114 réponses à ce sujet

[LaztRezort]

LFDog wrote...

Multiplayer = complexity in development.

Yes.  I think there is a misconception that MP is just something that can be tacked on to a game.  Akin to changing/updating the user interface, for example, or enhancing combat mechanics.  This is just not the case.

Let's clear this up, without any consideration of the subjective side of the debate.

Developing for multiplayer is an important game engine decision that is best made up front.  It can get complicated, and it can affect just about every code module -- timing/scheduling, AI, rendering chain, player input, memory management, scripting engine, etc. must all accomodate.  Also, the gameplay itself would need an entire overhaul to make it balanced and fun.  It would arguably be easier to add mounted combat, swimming, jumping, skiing, driving, and real-time combat with ninja swords than to "just add MP".  It would be massive undertaking for even the largest development houses (who are used to thinking in millions of dollars).

Since game developers work on a limited budget, provided by publishers ( who weigh profit vs. development cost), something else has to give.  This is the nature of beast, so to speak.  So thinking that DA:O Multiplayer would be DA:O Singleplayer with a MP option that can be turned on/off is incorrect.  DA:O (in it's current, massive form) + Multiplayer would cost a studio large amounts of money, because most customers are not going to pay double price for a video game.  You might, but that will not make up for the loss.

This is why many are against MP.  Not because MP is bad, dumb, childish, not fun, or whatever (all subjective).  But because DA:O would be less of a single-player game than it currently is if there was multiplayer.

NOTE:  By MP, I am talking small, not MMO.  MMO is an entirely different animal altogether, so much so that it requires an entirely different business plan and investment model even before a single programmer is hired.

[PurplePaladin]

I love the single player aspect of DA, but, after having SO much fun over the years with BG & NWN cooperative play, I really wish I could share the world of DA with a friend too. It's just so fun exploring fantasy world like DA with a friend (or two). You just can't have this kind/type of relaxing fun with WoW or Diablo. And I'm not talking PvP, just cooperative.

Modifié par PurplePaladin, 14 novembre 2009 - 07:43 .

[JustAnotherZero]

I remember NWN and how the multi-player aspect of the game made the main campaign... Simply trash. It was utterly underwhelming. It had a good story past Chapter 1 but... There was no immersion. It was horribly basic; go from here to there, kill this and that with some story thrown in.

Thank god they didnt include multi-player this time. Otherwise we'd end up with another NWN instead of a spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate.

[Magilicotti]

As far as this game, Dragon Age: Origins, is concerned it will never become a multiplayer game of course. Whether or not BioWare will make a MMO or a variation of a multiplayer type game, some say they have already reported they will not.



I've recently freed myself from MMORPG's, as I've played them heavily for the past 10+ years. This game is that game, which has brought me back to the single player RPG games, which I love so well.



To answer the subject of this thread, single player is fun, for those that find it fun. Those that play multiplayers, will find them fun more. Therefore to answer your question is a simple matter of opinion.



Mine answer is, single player is more fun. As long as there are games like this masterpiece, I will never get bored of them.

[LaztRezort]

Since we are clearing up misconceptions , let me try to head off another argument I sense coming down the line:  "BG/NWN had MP, and it was a good game, so why not DA:O?"

Again, doing way with the subjective side of things, this is a ill-contrived comparison.  DA:O is orders of magnitude more complex than BG, with or without MP. 

To take a hypothetical case, and completely over extrapolate to make a point:  If Bioware was given the money to make a viable MP game as "good" as BG (for all this is decided by contract with the publisher beforehand), we would have BG -- with all its lack of high-res graphics, visual effects, tons of voice acting, lack of modability, etc.  Yes, this is not entirely true for various reasons (such as better development tools, existing code bases, and enhanced APIs that were not available then), but it paints the picture.  DA:O may be a spiritual successor to a decade old game, but technical and financial comparisons should be made with care, if at all.

[wanderon]

Romeriez Galenar wrote...

wanderon wrote...

Sigh, why do people have such a hard time accepting what a game offers without harping on about oh this is great but if it only did this or that it would be so much better.

It's a single player game - I would like to see it remain a single player game - just because I would not be forced to avail myself of mutliplayer does not mean I would not lose anything if multiplayer were added.

To add multiplayer would require a substantial amount of work that would take away dev time from working strictly on the single player aspect. Thus my single player aspect loses so others can play MP - it's a single player game and it has the possibilty of being one of the best ones ever made - lets not gimp that by trying to be something it was never designed to be!

Firstly I imagine it as sort of a feedback mechanism.  The game is good but it is NOT perfect.  I'm certain that Bioware is interested in what people think, what they liked and what they wish was included as long as its posted in a constructive manner.

Now I don't believe for a second that they thought MP wouldn't be wanted which is why I asked myself what the *beep* they were thinking when they designed this game without it.  

