Ce sujet est fermé
I'm just going to say no here, the ones before me have argued the case so well, I don't feel I need to repeat what they said.
Should Mass Effect 3 be a Multiplayer game?
Débuté par
mereck7980
, déc. 08 2010 02:51
Retour en haut
#77
Posté 10 décembre 2010 - 03:27
CrypticZer0
-
- Members
- 28 messages
Amen x2.xiiz wrote...
mereck7980 wrote...
Gibb_Shepard wrote...
Get multiplayer the hell away from ME3. I do however welcome it in an ME spin-off game.
Amen...
#78
Posté 10 décembre 2010 - 03:30
Yeled
-
- Members
- 784 messages
I have no interest in multiplayer in ME3. There's a reason I play bioware games and it isn't for the online, multiplayer experience. Sometimes companies need to understand what they do very well and brought them to where they are. Keep refining that. Make it better. Make it epic. That's what bioware did successfully when they went through titles like KoToR, Jade Empire, and eventually Mass Effect.
In my opinion ME2, while a very good game, represented BioWare starting to lose their way. They didn't really improve on what they already did well, instead choosing to focus on improving their shooter gameplay. While the gameplay was better, I don't see ME2 as an improvement or refinement of ME1, but almost a departure where they chose to move in a different direction.
If ME3 is multiplayer, or if it includes a seperate multiplayer component, I will interpret that as bioware continuing to move away from their core gamestyle...the thing that makes their games great. If they are chasing the mass audience and trying to sell as many copies as Halo: Reach and CoD, I fear they will lose their way in the process. Many companies have lost their way and ultimately suffered in the long-term as the quality of their titles goes down and their core audience begins to abandon them.
Obviously this hasn't happened yet, although I am one of those people who thinks ME1 is better than ME2. But I wouldn't be surprised if it happens down the road. Multiplayer ME3 and MMO's like The Old Republic are bad signs, in my opinion.
In my opinion ME2, while a very good game, represented BioWare starting to lose their way. They didn't really improve on what they already did well, instead choosing to focus on improving their shooter gameplay. While the gameplay was better, I don't see ME2 as an improvement or refinement of ME1, but almost a departure where they chose to move in a different direction.
If ME3 is multiplayer, or if it includes a seperate multiplayer component, I will interpret that as bioware continuing to move away from their core gamestyle...the thing that makes their games great. If they are chasing the mass audience and trying to sell as many copies as Halo: Reach and CoD, I fear they will lose their way in the process. Many companies have lost their way and ultimately suffered in the long-term as the quality of their titles goes down and their core audience begins to abandon them.
Obviously this hasn't happened yet, although I am one of those people who thinks ME1 is better than ME2. But I wouldn't be surprised if it happens down the road. Multiplayer ME3 and MMO's like The Old Republic are bad signs, in my opinion.
#79
Posté 10 décembre 2010 - 03:35
CrypticZer0
-
- Members
- 28 messages
You do know that those links you posted from Kotaku are from November 17th, which is just after the teaser trailer surfaced right?thelucidlife wrote...
Apparently, the announcement just made earlier today is NOT about ME3, but for a fully multiplayer stand-alone that will not feature Shepard. If this is the case, then I'm gung-ho....they can get this little litmus test out of the way before they decide to mess up ME3.
http://kotaku.com/56...player-spin off
http://kotaku.com/56...wares-next-game
You know that EA and Bioware execs have the COD demo. in mind (who wouldn't want a rabid fanbase like that? *sigh*), but I have faith in the masterminds at Bioware as well....they love them some single player story development.
The latest "rumor-mill" news points towards it being Mass Effect 3 with multiplayer; yes granted still a rumor.
But like I said, the things you linked to are the exact stories and such that've been dissected and talked about for over a month now.
#80
Posté 10 décembre 2010 - 04:09
Zulu_DFA
-
- Members
- 8 217 messages
Since ME2 has screwed it all already, and ME3 can't possibly be any worse, and MP means bigger budget for ME3, I say let them get on with it!
