74 réponses à ce sujet

[-Skorpious-]

Getorex wrote...

-Skorpious- wrote...

Sapphira wrote...

I've never played Bioshock 2 or Singularity, but whats your opinion on RE5 ?

Aside from the ridiculous plot, bizarre VO/characterization for 2/3 of the cast, its utter lack of survival horror elements and the constant in your face action - it was ok, just ok. Certaintly no RE4.

The MP was essentially a repeat of RE4's survival/time-attack modes. However, the co-op was excellent, and I did forget the versus mode (which allowed for MP) came out as a DLC. I guess I can remove RE5 from my list, since I forgot that little fact. =p

Erm..."Aside from the ridiculous plot..." What part of RE hasn't been one big pile of ridiculous plot? Granted, my sole exposure to RE lay in the movies but still - based on the games I seen nothing but ridiculous plot.

The original 3 was basically a story about you are your teams survival against an onslaught of undead/mutated horrors with a mix of puzzle solving. The combat was downplayed, and conservation of ammo and health was a critical part of the gameplay (to add realism I guess). However,  RE:CV and RE4 began to cross the line into "ridiculous" but RE5 kinda went overboard.

Plus, the movies are god-awful. Nothing like the games at all. Except maybe RE5, hence why I feel so negative about the game as a whole.

[Getorex]

mereck7980 wrote...

Splinter Cell 108 wrote...

FieryPhoenix7 wrote...

Splinter Cell 108 wrote...

I don't know if I'm correct or not but there's still the big risk of adding the multiplayer to the trilogy's last game. If it fails then a lot of money would have been wasted for nothing, usually games that don't have multiplayer get multiplayer in their second versions such as Dead Space. Maybe ME3 won't have multiplayer but I'm pretty sure whatever comes next that has Mass Effect on its name will have MP unfortunately.

(...)

I'd be OK with that, so as long ME3 is safe from it.

Same with me, I just want to finish the trilogy without MP. However it will be sad to see that the next Mass Effect games will have MP.

It may be inevitable that future big budget games will have some form of MP.  As long as a game is designed specifically around MP it isn't always a terrible thing, but ME is already 2 entries into a trilogy.  Trying this "new design philosophy" now could be disastrous.  Wait until you can create an original IP to experiment with this idea Bioware! 

I'm not sure about the fear/anger over possible MP in ME3. I don't mean that the main game itself need (or should) be MP but surely adding an MP portion for use after the game is harmless?

Virtually every game I've played over the last few years have been SP/MP at the same time: the entire Call of Duty series, Ghost Recon, Sniper Ghost Warrior, Far Cry (1 and 2), Crysis, Battlefield, etc, etc, etc. Each had a SP game and MP mode. The MP did not detract or subtract from the SP.,
Hell, MP is easy and doesn't take much thought at all. You just create environments and don't have to sweat a plot, dialog (no where NEAR as much as for SP), etc. MP is lazy development so it doesn't really take away from the real work involved in SP. You even can allow for user-created content (maps).

Why does the addition of an MP capability (sans any Shepard, et al) mean that the SP must suffer (to your minds)?

[YAHG]

if the MP option will get the studio more money for future games, i'm all for it. if it cuts corners on the 1 player(which i only play), then i'll go to another game that suits my needs.

[Kronner]

I don't care about MP or online components, I just want a good story and enemies to kill.

[Camronnba]

The BioShock2 MP was pretty bad but the single player campaign wasn't affected by it imo. I agree BS2 was inferior to BS but I think that's mainly due to the fact that the BS story had a sort of finality to it that it was really a stretch to get BS2 out and with that in mind I think they did a solid job. The voice acting was outstanding as were the environments, and the SP campaign was lengthy and enjoyable.



If I'm not mistaken EA stated that multiplayer is just 'one way' in which games can gain move beyond single player-only status. Perhaps something as simple as being able to view your friends choices in ME3 (Love interest, Para or Ren etc) would suffice.

