70 réponses à ce sujet

[bjdbwea]

Omega-202 wrote...

Well that's news to BioWare.  They're currently making the MOST EXPENSIVE GAME OF ALL TIME focused completely on multiplayer story-telling.  They're taking a $350 million + gamble on SW: the Old Republic and its ability to do multiplayer story telling.

And even though they have Mr. Karpyshyn working on the project, I have doubts whether they will succeed. Either it will have a good story, then the masses will quickly leave because the gameplay isn't like they'd expect from their common MMORPGs. Or the story will suffer because of the compromises they had to make for the multiplayer gameplay.

Omega-202 wrote...

Because you can just keep throwing resources at a project and it gets infinitely better right?  No.  There's a point where the game is simply complete.

That might be true, but ME 2 was already far from being complete. And ME 3 doesn't have much development time either. It's already questionable whether it will be the game that it should be, but wasting time on a multiplayer mode would make that very unlikely.

Omega-202 wrote...

So, especially if you have a separate office work on the other section, it doesn't hurt the single player.  It could have its own budget that would be recouped by the additional cost of the DLC.

That would only work if a large enough number of people would buy the DLC, but I doubt that, because the majority of people likes the Mass Effect series for its amazing single player experience. Anyway, if they have more money and people available, they should work on the single player mode too.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 20 janvier 2011 - 03:49 .

[Omega-202]

bjdbwea wrote...


And even though they have Mr. Karpyshyn working on the project, I have doubts whether they will succeed. Either it will have a good story, then the masses will quickly leave because the gameplay isn't like they'd expect from their common MMORPGs. Or the story will suffer because of the compromises they had to make for the multiplayer gameplay.

That's what you believe.  But BioWare is going to make games based on what BioWare believes.  They believe its going to work.  

That might be true, but ME 2 was already far from being complete. And ME 3 doesn't have much development time either. It's already questionable whether it will be the game that it should be, but wasting time on a multiplayer mode would make that very unlikely.

And you're basing this on what?  You don't know how far along they are.  You don't know when they started.  You don't know if adding more hands to the project is going to help.  You have NOTHING to base this speculation on.  

That would only work if a large enough number of people would buy the DLC, but I doubt that, because the majority of people likes the Mass Effect series for its amazing single player experience. Anyway, if they have more money and people available, they should work on the single player mode too.

You first acknowledge that "more people doesn't necessarily equal more quality" and then come back with this last part?  

And if its included in the price of a Collector's Edition, people will buy it up without a second thought.  People buy special editions without a second thought whether its an additional $10 or $30 and I guarantee that people would pay $100+ for an ME3 Collector's Edition even if they don't plan on ever playing the multiplayer.  

And if you put a nice piece of story in the co-op DLC, a lot of people would be enticed to play it just for that.  They could make the co-op campaign soloable to get people who don't like multiplayer to buy it just to see a complementary view of the ME Universe.  

Modifié par Omega-202, 20 janvier 2011 - 04:01 .

[bjdbwea]

You are also just writing down speculations. Only one thing is for sure, they will do whatever EA thinks makes them the most money. Hopefully, their research has shown that multiplayer would cost more than it would earn.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 20 janvier 2011 - 04:09 .

[Omega-202]

bjdbwea wrote...

You are also just writing down speculations. Only one thing is for sure, they will do whatever EA thinks makes them the most money. Hopefully their research has shown that multiplayer would cost more than it would earn.

I'm positing an option not speculation of something that was going to happen.  I never said its something they were going to do, I was only arguing the feasibility of it.  

YOU on the other hand countered with speculation.  

And in regards to research, EA had this to say:

"Chatting with trade site Develop, Gibeau says "I volunteer you to speak to EA's studio heads; they'll tell you the same thing. They're very comfortable moving the discussion towards how we make connected gameplay – be it co-operative or multiplayer or online services – as opposed to fire-and-forget, packaged goods only, single-player, 25-hours-and you're out. I think that model is finished.""Online is where the innovation, and the action, is at"." 

