377 réponses à ce sujet

[Omega-202]

charmingcharlie wrote...

Omega-202 wrote...
You're going to have to provide a source for that because the figure I had read was $2.50 per disk.  
I'll also need to hear where you heard about RAGE needing content cuts because that game is over 9 MONTHS away from release.  To even think that they're close to the point of "package planning" is hilarious.  

You could've just googled it but I will save you the time :-

www.joystiq.com/2008/08/01/carmack-rage-to-look-worse-on-360-if-limited-to-two-dvds/

Tim Willits ........................

the game was supposed to feature several wastelands for the player to explore. Because of the limitations of the
Xbox 360's media, they had to cut down the wastelands to only two, which are themselves split into multiple instances. These changes have been made across all versions of Rage, not just the 360 port.

http://www.1up.com/n...xbox-360-limits

This sounds like a mix of Bethesda playing tight wad and a bluff to try and get Microsoft to ease up on licensing.  
I'll try to find the article where I read $2.50 per disk.  It was originally linked off of Escapist.com.  Do you have the 5-7 figure anywhere?  

[-Skorpious-]

Omega-202 wrote...

-Skorpious- wrote...

Secondly, some of us (like myself) would rather see a spin-off MP game with loads of additional content, customization, and a unique SP experience; tacking MP onto ME3 will hinder both games, not just ME3.

Yes, that's what you'd like, but is that what BioWare would like?

If they do some market testing and find that the feedback for such a game is lukewarm, especially in a market DOMINATED by other companies already, why would they go ahead and release a multiplayer heavy game when they've never had any experience doing so in the past?  They have no guarantee it would sell well.

In addition, they'd need to put in all of the effort for advertising this other game, they'd need to do the press tour, they'd need to shell out money for some sort of cinematic trailer, AND if they did have a single player campaign on this multiplayer focused game, they'd either A) Be developing it with staff not from their main Edmonton office (ME headquarters) or They'd be pulling staff off of ME3 to work on this other game, harming ME3's single player.  

It makes no sense for them to want to do that.  

Why do both games need to be released at the same time? And why would Bioware risk their most successful series to date by attempting to include an aspect that can potentially hurt the core experience of the game?

[AdmiralCheez]

So I looked really hard at the image for clues as to what it could be. But all I have to add to the discussion is: DAT ASS.

[NYG1991]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

So I looked really hard at the image for clues as to what it could be. But all I have to add to the discussion is: DAT ASS.

well said. it'd be awesome if that's what the sniper ends up saying

[MisterDyslexo]

I think its a Princess Barbie sequel. Can't wait.

[charmingcharlie]

Omega-202 wrote...
This sounds like a mix of Bethesda playing tight wad and a bluff to try and get Microsoft to ease up on licensing.  
I'll try to find the article where I read $2.50 per disk.  It was originally linked off of Escapist.com.  Do you have the 5-7 figure anywhere?  

I think you might be confusing "production costs" and "royalty costs".  The actual physical media is probably charged at $2.50 per disc (amazing when you think a blank DVD can be bought for pennies these days) on top of the production costs there is also an added royalty cost that MS charges.  Now some are claiming MS has dropped this "per disc" royalty but it hasn't changed ID's stance that it is too expensive to produce a three disc game on the xbox 360. 

Suffice to say the royalty fees on console games are prohibitive and it is the main reason why PC games are always at least $10 cheaper (even on release day) than the console version.  I believe it would not be financially viable for Bioware to do a 3 disc game and if they included MP it would have to fit on 2 discs and share space with the SP campaign that means SP would suffer.

[Omega-202]

-Skorpious- wrote...

Omega-202 wrote...

-Skorpious- wrote...

Secondly, some of us (like myself) would rather see a spin-off MP game with loads of additional content, customization, and a unique SP experience; tacking MP onto ME3 will hinder both games, not just ME3.

Yes, that's what you'd like, but is that what BioWare would like?

If they do some market testing and find that the feedback for such a game is lukewarm, especially in a market DOMINATED by other companies already, why would they go ahead and release a multiplayer heavy game when they've never had any experience doing so in the past?  They have no guarantee it would sell well.

In addition, they'd need to put in all of the effort for advertising this other game, they'd need to do the press tour, they'd need to shell out money for some sort of cinematic trailer, AND if they did have a single player campaign on this multiplayer focused game, they'd either A) Be developing it with staff not from their main Edmonton office (ME headquarters) or They'd be pulling staff off of ME3 to work on this other game, harming ME3's single player.  