[Da_Lion_Man]

I think that's highly likely it will affect the future Bioware titles.

[FuturePasTimeCE]

didn't bioware make bioshock (good game)?

[Mister Mida]

We'll see how this affects ME3. After that, EA can do whatever they want. They're lucky they've bought Bioware and released Brütal Legend, or else I wouldn't have bought games with EA's label on it.

[Da_Lion_Man]

FuturePasTimeCE wrote...

didn't bioware make bioshock (good game)?

What? No...

[mereck7980]

Getorex wrote...

mereck7980 wrote...

Splinter Cell 108 wrote...

FieryPhoenix7 wrote...

Splinter Cell 108 wrote...

I don't know if I'm correct or not but there's still the big risk of adding the multiplayer to the trilogy's last game. If it fails then a lot of money would have been wasted for nothing, usually games that don't have multiplayer get multiplayer in their second versions such as Dead Space. Maybe ME3 won't have multiplayer but I'm pretty sure whatever comes next that has Mass Effect on its name will have MP unfortunately.

(...)

I'd be OK with that, so as long ME3 is safe from it.

Same with me, I just want to finish the trilogy without MP. However it will be sad to see that the next Mass Effect games will have MP.

It may be inevitable that future big budget games will have some form of MP.  As long as a game is designed specifically around MP it isn't always a terrible thing, but ME is already 2 entries into a trilogy.  Trying this "new design philosophy" now could be disastrous.  Wait until you can create an original IP to experiment with this idea Bioware! 

I'm not sure about the fear/anger over possible MP in ME3. I don't mean that the main game itself need (or should) be MP but surely adding an MP portion for use after the game is harmless?

Virtually every game I've played over the last few years have been SP/MP at the same time: the entire Call of Duty series, Ghost Recon, Sniper Ghost Warrior, Far Cry (1 and 2), Crysis, Battlefield, etc, etc, etc. Each had a SP game and MP mode. The MP did not detract or subtract from the SP.,
Hell, MP is easy and doesn't take much thought at all. You just create environments and don't have to sweat a plot, dialog (no where NEAR as much as for SP), etc. MP is lazy development so it doesn't really take away from the real work involved in SP. You even can allow for user-created content (maps).

Why does the addition of an MP capability (sans any Shepard, et al) mean that the SP must suffer (to your minds)?

It's all about resources.  Bioware has a budget for every game they produce, and every aspect of the game needs to have funds/people allocated to it.  Imagine that ME2 had MP built in, and because of that they didn't have the time/money available for fleshing out all the crew missions?  A number of the games you referenced, especially Far Cry 2, had mediocre SP and MP game modes.  If Crytek had allocated the resources they used on the MP aspect of Far Cry 2 on the SP mode (or vice versa) would the game have been better overall? 

Look at BioShock 2.  The first game was almost unanimously held as amazing.  The second game was not nearly as well received, especially the SP campaign.  If Take Two had scrapped the MP and focused on SP would if have been a better game? 

[Da_Lion_Man]

I don't think so. I think the reason why Bioshock 2 wasn't as great as the first one, is because the main director left after Bioshock 1 (I forgot his name, he's working on Bioshock: Infinite though).

Believe it or not, the absense of some people can influence the quality of a game. This is more common in the Japanese gaming industry, but it still happens quite a bit in the Western one too.

Modifié par Da_Lion_Man, 08 décembre 2010 - 07:40 .

[Phaedon]

I was about to post what Da Lion Man said, so yeah, whatever he said.

[Splinter Cell 108]

mereck7980 wrote...

Getorex wrote...

mereck7980 wrote...

Splinter Cell 108 wrote...

FieryPhoenix7 wrote...

Splinter Cell 108 wrote...