[Jacen987]

JamieCOTC wrote...

Dusty Boy T wrote...

I don't think many people here want multiplayer anyway, bro.

Again, this.

Alexander Kogan wrote...

Dude, I completely agree with you
100%.  Multiplayer is something that does NOT belong in Mass Effect 3
and it would be a waste of BioWares' time, money and patience into
tacking it into the game.  Mass Effect 3 (and the Mass Effect series as a
whole) was built from the ground up as an epic single player experience
and it should remain as such.

And to everyone else out there
that disagrees,  MULTIPLAYER DOES NOT HAVE TO BE IN EVERY GAME!!!  Just
because a legendary series such as Mass Effect won't have multiplayer
does not mean the end of the fricking world!  There is nothing wrong
with single player only games!
[smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/devil.png[/smilie]

And this. 

I know a mod did state that ME3 was a SP game, but for the love of god, I wish a dev would say something and end this debate once and for all. 

:ph34r:See,this media blackout is driving me out of my mind!!!!They released a bloody hype trailer,and for what.!!!!
For a game,we already knew was coming.And for a game we know nothing about.

Its been 2 months and not even a lousy stinkin paragraph of a basic classification.Or a screenshot or something.

Is it a multiplayer,is it co-op.Would painting a few broad stockes really kill there the damn marketing.Nearly 70% of all threads seem to be asking question,because people dont have the slightest idea what to expect at this point.

I honestly cant see the logic behind adding any sort of multi-player.Are they really going to win a new audience with a last instalment of the series,by adding a half-a.....ed online component at the cost of what the current audience expects.Its my opinion that ME3 already had some pretty huge shoes to fill.If they honestly think they can dish out more of the same.Well,i just dont think,that'll do it.

And when both componets arent great,its Fail on both accounts and it will be C&C4 all over agian.(nobody pleased)

I just hope they come out of the closet and post a paragraph.Will it be a SP,or MMO,or co-op,or a damn Gears of Effect.So these thread can stop and we know what the ===== we are in for.Honeslty i wish they hadn't announced.

[Ulzeraj]

Jacen987 wrote...

See,this media blackout is driving me out of my mind!!!!They released a bloody hype trailer,and for what.!!!!

For a game,we already knew was coming.And for a game we know nothing about.

I think...

building hype for DA2 and ME2 at the same time can be counter productive. We'll get a lot more of love and information once DA2 is ready and packed for the average-joe.

[Jacen987]

"Online is where the innovation, and the action, is at"."

Damn this is stupidest thing i've ever heard.There's money in multilayer,but innovation.PTHTH!!

I bed to differ.Regerdless even from a business perspective it makes no sence.Who's gonna play it.The core ME audience,that come for story,immersion and choice.The Online Junckies!Are thay really drop Gears,or COD or Halo,or whatever to play ME online.

Those games,those series were design primarely  with that inmind.By people who've been making online games for the better part of a decade.Are they really gonna rake in the big bucks with a poor man's Gears.

Somehow i doubt ME was invisioned with a strong multi-player appeal.From Bioware.........<_<

I think...

building hype for DA2 and ME2 at the same time can be
counter productive. We'll get a lot more of love and information once
DA2 is ready and packed for the average-joe.

Then,they rally shoud not have annouced it that early.:huh:Damn i miss the days,when reveal were done 3 months before release/

Modifié par Jacen987, 20 janvier 2011 - 04:52 .

[Omega-202]

But it still will have story, immersion and choice and all of that. BioWare isn't going to get rid of any of those features.

Its just that they probably realized that there's a market cap for that audience. They need to expand the appeal in order to sell more. Who's going to play it? Hate to break it to you, but the people you listed are a lot of the people who ALREADY are big fans of the ME series. There are a lot of shooter fans of those games in this community AND the development team; Christina Norman said that they had a lot of fans of other shooters during one of her presentations and that it helped them tune the shooter experience for ME2.

