473 réponses à ce sujet

[Marcus8958]

Behindyounow wrote...

Marcus8958 wrote...

Its not impossible. Just look at DAO, They spent money on making a achievements system that caters to the typical Modern Warfare player on Xbox or the World of Warcraft player.

I would think adding achievements would cost a lot less time and money than adding a multiplayer component.

Although yes, the achievements are a waste of money and development time that could've bettered singleplayer too. But not by much, I'd wager.

Adding multiplayer to the campaign yes but adding multiplayer to the game engine I believe not.

The rest would get modded by the community.

[AlanC9]

That's really confused. The engine's the hard part. You need to break the thing up into client and server components, decide what information about the game state needs to be passed to the clients, then work out a transmission protocol for said information.

[svendigo]

Marcus8958 wrote...

Behindyounow wrote...

Maverick827 wrote...

Actually, the wise thing to do would be to add multiplayer intelligently and without detriment to the single player experience.  

Impossible, unless EA gives Bioware a limitless budget to make a game.

Its not impossible. Just look at DAO, They spent money on making a achievements system that caters to the typical Modern Warfare player on Xbox or the World of Warcraft player.

It doesn't take a programmer to know the difference between the amount of work needed to get a working MP system and to flag gamedata variables as achievements...

[AlexXIV]

MofineBovine wrote...

I cant believe That people are actualy opposed to the idea of multiplayer co op.

There is a game you may have heard of, its called Baulder's Gate 2. It is a single player game. Its single player campain was excellent. Playing its single player game with a freind in multiplayer co op made the game even more exciting. It didnt change the story, it didnt affect how the game played what so ever. The difference was, that there were times when you knew what was comming up ahead and you had a plan to tackle a certain enemy a certain way. Then as you were explaining what you wanted to do with your freinds, one of them would wander foward and set off the npcs. Absoulte bedlam would ensue and alot of screaming "what are you doing YOU IDIOT!!??!!!" would break out. But, it was all good fun. It actualy adds a level of unexpected excitement to what would be an otherwise clockwork, routine encounter. Overall, adding mutliplayer to an excellent party based single player game increased the level of enjoyment tenfold.

Anyone who is afraid that playing a game online with someone else would ruin their experience is obviosly mentaly deficient. Because, you could always just not do it. Co op play isnt somthing you do with randoms, its somthing you do with freinds. If your freinds are annoying douche bags, then dont play with them.

I just wish DA:O did have multiplayer co op. It would have increased my level of enjoyment of the game immeasurably. Instead of hearing my girlfriend complain every 20 minutes that i was on the computer and not spending time with her, i could have spent time with her by playing the damn thing.

Honestly you should be banned for raising this skeleton. Bioware stated multiple times (even in this thread) that DA2 is a single player game. Now gtfo.

[Cyran127]

Don't see why people are so against co-op. I'd like to see it as a feature. Not like you'd be forced to play co-op. I'd like to have the option. Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale, Neverwinter Nights, and probably other Bioware/Black Isle games that I'm forgetting all had co-op. Wouldn't need to be anything fancy. Just let another human player take control of a companion and you can experience the story together.



Single-player games with a co-op experience are much better than crappy MMOs.

[Estel78]

Cyran127 wrote...

Don't see why people are so against co-op. I'd like to see it as a feature. Not like you'd be forced to play co-op. I'd like to have the option.

I don't get it how some people don't (want to) understand that including a co-op option involves spending resources that otherwise might have been used to make the campaign better.

Personally, i play RPGs to lose myself in the world, to immerse myself in the story. Having another buddy running around cheapens that experience, imho.

[Unit-Alpha]

Again it is a person with no registered games that suggests multiplayer. My conjecture holds true.



No, it does not need multiplayer.

[Sanguinerin]

I love Dragon Age: Origins, and I'm way too excited for Dragon Age 2 considering how far away it is, so single player in the game does work out well.

When I first heard about Dragon Age, I kept hoping it would be the next Neverwinter Nights. NWN was probably my favorite game/series up until now, and I played it from middle school, to high school, to college. It has a lot of years on me. Why did I play it so long? The roleplaying community on a custom RP server that I found.

I played the campaign with friends at times, but I really loved playing in the custom worlds people made too. Now, I'd love either option in the Dragon Age series, a multiplayer game where we go around Thedas (it's a beautiful world that's been created, after all), or a multiplayer game where we can make our own worlds and get in game together that way.

In DA2, I'm perfectly content without multiplayer. I loved Origins and running around with my characters who did have their own personalities, and I wouldn't give that up in DA2 either.

I still wouldn't mind a game with multiplayer ability. In Awakening **possible spoiler**, I wanted to hop over to Cumberland with Wynne (my favorite character) and help solve issues with the Fraternities rather than keep going on about the Darkspawn.

I'm not saying they have to take an MMORPG style, but the ability to roam Thedas freely and interact with the awesome world established here isn't a bad idea. Until then, or if there's never that sort of free roaming, I'll just keep hoping for the next game to have Cumberland, Nevarra City, or Val Royeaux. Those would be my three most desired places to visit in Thedas.

Edit: I fixed my text spacing and some grammar.

Modifié par HallowedWarden, 09 octobre 2010 - 03:14 .

[Lintanis]

The game is doing just fine as a single player 

[Gemini1179]

I prefer it to be single player. There are enough multi-player games out there.

[Morrigans God son]

Multiplayer makes games better. It doesn't have to take away any of the story really.

Multiplayer is the future!!!!!!