It makes no sense for them to want to do that.  

Why do both games need to be released at the same time? And why would Bioware risk their most successful series to date by attempting to include an aspect that can potentially hurt the core experience of the game?

When did I say "at the same time"?  Are you referring to the Edmonton staff issue?  Are you suggesting that they take their Mass Effect single player RPG team, the team that at its core was the one that worked on Knights of the Old Republic and let them go ahead and make a multiplayer game?  Instead of using their new studio staffed with people they picked up with multiplayer backgrounds?  

They could stagger the launches, most definitely, but the development cycle for both would coincide, unless they had Edmonton working on some other unrelated project.  

And your last argument wasn't about hurting ME3.  Your last statement was a personal opinion.  You've yet to give any evidence that the quality would suffer.  

[hero3440]

I think its has nothing to do with mass effect at all.

[Omega-202]

charmingcharlie wrote...

Omega-202 wrote...
This sounds like a mix of Bethesda playing tight wad and a bluff to try and get Microsoft to ease up on licensing.  
I'll try to find the article where I read $2.50 per disk.  It was originally linked off of Escapist.com.  Do you have the 5-7 figure anywhere?  

I think you might be confusing "production costs" and "royalty costs".  The actual physical media is probably charged at $2.50 per disc (amazing when you think a blank DVD can be bought for pennies these days) on top of the production costs there is also an added royalty cost that MS charges.  Now some are claiming MS has dropped this "per disc" royalty but it hasn't changed ID's stance that it is too expensive to produce a three disc game on the xbox 360. 

Suffice to say the royalty fees on console games are prohibitive and it is the main reason why PC games are always at least $10 cheaper (even on release day) than the console version.  I believe it would not be financially viable for Bioware to do a 3 disc game and if they included MP it would have to fit on 2 discs and share space with the SP campaign that means SP would suffer.

I know the difference and it would be ridiculous for it to cost $2.50 to burn a DVD that anyone can get in bulk for chicken scratch.  

I give little credence to the ID issue.  Unless someone shows otherwise, I will not believe that Microsoft charges an additional fee of 5-7 USD in licensing for each disk, on top of the original royalty for the sale of the game as a whole.  Bethesda has made a push against the piracy and game re-sale front in the past and I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that they're squeezing ID to make sure that the game doesn't get spread on to too many disks to avoid "share" gaming.  

I know we're long past the olden days where gamers would share disks for multidisk games, but it wouldn't be beyond reason for them to still fear this.  

[SkittlesKat96]

 Hardcore Bioware fans know a lot about the lore and would know about the first contact war, but it could also mean Mass Effect 3 which is the general consensus at the moment and makes a lot more sense. Unless maybe it's another company helping Bioware so they can still make ME3 while making a first contact war ME game?

I know it's most likely a Mass Effect game though, we've all seen the evidence.
Is the 11th tomorrow in the US?

[MisterDyslexo]

SkittlesKat96 wrote...

 Hardcore Bioware fans know a lot about the lore and would know about the first contact war, but it could also mean Mass Effect 3 which is the general consensus at the moment and makes a lot more sense. Unless maybe it's another company helping Bioware so they can still make ME3 while making a first contact war ME game?

I know it's most likely a Mass Effect game though, we've all seen the evidence.
Is the 11th tomorrow in the US?

Not quite. Its about 47 hours until the VGAs. If you can't get it internationally, I for one will post whatever I hear of Bioware on here.

[-Skorpious-]

Omega-202 wrote...

-Skorpious- wrote...

Omega-202 wrote...

-Skorpious- wrote...

Secondly, some of us (like myself) would rather see a spin-off MP game with loads of additional content, customization, and a unique SP experience; tacking MP onto ME3 will hinder both games, not just ME3.

Yes, that's what you'd like, but is that what BioWare would like?

If they do some market testing and find that the feedback for such a game is lukewarm, especially in a market DOMINATED by other companies already, why would they go ahead and release a multiplayer heavy game when they've never had any experience doing so in the past?  They have no guarantee it would sell well.

In addition, they'd need to put in all of the effort for advertising this other game, they'd need to do the press tour, they'd need to shell out money for some sort of cinematic trailer, AND if they did have a single player campaign on this multiplayer focused game, they'd either A) Be developing it with staff not from their main Edmonton office (ME headquarters) or They'd be pulling staff off of ME3 to work on this other game, harming ME3's single player.  