How a game series was envisioned at the start is not always relevant to where it goes. Was Mario envisioned for the eventual leap to 3D? Was Warcraft envisioned for the transfer from RTS to MMO? And we're not even talking about a leap of those scales. All we're talking about is taking a wonderful TPS/RPG and making it have optional co-op.

[bjdbwea]

Omega-202 wrote...

They need to expand the appeal in order to sell more.

They already tried to make ME 2 more appealing to the shooter crowd, but it didn't exactly increase the sales numbers. And I think that many shooter fans would still ignore ME 3 even with a multiplayer mode, simply because there are countless shooters from dedicated developers that will always work better than BioWare's and that do not distract them with cutscenes and dialogue.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 20 janvier 2011 - 05:11 .

[Jacen987]

Omega-202 wrote...

But it still will have story, immersion and choice and all of that. BioWare isn't going to get rid of any of those features.
Its just that they probably realized that there's a market cap for that audience. They need to expand the appeal in order to sell more. Who's going to play it? Hate to break it to you, but the people you listed are a lot of the people who ALREADY are big fans of the ME series. There are a lot of shooter fans of those games in this community AND the development team; Christina Norman said that they had a lot of fans of other shooters during one of her presentations and that it helped them tune the shooter experience for ME2.
How a game series was envisioned at the start is not always relevant to where it goes. Was Mario envisioned for the eventual leap to 3D? Was Warcraft envisioned for the transfer from RTS to MMO? And we're not even talking about a leap of those scales. All we're talking about is taking a wonderful TPS/RPG and making it have optional co-op.

Please,what shooter fans.Last ime i checked,you still spend 50% of your time in ME2 talking and exploring and just moving around.The Ratio of combat/roleplaying has not changed at all form ME1.The only things that changed is that they simplyfied the combat,by essentially eliminating any thought involved.

However Gears fans and alike buy those games because they're NONE-STOP action.Short and explosive campaigns,followed by JUMP-IN JUMP-OUT multiplayer.Whos goona sit through dialog trees,or wait for others as they read,or even have the time to play multiple hours on end on plot-based missions.

This game is just not for them,and until Bioware "streamlines" every RPG mechanic,until this is just a corridor shooter,no talking,no progression,no nothing.It will never sell like them.They shoud,instead,focus on adding more depth,to catch the roleplayers,who currently dont even regard ME as an RPG.

Modifié par Jacen987, 20 janvier 2011 - 05:20 .

[Omega-202]

bjdbwea wrote...

They already tried to make ME 2 more appealing to the shooter crowd, but it didn't exactly increase the sales numbers. And I think that many shooter fans would still ignore ME 3 even with a multiplayer mode, simply because there are countless shooters from dedicated developers that will always work better than BioWare's and that do not distract them with cutscenes and dialogue.

A) The sales DID go up.  Drastically.  After 6 weeks, ME 1 sold 1.6 million copies.  After 1 week, ME 2 had already sold 2 million copies.  I don't have the "to current date" numbers off hand, but I do remember seeing them out there.  ME 2 has sold a lot more than ME 1.  

You say it as if every shooter fan is a mindless drone who only thinks "Kill Kill Kill".  That makes YOU look like the unintelligent one, not the people you're trying to insult.  Few people like playing contextless murder simulators as you'd like to imagine.  I've yet to hear a person complain about the fact that there was "too much story" in ME 2.  

And ME 2's mechanics were on par with any high end TPS out there and it offered more variety to the combat than any other on the market.  

[Schneidend]

Needs some squadmate controlling co-op. Telling Mordin to take cover instead of CQC'ing krogan gets tiresome.

[Jacen987]

Omega-202 wrote...

bjdbwea wrote...

They already tried to make ME 2 more appealing to the shooter crowd, but it didn't exactly increase the sales numbers. And I think that many shooter fans would still ignore ME 3 even with a multiplayer mode, simply because there are countless shooters from dedicated developers that will always work better than BioWare's and that do not distract them with cutscenes and dialogue.