#81
Posté 10 décembre 2010 - 04:14
heman14
-
- Members
- 66 messages
I agree with a lot of what was said. If they want to do a spin off game that is multiplayer great! But keep multiplayer the hell away from Mass Effect 3!
#82
Posté 10 décembre 2010 - 04:49
ZombifiedJake
-
- Members
- 434 messages
Keep multiplayer for spinoffs. I'll probably have people disagreeing, but I feel that multiplayer would ruin the integrity of the trilogy.
#83
Posté 10 décembre 2010 - 04:56
Matchy Pointy
-
- Members
- 1 229 messages
ZombifiedJake wrote...
Keep multiplayer for spinoffs. I'll probably have people disagreeing, but I feel that multiplayer would ruin the integrity of the trilogy.
I'm with you 100% here.
#84
Posté 10 décembre 2010 - 05:04
Budskee
-
- Members
- 9 messages
The way I see it is this. I'm not sure of any way to successfully impliment multiplayer into Mass Effect and still keep it Mass Effect othern than some sort of single player co-op only, as one player plays as the main character Sheperd, and player 2 plays as one of the 2 crew mates following him around. However, IF there were any kind of multiplayer to be implimented I trust BIOWARE not to take the decision lightly. They will have thought long and hard on how to do it properly. So my answer is I don't know as I see it, but if it could be done, I trust BIOWARE to do it right.
#85
Posté 10 décembre 2010 - 05:16
Pelican34
-
- Members
- 63 messages
ZombifiedJake wrote...
Keep multiplayer for spinoffs. I'll probably have people disagreeing, but I feel that multiplayer would ruin the integrity of the trilogy.
I second this
#86
Posté 10 décembre 2010 - 05:21
RinpocheSchnozberry
-
- Members
- 6 212 messages
How funny would it be if they announced multiplayer in ME3 and everyone in the audience booed?
#87
Posté 10 décembre 2010 - 05:27
Xavier0080
-
- Members
- 15 messages
No, ME3 should be true to what ME is: a fantastic single player game.Not to mention this is EA we're talking about, the only (major) company to host its own servers (Why?) and shut them down less than a year (or closely thereafter, LotR:Conquest) afterwards. They don't support MP, they got Visceral to add MP to Dead Space, an addition of which every preview I've seen has naysayed as being against the core of what that game is. I would be immensely worried about a multiplayer ME experience.
Save it for a spin-off, do NOT add it to my favorite franchise (ever since KotOR apparently died, and SW:tOR took its place instead, a move I'm still sad about). I never use these forums, but I got on here just to have my voice heard. Adding MP to long-standing single player games has never worked well, with few exceptions. Just look at GTA4, Bioshock 2, Assassin's Creed:Brotherhood. They are virtual ghost towns online (even Brotherhood its hard to find matches, and it's 2-3 weeks old).
EA has stated they plan to make a lot out of the ME universe. That's fine, that's good. It's a fantastic and well-realized universe, so make a new game focusing on MP, don't tack it on to a game that has no need of it.
Save it for a spin-off, do NOT add it to my favorite franchise (ever since KotOR apparently died, and SW:tOR took its place instead, a move I'm still sad about). I never use these forums, but I got on here just to have my voice heard. Adding MP to long-standing single player games has never worked well, with few exceptions. Just look at GTA4, Bioshock 2, Assassin's Creed:Brotherhood. They are virtual ghost towns online (even Brotherhood its hard to find matches, and it's 2-3 weeks old).
EA has stated they plan to make a lot out of the ME universe. That's fine, that's good. It's a fantastic and well-realized universe, so make a new game focusing on MP, don't tack it on to a game that has no need of it.
#88
Posté 10 décembre 2010 - 06:04
Guanxii
-
- Members
- 1 646 messages
In my opinion team-based co-op (up-to 3 players, obviously) could work quite easily during the single player Mass Effect campaign without all that much work.