It makes no sense for them to want to do that.  

Why do both games need to be released at the same time? And why would Bioware risk their most successful series to date by attempting to include an aspect that can potentially hurt the core experience of the game?

When did I say "at the same time"?  Are you referring to the Edmonton staff issue?  Are you suggesting that they take their Mass Effect single player RPG team, the team that at its core was the one that worked on Knights of the Old Republic and let them go ahead and make a multiplayer game?  Instead of using their new studio staffed with people they picked up with multiplayer backgrounds?  

They could stagger the launches, most definitely, but the development cycle for both would coincide, unless they had Edmonton working on some other unrelated project.  

And your last argument wasn't about hurting ME3.  Your last statement was a personal opinion.  You've yet to give any evidence that the quality would suffer.  

True, I cannot prove that it will hurt the SP, but can you prove that the SP will remain unaffected? No, you can't. You can assume (as I am) but that is all you can do.

Maybe it is an opinion, but I would rather have Shepard's story end in the biggest bang possible - adding MP will subtract from that. By subtract I mean that both studios will have to develop the same weapon designs, models, animations, physics, general level designs, same talents and class powers, ect. While the MP team can refine these additions, they would still have to worl closely with the core team, thus, wasting resources that would be better suited to improving the SP.

Like I said, its a personal opinion. But I still think ME is too much of a golden goose to risk screwing around with the general formula of the games. Thats what spin-offs are for; to try things that may or may not work in the core experience of the series.

[MisterDyslexo]

hero3440 wrote...

I think its has nothing to do with mass effect at all.

I'm telling you people, Princess Barbie sequel. Prove me wrong

Modifié par MisterDyslexo, 10 décembre 2010 - 12:51 .

[Omega-202]

SkittlesKat96 wrote...

 Hardcore Bioware fans know a lot about the lore and would know about the first contact war,

And the fact that IT WASN'T A WAR!!!

Please people, suggesting this.  Its just getting sad at this point.  

[charmingcharlie]

Omega-202 wrote...

I know the difference and it would be ridiculous for it to cost $2.50 to burn a DVD that anyone can get in bulk for chicken scratch. 

Why would it be ridiculous ?  It's Microsoft this is a company that charges through the nose for pretty much everything.  They certainly have a monopoly on disc media on their console since publishers HAVE to use official DVD media provided only by Microsoft.   Now since MS has a monopoly on disc production it doesn't seen crazy to suggest they will charge a premium for the media.  After all publishers are not going to want to lose out on the 40 million potential customers on the xbox 360.

Omega-202 wrote...
I give little credence to the ID issue.  Unless someone shows otherwise, I will not believe that Microsoft charges an additional fee of 5-7 USD in licensing for each disk, on top of the original royalty for the sale of the game as a whole.  Bethesda has made a push against the piracy and game re-sale front in the past and I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that they're squeezing ID to make sure that the game doesn't get spread on to too many disks to avoid "share" gaming.  

I know we're long past the olden days where gamers would share disks for multidisk games, but it wouldn't be beyond reason for them to still fear this. 

So you are going to ignore two of the biggest names in the business   That is of course up to you, they clearly stated the reason RAGE is coming on just 2 discs and has seen content cut and quality sacrificed on the Xbox version is down to the extra cost of adding a third disc.  You choose to ignore that and make up a completely fictional reason for it all that is your choice.

If you are not going to be objective and listen to two of the biggest names in the industry there is little point in me trying to convince you.  You have clearly made up your mind that you are right and everyone else is wrong and nothing will change that.

Modifié par charmingcharlie, 10 décembre 2010 - 01:00 .

[Kenthen]

Omega-202 wrote...

SkittlesKat96 wrote...

 Hardcore Bioware fans know a lot about the lore and would know about the first contact war,

And the fact that IT WASN'T A WAR!!!

Please people, suggesting this.  Its just getting sad at this point.  

Of course it was a war, it just wasn't a very long one and with few casaulties.

[Gibb_Shepard]

[quote]Omega-202 wrote...

[quote]LiamN7 wrote...

[quote]Omega-202 wrote...



[quote]Gibb_Shepard wrote...

PLEASE DON"T BE ME3!! I never thought i'd ever say that, but ME3 with multiplayer is a massive turn off to me. The singleplayer can only suffer from this.[/quote]

THAT'S NOT TRUE!!!  Why do people keep insisting this?  The single player can remain exactly as is.  BioWare is not some backwoods podunk studio.  They have the man power and funding to develop a solid multiplayer game at one of their other studios and package it in with ME3.  Its not like they're racing against time to release this game and its not like they don't have the financial backing to make it happen.  