[Merced256]

well bioware if you want to really rake in those console sales you better make it multiplayer. I mean why aren't you shooting for MW2 current console popularity?

[Darkstormeye]

Solostran85 wrote...

I really hope it doesn't. Dragon age is more of a single player experience, multiplayer doesn't fit in the game.

I Agree with you.

[Mike Laidlaw]

Merced256 wrote...

well bioware if you want to really rake in those console sales you better make it multiplayer. I mean why aren't you shooting for MW2 current console popularity?

Sure, that kind of sales numbers would be great, but it requires a little more grace than just slapping multiplayer into the game to reach that level of popularity.

[Talogrungi]

I wouldn't want to lose the companion banter/character development by having other players BE my companions. I feel that RPGs lose too much of what makes the genre unique when they throw other players into the mix. Every Co-Op/MP RPG I've ever played (not a great number, admittedly) has been just hack-and-slash.

[Ortaya Alevli]

- Yo bud, let's play Dragon Age 2 together, shall we? I need a sidekick to watch my back while I'm busy rising to power.

- Uhh...sure, what should I do?

- Just stand right beside me while I'm doing the talking. Don't go anywhere. Or, go get yourself a cup of coffee. It may take a little while.

- Okay...And then?

- And when the battle begins, run up to the enemy and soak up arrows, fireballs and whatnot. I'll pick them one by one.

- Sounds like fun.

- It does, doesn't it? Not everyone's lucky enough to have a moron of a friend.

- Let's play!

[Maverick827]

Estel78 wrote...

I don't get it how some people don't (want to) understand that including a co-op option involves spending resources that otherwise might have been used to make the campaign better.

There is only a finite amount of "resources" (a catch-all phrase that means absolutely nothing concrete) that BioWare could throw into the single player campaign before it becomes superfluous; they are subject to diminishing returns, I guess you could say.

With enough resources, a large project in which single player and multiplayer can coexist is definitely possible.  Why would BioWare and EA be banking on TOR if they didn't believe this to be the case?  It wouldn't even take $100 million and an MMO to achieve, either.  Even just leting a friend connect and play a companion - the Tails to my Sonic, if you follow the analogous Sonic the Hedgehog 2 gameplay paradigm.

I am, of course, not saying that this should be implemented in DA2, nor in DA3, DA4, or DA15.  I'm not saying it should even be implemented at all.  Though I, personally, would like some consideration in this department, even more than that I simply want people with absolutely no knowledge on the subject to to stop saying that it is "impossible."

[In Exile]

Cyran127 wrote...

Don't see why people are so against co-op. I'd like to see it as a feature. Not like you'd be forced to play co-op. I'd like to have the option. Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale, Neverwinter Nights, and probably other Bioware/Black Isle games that I'm forgetting all had co-op. Wouldn't need to be anything fancy. Just let another human player take control of a companion and you can experience the story together.

Single-player games with a co-op experience are much better than crappy MMOs.

Basically because something has to give. You can either construct a Co-Op campaign that works single player, or tack on Co-Op to a single player campaign. But you have to have a narrative that either corresponds to 2+ people, or you have a filler combat buddy to take along.

It may be possible to design a brilliant Co-Op game that breaks this trend. But that means you need to set out and do it from the start. You can't just snap your fingers and get a brilliant campaign.

And so our objection is that a half-assed feature is bad. A good feature (of this scope) this to be a central feature. And we want a single player game, not a Co-Op one.

Even in the most limiting case, where all Co-Op will cost is like 4 quests (say you don't have the any of Denerim sidequests) and only gets tacked on so someone can control a character in combat and the story is exclusively SP, that's still too high a cost for us.

[Gemini1179]

I don't want my gaming experience to depend on someone else. I've done the multi-player gaming thing and it's fun in short bursts, but it grows tiresome after a while. I enjoy the serenity of a single player game that I can play at my leisure without being dependent on another person's schedule and vice versa.



Once you have someone chew you out for not making a dungeon run (because you have, you know, a life) you tend to gain some perspective on multi-player games.

[Merced256]

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

Merced256 wrote...

well bioware if you want to really rake in those console sales you better make it multiplayer. I mean why aren't you shooting for MW2 current console popularity?

Sure, that kind of sales numbers would be great, but it requires a little more grace than just slapping multiplayer into the game to reach that level of popularity.

So has MW2 unlocking that markets potential have any impact on future plans? If not, then why?

To give some context, many companies would've never looked at the MMO market had WoW not blown it open, MW2 did the same thing in a sense.

Modifié par Merced256, 09 octobre 2010 - 07:41 .

[Maverick827]

Gemini1179 wrote...

Once you have someone chew you out for not making a dungeon run (because you have, you know, a life) you tend to gain some perspective on multi-player games.

Why are you playing with those people?

Some of us have friends that we actually like spending time with.

[Da_Lion_Man]

Baldur's Gate had co-op IIRC. So why not this? It only improves the replay value of this game so... why not?



BTW I can see ME3 having multiplayer, didn't Bioware look for developers for making a MP?

[Xewaka]

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

Merced256 wrote...

well bioware if you want to really rake in those console sales you better make it multiplayer. I mean why aren't you shooting for MW2 current console popularity?

Sure, that kind of sales numbers would be great, but it requires a little more grace than just slapping multiplayer into the game to reach that level of popularity.

You could always go the Baldur's Gate  style and allow a party of created PCs plowing through the main game.

Oh wait, there's no more Origins, it'd be an army of hawklones. Forget I said anything.

[Burningwolf]

Multiplayer=no thank you