Hello Bioware and fans,
I actually just wanted to start up a discussion on this, as I saw it as the only downfall and limitation of DA1.
Game today are amazing, and Bioware is right at the top of that amazing pyramid. The unfortunate thing I am seeing today (espeically in PC gaming) is the limitations with multiplayer and Co-op. While there are several games taking advantage of this, I have yet to see a 'big hitter' game go down this road.
No I am not a Developer of any kind, I am simply an IT guy so I really don't know your limitations to this. Thought I will say that sharing the experience of the Campaign of any game with the magnitude of Dragon Age, or ME, would be an experience I would never pass up. It would just add a completely new quality to the game that would make it so unreal I really couldn't explain.
Again, I don't know if this has been brought up, is already being developed or whatever. I just felt like It would be cool to share this thought with everyone and HOPEFULLY get a snowball effect going on this.
All in all, keep making the badass games. I'll keep playing.
Dragon Age Sequal | co-op and multiplayer
Débuté par
konzine
, juin 11 2010 05:45
Retour en haut
#2
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 05:50
bzombo
-
- Members
- 1 761 messages
i'm not very high on co-op for single player games. the baldur's gate games had it and i survived. i tried it a couple times and it was ok. with current technology i'm sure the process would be more streamlined, but it's not something i'm that interested in. could it be cool? yes. it could also ruin the single player aspect of the game, which is my fear. if they build the game to work around multiplayer i think the game itself could suffer in depth and story.
#3
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 05:56
konzine
-
- Members
- 2 messages
While I agree that if they developed the story line completely around the Co-op, I also have to say that keeping it the storyline the same but simply adding in the Multi-Campaign would be cool. Say it's the same as DA1, only difference being you control 2 characters as does the other player.
#4
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 06:50
Kalfear
-
- Members
- 1 475 messages
This is one of the few ways id actually not buy the 2nd game!
Co-op and multiplayer nonsence.
Sorry OP but DA resources should be spent expanding the story even more, not figuring out the mechanics of co op and multiplayer!
Plus if you go co op and multiplayer, suddenly all those important things said by NPCs (now being controlled) are lost!
This game is perfert the way it was group wise and much of its magic is lost when you sub anouther real player in for a needed NPC player!
Leave this ganme as a single player RPG!
Co-op and multiplayer nonsence.
Sorry OP but DA resources should be spent expanding the story even more, not figuring out the mechanics of co op and multiplayer!
Plus if you go co op and multiplayer, suddenly all those important things said by NPCs (now being controlled) are lost!
This game is perfert the way it was group wise and much of its magic is lost when you sub anouther real player in for a needed NPC player!
Leave this ganme as a single player RPG!
Modifié par Kalfear, 11 juin 2010 - 06:51 .
#5
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 06:55
Cancermeat
-
- Members
- 925 messages
Kalfear wrote...
This is one of the few ways id actually not buy the 2nd game!
Co-op and multiplayer nonsence.
Sorry OP but DA resources should be spent expanding the story even more, not figuring out the mechanics of co op and multiplayer!
Plus if you go co op and multiplayer, suddenly all those important things said by NPCs (now being controlled) are lost!
This game is perfert the way it was group wise and much of its magic is lost when you sub anouther real player in for a needed NPC player!
Leave this ganme as a single player RPG!
I agree with this statement.
#6
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 07:04
Dreadstruck
-
- Members
- 2 326 messages
Kalfear wrote...
This is one of the few ways id actually not buy the 2nd game!
Co-op and multiplayer nonsence.
Sorry OP but DA resources should be spent expanding the story even more, not figuring out the mechanics of co op and multiplayer!
Plus if you go co op and multiplayer, suddenly all those important things said by NPCs (now being controlled) are lost!
This game is perfert the way it was group wise and much of its magic is lost when you sub anouther real player in for a needed NPC player!
Leave this ganme as a single player RPG!
What this man said. It rings the bells of truthiness.
#7
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 07:17
soteria
-
- Members
- 3 307 messages
It rings the bell of opinion--none of it is "truth" in the sense of a fact--but whatever.
#8
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 07:17
MindYerBeak
-
- Members
- 483 messages
A Mod team were developing a Multiplayer version, but Bioware closed them down. They have no intentions of bringing out multiplayer. Pointless even discussing it.