A) The sales DID go up.  Drastically.  After 6 weeks, ME 1 sold 1.6 million copies.  After 1 week, ME 2 had already sold 2 million copies.  I don't have the "to current date" numbers off hand, but I do remember seeing them out there.  ME 2 has sold a lot more than ME 1.  

You say it as if every shooter fan is a mindless drone who only thinks "Kill Kill Kill".  That makes YOU look like the unintelligent one, not the people you're trying to insult.  Few people like playing contextless murder simulators as you'd like to imagine.  I've yet to hear a person complain about the fact that there was "too much story" in ME 2.  

And ME 2's mechanics were on par with any high end TPS out there and it offered more variety to the combat than any other on the market.  

They dont say it,they just dont buy it.And believe it or not Action-Man,there plenty of people who play Role-Playing(just a joke,dont take offence) games and have patiance to do so.They just want quality.If Bioware sticks to what it can do,they'll innovate and sell  more and more.There is a hunger right now for solid RPG on all systems since JRG standarts are in decline


Copying 4-year old cover-based shooters wont ever make ME a premier title.Because Bioware hasnt been a pionier of FPS for the past 5 years.They always play catch-up/Ever since i remember,people were buying Bioware games for story.Gamplay was always sucky,unbalanced and so on.

As for your sales,ME was never in the top 10 NPD after its first month.While games like COD MW2 are still in top 20 after 1 year.Look at the purse of top rated shooters like COD,HALO , GEARS,heck even Uncharted.Its not even a contest and it will never be.

Someone said.......

But a good story and multiplayer gameplay are mutually exclusive. And if
you want a dedicated multiplayer mode, it would be better to outsource
that into its own game.

Normally there're not,but PURE shooters and RPG's are.The more u strengthen one the more u distill the other.
Im not insulting on shooter fans or anything.Infact i play shooters regurarly.But i dont play for RP or vice versa.Both genres have different goals and different appeal.And while people were pleased with the combat.Not many were pleased with the linear corridor,one-way shooting galleries some quests were.The mechanics are fine,but when they start bringing the whole expierience out of genre, some will cry faul.


BTW.Under the current 2 year dev timeframe ,so are story and multiplayer.

They either gonna finish,what they begann 5 years ago.Or they gonna Fail,with "Be everything for everyone"

And ME 2's mechanics were on par with any high end TPS out there

:blink:Where do you get this.Every review ive ever read or watched,and everyone if ever asked say there are far better shooters out there.Not one review has actually phraized the combat,as innovative.That was Uncharted and Gears/.........

Modifié par Jacen987, 20 janvier 2011 - 05:55 .

[bjdbwea]

Omega-202 wrote...

And ME 2's mechanics were on par with any high end TPS out there and it offered more variety to the combat than any other on the market.

Actually, no, they weren't. Almost every TPS that I have played on PC was more interesting, less repetitive and better controllable than the pew-pew in ME 2. Maybe it's adequate on consoles, but I'm quite sure that even there you can find numerous better shooters. Let's face it, no BioWare game since the DnD games has had really good combat, that just was never one of their strengths. Writing and story telling were, and even though ME 2 didn't exactly shine in these regards, it's still better than most games these days. So in any case, they should concentrate on that, because the demand is definitely still there.

[Omega-202]

I'm not going to bother arguing about the gameplay and the claims that "Not one review has actually phraized the combat,as innovative" because just doing a cursory search through the dozens of "Game of the Year" articles gave me enough praise for the combat to fill a small library, but interestingly enough I came across the same quote from Casey Hudson a few times in a number of interviews in these articles.

When asked about Mass Effect 3 in a lot of these Game of the Year interviews, he says (quoting directly from the X-Play interview) : "I think we've got some surprises in there that people aren't expecting us to add". The same thing is paraphrased in other interviews with him and ITS THE FIRST THING HE SAYS IN MOST OF THEM.