As I would image at the team select screen (prior to starting a mission) the game could simply detect 2nd and 3rd controllers and/or LAN and allow those player to select from the team screen and jump right into the action. The only notable gameplay differences while in co-op mode would be that the power wheel would be de-activated, powers and weapons simply mapped to the d-pad in combo with the L/R bumper (L for weapons, R for powers) and everything would be gravy.
It's a bit of extra work but its not exactly in the same league as building a whole new multiplayer mode from scratch and it wouldn't totally suck balls.
As I would image at the team select screen (prior to starting a mission) the game could simply detect 2nd and 3rd controllers and/or LAN and allow those player to select from the team screen and jump right into the action. The only notable gameplay differences while in co-op mode would be that the power wheel would be de-activated, powers and weapons simply mapped to the d-pad in combo with the L/R bumper (L for weapons, R for powers) and everything would be gravy.
It's a bit of extra work but its not exactly in the same league as building a whole new multiplayer mode from scratch and it wouldn't totally suck balls.
#89
Posté 10 décembre 2010 - 06:15
Atmosfear3
-
- Members
- 1 654 messages
Pretty sure the teams that work on the campaign and MP (if there will be an MP component) are mutually exclusive.
Personally, I don't get a crap if there will be MP. The singleplayer experience will be unchanged for the most part and may even benefit from having a larger budget.
Personally, I don't get a crap if there will be MP. The singleplayer experience will be unchanged for the most part and may even benefit from having a larger budget.
#90
Posté 10 décembre 2010 - 06:20
Gleym
-
- Members
- 982 messages
Ya know, if they absolutely MUST put in a multiplayer function, why not just, y'know, put it on a seperate disc? Or better still, a completely seperate install altogether that accompanies the fully-completed single-player story without either relying on each other? Oh wait, there's no money in that, and it doesn't alienate the pre-existing fanbase. Silly me.
#91
Posté 10 décembre 2010 - 06:21
TMJfin
-
- Members
- 718 messages
No no no no, absolutely no. Did I say no already? NO! I'm a single player and will never play multiplayer games, just not interested. And yes, I have tried some. I'm already pissed bout KOTOR. But oh well, that's life.
#93
Posté 10 décembre 2010 - 07:29
JJ Long
-
- Members
- 146 messages
No, absolutely not. No Multiplayer at all.
Why can't a game be single player anymore?
Why can't a game be single player anymore?
#95
Posté 10 décembre 2010 - 07:45
Ticladesign
-
- Members
- 151 messages
Just because YOU wont use s Multiplayer doesnt mean someone else wont. And just because YOU dont like Multiplayer, doesnt mean someone else wouldnt like it.
And despite populair belief among the singleplayer community here, it's about time a non-MMO rpg gets a Multiplayer mode, if it's true. (See my signature)
There has been a decent RPG that did Multiplayer right. It's made by Bioware, and is called Neverwinter Nights.
And despite populair belief among the singleplayer community here, it's about time a non-MMO rpg gets a Multiplayer mode, if it's true. (See my signature)
There has been a decent RPG that did Multiplayer right. It's made by Bioware, and is called Neverwinter Nights.
#96
Posté 10 décembre 2010 - 07:46
JJ Long
-
- Members
- 146 messages
If there is a mutliplayer, I don't want it to in any way be part of the single player. Nor do I want it to conflict with or take away from the development of the single player.
I wish a stronger message could be sent that multiplayer in this series is seen as a very negative thing. At least by me and several others.
The whole point of the series is that it is an RPG and it is your personal story. You make the decisions. It is absolutely crap if any of that gets screwed up by any tagged on multiplayer just because of this "every game has to have multiplayer" crap.
It just leave a bad taste in my mouth and makes me extremely upset.
THIS IS NOT THE GENRE FOR MULTIPLAYER!!!
If someone wants to play an FPS, go play COD or Halo. If someone wants to play an MMO, go play WoW or Old Republic when it comes out.
This is an RPG, AN RPG!!!!! The reason it exists is for a personal single player experience.
No Co-op, no multiplayer, PERIOD
I wish a stronger message could be sent that multiplayer in this series is seen as a very negative thing. At least by me and several others.