#9
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 07:30
Riddick74
-
- Members
- 1 messages
Co-op isn't always a bad thing. I love DA but also I love playing games with my fiancee, such as sacred 2. It's nice to be able to enjoy things together. I'm sure with all the game creating talent out there, that there would be a way of offering a multi player and co-op option as well as single player only for fans of that. Why not please all parties and gain a bigger following? Just my thoughts so please guys don't go jumping down my throat. I hope all viewpoints are given careful consideration.
Maybe two versions of a game and see which sells more?
Maybe two versions of a game and see which sells more?
#10
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 07:41
Dreadstruck
-
- Members
- 2 326 messages
soteria wrote...
It rings the bell of opinion--none of it is "truth" in the sense of a fact--but whatever.
Hmpf, if it pleases you, then it rings MY bells of tru...whatever.
#11
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 07:45
AlanC9
-
- Members
- 35 666 messages
Wouldn't the dialogs suck big-time in co-op? Non-main chracater players would spend an awful lot of time doing nothing.
#12
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 08:33
Terminatort800
-
- Members
- 176 messages
Co-op and multiplayer? Hm...it could be cool to try co-op mode with someone.
Modifié par Terminatort800, 11 juin 2010 - 08:33 .
#13
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 08:34
Kuch
-
- Members
- 1 messages
I think co-op on a limited scale would be enjoyable, however multiplayer would flat out be dumb. An RPG like DA wouldn't be successful in that area; it's too focused on one aspect of the game, and that's obviously the RPG part.
#14
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 08:37
soteria
-
- Members
- 3 307 messages
When I've played the NWN 1 and 2 campaigns co-op, it's been with someone who had already done the dialogue before so generally we'd speed through it, slowing down for some of the "choicer" sections or if a decision needed to be made. From what I've seen, most people that enjoy co-op, including myself, enjoy it primarily for the gameplay cooperative/competitve aspects. Enjoying the story becomes more like watching a movie for the "back-seat" player. Maybe that sounds boring, but if you think about the number of JRPG fans worldwide, I think it makes some sense.Wouldn't the dialogs suck big-time in co-op? Non-main chracater players would spend an awful lot of time doing nothing.
Modifié par soteria, 11 juin 2010 - 08:39 .
#15
Guest_Puddi III_*
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 08:51
Guest_Puddi III_*
Guest_Puddi III_*
-
- Guests
I don't think it would necessarily mess up the story. It depends on what the story is. If it's one of those stories where there is a Chosen One protagonist, yeah, it'd be kind of weird for a second PC to be riding around on his/her coattails. If it's a story like the one in Origins, it might work well enough, considering you're more of a "Chosen Group" (the Wardens) than a chosen individual. Although if there are more origin stories in DA2, it would be interesting to see how they'd handle multiple players. Maybe there'd be a separate "adventuring party" origin.
Modifié par filaminstrel, 11 juin 2010 - 08:51 .
#16
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 09:11
Darth Drago
-
- Members
- 1 136 messages
Ok first off why does it seem like every game must now get the standard suggestions for co-op or multiplayer for its sequel? Not every game works well with any kind of multiplayer features since they are designed to be experienced as a single player game. Mass Effect and Dragon Age are such games.
So no, I do not support the standard multiplayer suggestions and in no sense should there be a co-op feature at all. It ruins the single player experience that these games are set up around and as mentioned its resources to make this feature would likely mean the removing of other things that the single player game should have.
However, I wouldn’t be apposed to an arena or proving ground multiplayer feature. This would be something that will not affect the main game itself. It would be set up like most fighting games online modes where two players fight while the others that are waiting for their turn watch the fight.
For Dragon Age it would be set up like the Proving Ground in Orzammar. Same set up with group size and even other features. Players that are watching the fight will be able to bet on who wins if they want. Money won could be added to your main game to use, or it could be strictly for use in the online mode to purchase exclusive weapons, armor and other items. These items then could be used in the main game or maybe only for the online mode.
By the way this could work for Mass Effect as well.
Since it seems EA will likely force some sort of multiplayer garbage in all their owned games, lets hope they don’t do something stupid for once.
So no, I do not support the standard multiplayer suggestions and in no sense should there be a co-op feature at all. It ruins the single player experience that these games are set up around and as mentioned its resources to make this feature would likely mean the removing of other things that the single player game should have.
However, I wouldn’t be apposed to an arena or proving ground multiplayer feature. This would be something that will not affect the main game itself. It would be set up like most fighting games online modes where two players fight while the others that are waiting for their turn watch the fight.