I'll leave it at that. Purists beware. Even if he's not planning on adding multiplayer, he's adding something that YOU'RE not expecting. My bet remains on multiplayer.

We have EA's new business model, quotes about unexpected additions to ME3 and the persistent rumor that keeps cropping up in numerous publications. Take it as you will. I'm not going keep trying to fight the denial. The stalwart always fall to the persistence of ignorance.

[Jacen987]

Omega-202 wrote...

I'm not going to bother arguing about the gameplay and the claims that "Not one review has actually phraized the combat,as innovative" because just doing a cursory search through the dozens of "Game of the Year" articles gave me enough praise for the combat to fill a small library, but interestingly enough I came across the same quote from Casey Hudson a few times in a number of interviews in these articles.
When asked about Mass Effect 3 in a lot of these Game of the Year interviews, he says (quoting directly from the X-Play interview) : "I think we've got some surprises in there that people aren't expecting us to add". The same thing is paraphrased in other interviews with him and ITS THE FIRST THING HE SAYS IN MOST OF THEM.
I'll leave it at that. Purists beware. Even if he's not planning on adding multiplayer, he's adding something that YOU'RE not expecting. My bet remains on multiplayer.
We have EA's new business model, quotes about unexpected additions to ME3 and the persistent rumor that keeps cropping up in numerous publications. Take it as you will. I'm not going keep trying to fight the denial. The stalwart always fall to the persistence of ignorance.

^_^Reviews weres saying that the combat is alot better and polished  than the first game .Never that it was on par with top-line shooter.

:huh:Casey Hudson was asked about the STORY.And replayed,there were going to take it to places people wound never expect and they'll definately be surprises instore.

The Multiplayer rumor started after Job postings for multi-player balance of A Mass Effect title.So we still in the dark,regarding plans of online play.We know Bioware might  working on a ME title afte ME3.They've said they wont retire this "rich and deep universe"

Modifié par Jacen987, 20 janvier 2011 - 06:43 .

[Metalunatic]

I agree with no multiplayer. Seems like every company is stuffing it in the weirdest of franchises for no reason. ME is one of those games that don't need it, period.

[rma2110]

I think the job listings for job postings for multi-player balance of A Mass Effect title came too late for it to be mass effect 3. The mere mention of multi-player is the only thing that would make me not pre-order and wait for the reviews.



I've tried multi-player and it seems to bring out the worst in people. The griefers and cheaters are usually quick to ruin the fun.

[Praetor Knight]

Poaches wrote...

I thought the only people who wanted the multiplayer component were console players. Making comparisons to console fps' with co-op modes.

My opinion, cover based shooters are too slow paced to have any entertainment value in competitive gaming. Mass Effect has no place in it.

I'm on the 360, and I do not want multiplayer with ME3.


If there will be multiplayer set in the ME universe, save it for ME4 and beyond, IMHO.

[Element_Zero]

Again after reading a lot of the above postings on the subject, I'm still with the folks against it in the Mass Effect 3 title.

In a new stand alone title I'm fine with, I tend to think it will bring alot more satisfaction that way anyway with new heros should the dev team work the co-op play right if that is the mechanic you seek. Other MP desires can be brought in as well and the controls / classes can be more 'cookie cutter cut outs' of one another, since I know there's always going to be arguments going on over this class or that class or that power being too powerful or too underpowered in PVP arena style fighting.

It's just something I'm not interested in, and I've made my voice heard over and over in regards to it.

It's true we do worry about quality when it comes to the story of ME 3, infact not just that but game play mechanics, graphics, AI, but pure game quality in reguards to glitches / bugs. There are arguments going on and on about these non MP things in hundreds of postings out there.

Modifié par Element_Zero, 20 janvier 2011 - 08:35 .

[rodgerage]

I believe if they release the game and than make a multiplayer after it has been out that they could have as i dont want any of the campaign suffering because it was neglected because of multi-player