Why is it that nobody on this forum has any kind of concept of objectivism and any inkling of financial acumen.  Is everyone really so blinded that they can't see EA/BioWare's financial mindset?  

[/quote]

It's nice that you believe that, but its unfortunately not true. ME3 in some way will be hindered by multiplayer. 

[Mr. MannlyMan]

Omega-202 wrote...

You'd rather pay $120 for two separate ME games?  I'd personally prefer them in one package.  

I'd rather pay $60 for an amazing SP-focused game, and $60 for an equally good MP/SP game that builds on the franchise and gives it a solid base in the multiplayer market, than be unable to choose and end up buying a game with a scaled-down SP campaign and multiplayer that is simply a clone of other, more MP-oriented shooters.

And if it in no way harms the single player game, like we've been discussing, why are you opposed to it?
If its developed by a completely separate BioWare studio and written onto a separate "Multiplayer Disk 3", what is your problem?

Would it not make more sense for BioWare to include it and make more money off of the franchise as a whole, therefore increasing the likelihood and quality of future chapters for ME games?  

It would make even more sense for EA to fund development of an MP-oriented Mass Effect game outside the main trilogy. Adding multiplayer to a game that has an overtly dominant singleplayer component will cause problems in terms of how much credit shooter gamers will give you, and how long shooter fans will stay in your camp. In order to get the kind of profit you need to justify the expense, the multiplayer would need to be top-notch, and I'm sorry that I just can't see that happening.

Bioware isn't Bungie, and shooter fans will have a hard time swallowing a multiplayer component that's sub-par to the industry standard and that's overshadowed by a much larger singleplayer campaign.

THAT'S NOT TRUE!!!  Why do people keep insisting this?  The single player can remain exactly as is.  BioWare is not some backwoods podunk studio.  They have the man power and funding to develop a solid multiplayer game at one of their other studios and package it in with ME3.  Its not like they're racing against time to release this game and its not like they don't have the financial backing to make it happen.  

Why is it that nobody on this forum has any kind of concept of objectivism and any inkling of financial acumen.  Is everyone really so blinded that they can't see EA/BioWare's financial mindset?  

They're trying to get the game done in even less time than it took them to release ME2; nearly every interview in which they've answered questions regarding ME3 has been indicative of this. Also, this is EA we're talking about here. They have a very thorough history of screwing with game development and mucking with beloved IPs by milking target audiences with sub-par gimmicks, all the while disappointing fans and decreasing the lifespan of each franchise. It is not unreasonable to be critical of similar directions for ME3.

The thing that tickles EA's fancy is the wild popuclarity of MP-focused shooters like Halo and Call of Duty. It's a big market, but wasting resources on traps that are meant to draw in multiplayer fans are really inefficient IMO.

[maxut85]

ugh the anticipation is killing me. I vow to not go to this site again untill the vga's.

[Legion 2.5]

I really like all the detective work here. Did any of you went back in time to London and talk with Sherlock Holmes?

[MisterDyslexo]

Legion 2.5 wrote...

I really like all the detective work here. Did any of you went back in time to London and talk with Sherlock Holmes?

Time machine isn't ready yet. Michael J. Fox busted it a few weeks ago, and we haven't patched it up completely.

[Mr. MannlyMan]

Legion 2.5 wrote...

I really like all the detective work here. Did any of you went back in time to London and talk with Sherlock Holmes?

Time travel is elementary, Legion.

Modifié par Mr. MannlyMan, 10 décembre 2010 - 01:43 .

[Legion 2.5]

Mr. MannlyMan wrote...

Legion 2.5 wrote...

I really like all the detective work here. Did any of you went back in time to London and talk with Sherlock Holmes?

Time travel is elementary, Legion.

I was being funny.  Convienently though the Sherlock Holmes novels take place in London.

[ChuckNorris18]

 joystiq is confirming, from an unknown trusted source, that the game is mass effect 3 and will include multiplayer online.
Edit: Nvm found out that this article was posted at page 9.
www.joystiq.com/2010/12/09/rumor-mass-effect-3-to-be-revealed-at-the-vgas-will-include-mu/

Modifié par ChuckNorris18, 10 décembre 2010 - 02:05 .