be asking for too much.

[kalle90]

Probably something like Fable2. I wouldn't mind that as the AI teammates are still awful. I hope they fix that AI first

[ztonkin]

Why is MP in games SO IMPORTANT? It seems like almost every game is tacking a MP mode on now. Though I highly doubt that the story will suffer. If BioWare is known for anything it's their awesome stories. And if BioWare is adding MP to ME3, then you can bet your space hamster that it's EA's suggestion.

[MrBlazay]

It would be fun if it was co op.. but there is a alot of talking so that might be a problem for players who aren't true fans

[legend of kane]

I hope someone at Bioware addresses this soon. I am seeing threads on almost every other

forum about this very subject, and most seem to say the same thing, if multiplayer goes in,

something else will suffer for it. However, most do support a new ME game with multiplayer seperate

from the trilogy, just not in ME 3.

[Computer_God91]

I do not want multiplayer, as it is a fantasic way to waste away a outstanding singleplayer game to earn a dollar or two. Don't kill you own game like Halo and GoW did (their storyline is all jacked up, half of it doesn't make sense)

[xCirdanx]

hex23 wrote...
"Mass Effect" is a TPS with RPG elements. The second game should've made this crystal clear if the first game didn't.

And to definitely say what a TPS should focus on as opposed to an RPG is silly. That's like saying FPS are all the same. They aren't. There is a huge difference between "Half Life 2" and "Halo". The same goes for a straight up TPS like "Gears Of War", and a TPS with RPG elements like "ME". Also most of those RPGs you named aren't legendary.....they're decent/good games from 20+ years ago that rarely get mentioned nowadays. I'm 33 and you're placing a lot of importance on games that at the time didn't exactly set the world on fire.

Agree. You are absolutly right. ME is indeed a TPS and the RPG elements aren´t even that great, especially in ME2. For me that was a bit disappointing, i hoped for something like Deus Ex 1. Still, i enjoy the ME series.

But to get something right, as much as i enjoy CRPG´s, they aren´t real RPG´s at all. I could rant on, but i will just post this link, it´s a long but good "essay" and easy to understand, and shows why these games aren´t RPG´s.
http://insomnia.ac/c...-playing_games/

To the topic, i think it´s a waste of money to develop MP for the game. The shooter market is so full and almost every game of this genre has a MP mode. A Co-op mode could work pretty good if done right.

However, nothing that people say here will change anything about this. They will include it, if they want to. Let´s hope it won´t affect the single player experience and that ME3 will be better when it comes to the RPG elements of the game.

[TheShogunOfHarlem]

 I pray that this isn't true. I pray even further that if it is Bioware quickly abandons the concept. MP has been killing SP experiences the way I see it. It seems that every single developer seems to care less an less about having a substantive SP experience. It seems like have a SP game that runs 5-8 hours is acceptable. Personally I can care less about MP. It has so much potential that is wasted on appealing to the lowest common denominator in gamers. (run and gunners) Let me stop myself before I get into rant mode. All COD MP games that I have played are incredibly overrated and to me ultimately led to the ludicrously short SP. (Splinter Cell: Conviction is another example)

To me the only game that balanced a strong SP/MP experience was GTA 4. (Maybe MGS 4) 

[TheShogunOfHarlem]

Computer_God91 wrote...

I do not want multiplayer, as it is a fantasic way to waste away a outstanding singleplayer game to earn a dollar or two. Don't kill you own game like Halo and GoW did (their storyline is all jacked up, half of it doesn't make sense)

I think an even better example would be the Call of Duty series. 

[CoreMagus]

Love the drama about this, do you guys lack free will? Will the game force you to play Co-op or Multiplayer and what is stopping you from just playing the singelplayer part? instead you go "HURR DURR DEM GAIS @ BIOWARE RUIN DE GAEM WIT COOP AND MP, I WILL NOT BUY THIS GAME DURR HURR."



Wtb a ME3 with Singelplayer, Co-op and a multiplayer part