I don't know if I'm correct or not but there's still the big risk of adding the multiplayer to the trilogy's last game. If it fails then a lot of money would have been wasted for nothing, usually games that don't have multiplayer get multiplayer in their second versions such as Dead Space. Maybe ME3 won't have multiplayer but I'm pretty sure whatever comes next that has Mass Effect on its name will have MP unfortunately.

(...)

I'd be OK with that, so as long ME3 is safe from it.

Same with me, I just want to finish the trilogy without MP. However it will be sad to see that the next Mass Effect games will have MP.

It may be inevitable that future big budget games will have some form of MP.  As long as a game is designed specifically around MP it isn't always a terrible thing, but ME is already 2 entries into a trilogy.  Trying this "new design philosophy" now could be disastrous.  Wait until you can create an original IP to experiment with this idea Bioware! 

I'm not sure about the fear/anger over possible MP in ME3. I don't mean that the main game itself need (or should) be MP but surely adding an MP portion for use after the game is harmless?

Virtually every game I've played over the last few years have been SP/MP at the same time: the entire Call of Duty series, Ghost Recon, Sniper Ghost Warrior, Far Cry (1 and 2), Crysis, Battlefield, etc, etc, etc. Each had a SP game and MP mode. The MP did not detract or subtract from the SP.,
Hell, MP is easy and doesn't take much thought at all. You just create environments and don't have to sweat a plot, dialog (no where NEAR as much as for SP), etc. MP is lazy development so it doesn't really take away from the real work involved in SP. You even can allow for user-created content (maps).

Why does the addition of an MP capability (sans any Shepard, et al) mean that the SP must suffer (to your minds)?

It's all about resources.  Bioware has a budget for every game they produce, and every aspect of the game needs to have funds/people allocated to it.  Imagine that ME2 had MP built in, and because of that they didn't have the time/money available for fleshing out all the crew missions?  A number of the games you referenced, especially Far Cry 2, had mediocre SP and MP game modes.  If Crytek had allocated the resources they used on the MP aspect of Far Cry 2 on the SP mode (or vice versa) would the game have been better overall? 

Look at BioShock 2.  The first game was almost unanimously held as amazing.  The second game was not nearly as well received, especially the SP campaign.  If Take Two had scrapped the MP and focused on SP would if have been a better game? 

Yeah those two went bad. But Far Cry 2 went bad because Crytek didn't develop it, instead UBISOFT and their incompetent developers were the ones that screwed it up. In anyway MP is a bad idea if it screws up the SP IMO especially if we're talking about RPGs.

[SmokePants]

Devlopers devise their own schedule and budget estimate, submit it to the publisher, and the publisher decides if it wants to fund the project. If multiplayer is a part of ME3, then it was factored in from the beginning. It will not take away resources from the SP, because if the game was SP-only, those extra resources would not be there.

Modifié par SmokePants, 08 décembre 2010 - 07:56 .

[mereck7980]

SmokePants wrote...

Devlopers devise their own schedule and budget estimate, submit it to the publisher, and the publisher decides if it wants to fund the project. If multiplayer is a part of ME3, then it was factored in from the beginning. It will not take away resources from the SP, because if the game was SP-only, those extra resources would not be there.

I can agree with you partially, but you can't tell me that  Bioware would not have to devote programing, artistic, and sound effect resources away from the SP product when they were creating their schedule and budget.  We also don't know if EA pushed the MP idea on Bioware or if it was theirs from the begining.  If EA pressured Bioware to add MP to the ME franchise they might be willing to agree to a larger budget.  If not, Bioware might have to draw on its existing resources and still include MP in the final product.  Its all speculation, but at the end of the day it very well could be the case that adding MP might hurt the SP aspect of ME3.   

[Getorex]

All MP is the same. It always and everywhere just simpleton team deathmatch or free-for-all, regardless of whether it is "RPG" or FPS. MP is ALWAYS either of the two above - tedious and repetitive. EA seems to believe this is where the future of ALL games is: repetition and tedium (try playing "Eve", the "high-tech" space RPG. BORING. REPETITIOUS. TEDIOUS).