The whole point of the series is that it is an RPG and it is your personal story. You make the decisions. It is absolutely crap if any of that gets screwed up by any tagged on multiplayer just because of this "every game has to have multiplayer" crap.
It just leave a bad taste in my mouth and makes me extremely upset.
THIS IS NOT THE GENRE FOR MULTIPLAYER!!!
If someone wants to play an FPS, go play COD or Halo. If someone wants to play an MMO, go play WoW or Old Republic when it comes out.
This is an RPG, AN RPG!!!!! The reason it exists is for a personal single player experience.
No Co-op, no multiplayer, PERIOD
#97
Guest_jollyorigins_*
Posté 10 décembre 2010 - 07:48
Guest_jollyorigins_*
Guest_jollyorigins_*
-
- Guests
How dumb can EA be? "Single-player games are effectivley dead"? Wasn't ME2 one of their best selling games this year? I think EA is run by lots of Vorcha.
#98
Posté 10 décembre 2010 - 08:03
Ticladesign
-
- Members
- 151 messages
A RPG not a gerne for Multiplayer? *laughs*
Go tell that to the countless Persistent World communities for NWN on their forums.
A PW world with DM's that run personal events for your character are far more rewarding than scripted NPC's that have no life in them but the tunnel vision of a writer. At least a DM (a good one) will respond and change plotlines based on your actions ingame.
So please... dislike Multiplayer RPG's what you will, but saying Multiplayer doesnt work in a RPG game is utter, and complete nonsence.
Go tell that to the countless Persistent World communities for NWN on their forums.
A PW world with DM's that run personal events for your character are far more rewarding than scripted NPC's that have no life in them but the tunnel vision of a writer. At least a DM (a good one) will respond and change plotlines based on your actions ingame.
So please... dislike Multiplayer RPG's what you will, but saying Multiplayer doesnt work in a RPG game is utter, and complete nonsence.
#99
Posté 10 décembre 2010 - 08:07
Raizo
-
- Members
- 2 526 messages
On paper there is nothing wrong with bioware making ME3 a Multiplayer game, in reality however it would be a very stupid thing to doand I am very much against the idea of a Mulitplayer ME3.
In most multipalyer games you find that soo much time and effort is put into making the multiplayer work that the solo experience almost always suffers. Then there's the matter of ME3's storyline, it's supposed to be the conclusion to Shepard's story, ME3 is supposed to be a about him, his journey his choices, I don't see how adding Multiplayer gameplay to ME3 is going to work from a storyline stand point unless Bioware is planning on somthing similar to RE4 and RE5's Mercenary mode or deathmatches like in GOW while leaving the main game a solo experience only.
In most multipalyer games you find that soo much time and effort is put into making the multiplayer work that the solo experience almost always suffers. Then there's the matter of ME3's storyline, it's supposed to be the conclusion to Shepard's story, ME3 is supposed to be a about him, his journey his choices, I don't see how adding Multiplayer gameplay to ME3 is going to work from a storyline stand point unless Bioware is planning on somthing similar to RE4 and RE5's Mercenary mode or deathmatches like in GOW while leaving the main game a solo experience only.
#100
Posté 10 décembre 2010 - 08:11
themark443
-
- Members
- 68 messages
Raizo wrote...
On paper there is nothing wrong with bioware making ME3 a Multiplayer game, in reality however it would be a very stupid thing to doand I am very much against the idea of a Mulitplayer ME3.
In most multipalyer games you find that soo much time and effort is put into making the multiplayer work that the solo experience almost always suffers. Then there's the matter of ME3's storyline, it's supposed to be the conclusion to Shepard's story, ME3 is supposed to be a about him, his journey his choices, I don't see how adding Multiplayer gameplay to ME3 is going to work from a storyline stand point unless Bioware is planning on somthing similar to RE4 and RE5's Mercenary mode or deathmatches like in GOW while leaving the main game a solo experience only.
agreed. bioshock 2 was probably the best example of what happens when you add a multiplayer component to a single player driven game. single player lacked substance and was short.