For Dragon Age it would be set up like the Proving Ground in Orzammar. Same set up with group size and even other features. Players that are watching the fight will be able to bet on who wins if they want. Money won could be added to your main game to use, or it could be strictly for use in the online mode to purchase exclusive weapons, armor and other items. These items then could be used in the main game or maybe only for the online mode.
By the way this could work for Mass Effect as well.
Since it seems EA will likely force some sort of multiplayer garbage in all their owned games, lets hope they don’t do something stupid for once.
#17
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 10:09
AlanC9
-
- Members
- 35 666 messages
soteria wrote...
When I've played the NWN 1 and 2 campaigns co-op, it's been with someone who had already done the dialogue before so generally we'd speed through it, slowing down for some of the "choicer" sections or if a decision needed to be made. From what I've seen, most people that enjoy co-op, including myself, enjoy it primarily for the gameplay cooperative/competitve aspects. Enjoying the story becomes more like watching a movie for the "back-seat" player. Maybe that sounds boring, but if you think about the number of JRPG fans worldwide, I think it makes some sense.
You're probably right. I've never really seen the point of either co-op or JRPGs myself.
#18
Posté 12 juin 2010 - 03:22
Elanareon
-
- Members
- 980 messages
C'mon coop would be fun. We're not talking about adding new maps for arena or anything. Just a way to play with my friends and have fun.
#19
Posté 12 juin 2010 - 07:40
KalDurenik
-
- Members
- 574 messages
While there is more then just "play with your friends" i agree. They should implement features that allow one to host and join servers. Im not saying "omg make a new mapppppppppppppppppppp". Im saying let the community make all the multiplayer related servers and maps.
I know there is alot of "OMG MULTIPLAYER IN MY GAME... BURN THE GAME" people here. But multiplayer could only improve the game. Add more players and make the game live for years to come.
I know there is alot of "OMG MULTIPLAYER IN MY GAME... BURN THE GAME" people here. But multiplayer could only improve the game. Add more players and make the game live for years to come.
#22
Posté 12 juin 2010 - 07:49
KalDurenik
-
- Members
- 574 messages
why the "no"?
And to the people saying that sequels should not have multiplayer. Well one of the dumbest things Bioware did was not add multiplayer support for the first game.
Oh and before someone yell "MULTIPLAYER BE STEALING MY STORY" you do know that you have another team for the multiplayer code right?
And to the people saying that sequels should not have multiplayer. Well one of the dumbest things Bioware did was not add multiplayer support for the first game.
Oh and before someone yell "MULTIPLAYER BE STEALING MY STORY" you do know that you have another team for the multiplayer code right?
#23
Posté 12 juin 2010 - 07:57
Behindyounow
-
- Members
- 1 612 messages
KalDurenik wrote...
why the "no"?
And to the people saying that sequels should not have multiplayer. Well one of the dumbest things Bioware did was not add multiplayer support for the first game.
Oh and before someone yell "MULTIPLAYER BE STEALING MY STORY" you do know that you have another team for the multiplayer code right?
Money spent on making the multiplayer is money that could be spent bettering the singleplayer.
#24
Posté 12 juin 2010 - 08:13
KalDurenik
-
- Members
- 574 messages
Maybe?
Allowing people to host game worlds (like NWN) would make the game get alot more hype = more sales = more money = more money to spend.
Multiplayer is a huge selling point now days and tbh they are kind foolish not to take a slice of that cake.
Also im not saying its not alot of work. Im not saying "make a multiplayer world" im saying. Throw in multiplayer based platform for up to lets say 20 people. Some GM tools. Allow hosting and joining. Make a new multiplayer conversation system. Wiee done! No need to make a new world with 150 hours of gameplay. Just let the community do that and sit back and enjoy the money from it.
Allowing people to host game worlds (like NWN) would make the game get alot more hype = more sales = more money = more money to spend.
Multiplayer is a huge selling point now days and tbh they are kind foolish not to take a slice of that cake.
Also im not saying its not alot of work. Im not saying "make a multiplayer world" im saying. Throw in multiplayer based platform for up to lets say 20 people. Some GM tools. Allow hosting and joining. Make a new multiplayer conversation system. Wiee done! No need to make a new world with 150 hours of gameplay. Just let the community do that and sit back and enjoy the money from it.
Modifié par KalDurenik, 12 juin 2010 - 08:16 .
#25
Posté 12 juin 2010 - 08:31
Lord Gremlin
-
- Members
- 2 927 messages
No. Just no. No jetpacks for chess, no multiplayer for DA. This is one of a few ways to actually ruin this game.