There is no creativity needed - just graphics designers. No dialog, no acting (from even weak voice actors), no plot except in the barest of bare skeletons. This being the case, a PROPERLY designed and written game for SP and MP should not suffer unless the idiots at the top throw all their focus on MP. MP almost creates itself so doesn't really need any investment. Just do the SP and then build the environments from that and stick it online and, tada! an MP forms from the goo. Simple, mindless, free-for-all or team deathmatch. Always.

Modifié par Getorex, 08 décembre 2010 - 08:21 .

[SmokePants]

mereck7980 wrote...

I can agree with you partially, but you can't tell me that  Bioware would not have to devote programing, artistic, and sound effect resources away from the SP product when they were creating their schedule and budget.  We also don't know if EA pushed the MP idea on Bioware or if it was theirs from the begining.  If EA pressured Bioware to add MP to the ME franchise they might be willing to agree to a larger budget.  If not, Bioware might have to draw on its existing resources and still include MP in the final product.  Its all speculation, but at the end of the day it very well could be the case that adding MP might hurt the SP aspect of ME3.   

I'm working under the assumption that the expansion of BioWare Montreal was solely to facilitate the extra resources required for ME3. Montreal has a much larger pool of talent to draw from than does Edmonton and people are more willing to relocate to Montreal than Edmonton.

If that's wrong, and BioWare Edmonton not only lost Montreal as an adjunct studio, but also had to set aside 20 or so people from the core team  to tackle the multiplayer, then they would be facing a manpower issue, which a budget can't really solve.

But I'm pretty confident that BioWare Montreal -- not being large enough to handle the rumored standalone project -- is still The Mass Effect team's adjunct and will be applying many of the28 developers they just hired to working on the Mass Effect 3 multiplayer. It's the scenario that makes the most sense to me.

Remember that Dr Ray and Dr Greg are VP's at EA and have a lot of influence over the company as a whole. I doubt they could be bullied into such a quality-compromising scenario as the one that has been rumored/feared.

[yoshibb]

I don't understand this infatuation with multiplayer, just like I don't understand the infatuation of FPS. I play video games to get away from it all not to be invaded by all the immature idiots out there who drove me to play video games to begin with. It's a personal experience for me, I don't want other people bugging me, saying stupid stuff in my ear when something dramatic is going on in the screen. It takes me a frickin hour to find a decent set of people to play Left 4 Dead with and even then I have to deal with everyone running around in circles getting themselves killed instead of actually playing the game. This is not fun, at all.



You know there are still a decent amount introverted people in the that don't need human interaction every five seconds to have a good time. Goodness, it's like someone talking to you while you are reading a book or watching a movie. I enjoy the experience much better alone. I hate this stupid multiplayer ****.

[mereck7980]

SmokePants wrote...

mereck7980 wrote...

I can agree with you partially, but you can't tell me that  Bioware would not have to devote programing, artistic, and sound effect resources away from the SP product when they were creating their schedule and budget.  We also don't know if EA pushed the MP idea on Bioware or if it was theirs from the begining.  If EA pressured Bioware to add MP to the ME franchise they might be willing to agree to a larger budget.  If not, Bioware might have to draw on its existing resources and still include MP in the final product.  Its all speculation, but at the end of the day it very well could be the case that adding MP might hurt the SP aspect of ME3.   

I'm working under the assumption that the expansion of BioWare Montreal was solely to facilitate the extra resources required for ME3. Montreal has a much larger pool of talent to draw from than does Edmonton and people are more willing to relocate to Montreal than Edmonton.

If that's wrong, and BioWare Edmonton not only lost Montreal as an adjunct studio, but also had to set aside 20 or so people from the core team  to tackle the multiplayer, then they would be facing a manpower issue, which a budget can't really solve.

But I'm pretty confident that BioWare Montreal -- not being large enough to handle the rumored standalone project -- is still The Mass Effect team's adjunct and will be applying many of the28 developers they just hired to working on the Mass Effect 3 multiplayer. It's the scenario that makes the most sense to me.

Remember that Dr Ray and Dr Greg are VP's at EA and have a lot of influence over the company as a whole. I doubt they could be bullied into such a quality-compromising scenario as the one that has been rumored/feared.

This could very well be the case.  I have heard rurmors along the same lines, but in my heart of hearts wish that the primary development team and all its support staff were focused on the core SP experience.  This will be the last game in the series and as long as it is sucessfull there will be plenty of time to develop a MP spinoff.  

If I remember correctly (and I could be wrong on this point) didn't the word that Bioware was hiring development staff for a multiplayer ME project spread after EA aquired Bioware?  The Docs might not have had the leverage to fight EA when the decision was made since they were already part of the "mothership"?

[Knottedredloc]

If EA wants MP in Mass Effect, Bioware will put MP in Mass Effect. EA has tasked Bioware to create as big of a market for Mass Effect as possible. If that means watering down the RPG elements of ME while intensifying its "shooter elements", "rebooting" the story line, porting the game over to PS3, or making Mass Effect a Multi-player shooter, you can bet your arse that Bioware will capitulate.

[Googlesaurus]

yoshibb wrote...

I don't understand this infatuation with multiplayer, just like I don't understand the infatuation of FPS. I play video games to get away from it all not to be invaded by all the immature idiots out there who drove me to play video games to begin with. It's a personal experience for me, I don't want other people bugging me, saying stupid stuff in my ear when something dramatic is going on in the screen. It takes me a frickin hour to find a decent set of people to play Left 4 Dead with and even then I have to deal with everyone running around in circles getting themselves killed instead of actually playing the game. This is not fun, at all.

You know there are still a decent amount introverted people in the that don't need human interaction every five seconds to have a good time. Goodness, it's like someone talking to you while you are reading a book or watching a movie. I enjoy the experience much better alone. I hate this stupid multiplayer ****.

Don't underestimate the joys of an FPS done right. Counter-Strike is one of the most rewarding games out there. 

[RideUrLightning]

I can't really blame them. People see big puslishers as evil, but they're just in the business of making money, and there's nothing wrong with that really - in my opinion - as long as they're using fair business tactics. Right now, multiplayer is the big appeal, so I can understand why they would want it in all of their games. Do I agree? Hell no. It's going to stunt the development of single player games and eventually just oversaturate the market. I'm already sick of the same damn FPS every year, and I honestly don't see it get better anytime soon.

I will say though that there may be something good to come out of this. EA's new policy basically forces certain developers to add MP to games that may have never seen it otherwise, and it forces devs, such as BW, to try things they really have never delved into before. Who knows - maybe BW has somethig crazy up their sleeves if they do end up having to add multiplayer. I wouldn't mind it as long as the SP doesn't suffer.

Modifié par RideUrLightning, 08 décembre 2010 - 09:12 .

[cdtrk65]

Blah...multiplayer in an RPG stinks.



Every one of the games mentioned that have both SP and MP, all have what 8 hr SP campaigns?

Little to no interaction with the story if they have one at all.



As someone that plays alot of sports games, I can totally see EA screwing up Mass Effect and Bioware.



Why haven't they bought activision yet? Maybe they should get exclussive rights from world wide militaries so that they are the only ones that can make shooter games.

[Kane-Corr]

Bioshocks Single player was greatly hurt. I beat Bioshock 2 in one day...and once again...nothing new in the story...more like an expansion on the first than anything. But since it had Multiplayer! Oh, watch out! It's awesome! Nah...Bioshock 1 was far better....it was original, and catered to what was important....the story.

[Alienmorph]

At least, I hope this doesn't affect ME3, but surely this means that before a whole new ME saga we'll have to tolerate a perfeclty useless multiplayer spin-off.