That said, I don't fool myself into thinking they'd ever go back and put MP in.  They won't.  The people that are posting saying it would ruin their perfect single player game are most likely wrong however and just resisting things to be resisting them.  No other game that bioware created with MP impacted in any way a person playing the single player game.  It was just a case of use it or ignore it. 

If DA:O was released as a combo SP & MP game then you might be technically correct that the MP part would not effect SP play to any significant degree since the engine would have been designed from the ground up to include both. 
 
However it might still be argued that the time and effort put into the MP side during development would have been taken away from the SP side (and vice versa for those who would rather have the MP side).

As for what they were thinking when they decided to design the game without MP - isn't it obvious? They wanted to make a great single player game- and they have and there is no reason to change that vision now to cobble on a MP aspect rather than to put all their effort into making the game a better single player game.

[LFDog]

0LunarEclipse0 wrote...

LFDog wrote...

The one thing that bioware does that is excellent is allow an open-development model. So even if multi-player doesn't get added (again, I hope it doesn't) - you can still create challenges to share with your friends.

You are being given a community why do you have to destroy my hopes of a single player game. That being the only reason I buy Bioware games. I love single player immersion. As has been stated a million times NWN single player was lacking because of the multiplayer. So enough stop crying for it. You are in the minority. Bioware fans have grown up and we still love our single player experience. There are plenty of games that cater to what YOU want. So stop trying to take away from a company who caters to what WE want.

P.S. Just because a game is old (Baulders Gate and it's mp) does not mean it is bad. So don't cry that you don't get good games with the MP. You do and plenty of companies are cattering to YOU. So can I not just have this one that caters ME and the millions of other single player gamers across the world.

Um.... not sure what you're trying to say, but I am NOT in favour of multi-player.  I'm single-player all the way.
The reason I am single-player is that I think Multi-player would add complexity to development that would result in a diminished single-player.

So... if you are attacking me for wanting multi-player - you need to re-read what I posted.  I want single-player - like the box said.

[Rylor Tormtor]

muniekk85 wrote...

As to replying to your post, WoW is the only popular fantasy multiplayer (both massively and "regular") game I know of

I sense ignorance. Ignorance expressed in so shameless way...

He said popular, as in mainstream. Not the super geek warrens we live in. Get over yourself.

[Melcene]

I wouldn't mind some sort of TCP/IP multiplayer option.



That being said, I was just telling my husband last night that I enjoy this game, and its interactions with the other party members, and that right now it's quite a relief from WoW. These characters don't cause nearly as much trouble or grief

[JeffMo]

Magilicotti wrote...

As far as this game, Dragon Age: Origins, is concerned it will never become a multiplayer game of course. Whether or not BioWare will make a MMO or a variation of a multiplayer type game, some say they have already reported they will not.

I've recently freed myself from MMORPG's, as I've played them heavily for the past 10+ years. This game is that game, which has brought me back to the single player RPG games, which I love so well.

To answer the subject of this thread, single player is fun, for those that find it fun. Those that play multiplayers, will find them fun more. Therefore to answer your question is a simple matter of opinion.

Mine answer is, single player is more fun. As long as there are games like this masterpiece, I will never get bored of them.

I am in the same boat as you Mag and can relate to the freedom from MMO's that you have recently found. I knew this type of reaction was going to be fairly common when all of the WoW (and other MMO) refugees decided to play a non-MMO such as DA:O.

One of the most prominent reasons people are sucked into and hopelessly addicted to MMO's like WoW is very simple: online games and the interaction therein are some of the ONLY social interactions that many people have in the majority of their waking life, aside from family, work etc. MMO's allow the mind to be distracted with thousands of people, drama, raids, pvp, freaky ERP'ers, numerous chat channels etc etc etc. If you find yourself feeling "alone" or "isolated" because you can't even sit down to enjoy an engrossing, fun single player experience, you may want to take a step back and re-evaluate exactly why you are playing games in the first place.

Games are meant to be fun, not a substitute for life and while multi-player games are awesome and can be very exciting, people need to remember that if the plug was pulled, that world and all the pixels just simply do not exist in reality. You don't own that character, that epic sword and if you do not know the people you associate with online in real life, they dont carry over through your modem if the server is deleted forever.

[Romeriez Galenar]

See here's the deal. NWN's single player story wasn't done by Bioware so that point is moot. Perhaps you can argue if they HAD done it instead of focusing on including MP (If that's even the case) then perhaps you have a case here. Bioware took what...5+ years to make this? The graphics are better in The Witcher which is based on the Aurora engine..so why didn't they just make this game on that engine and save some time?



To the people that think the story in DA:O is "Great", well that's subjective. The beginning origins are great, and the ending was good, but the middle in my opinion leaves a lot to be desired. And talk about go here get this quests... have you even experienced any of the so called side quests in this game? They're worse than anything that appeared in NWN....



Most of my thoughts are my opinion though and if you don't agree feel free to ignore me, I won't be offended.

[RedShft]

<3 Singleplayer. Singleplayer > Multiplayer rpgs.

[Spura]

eisberg77 wrote...
NWN single player actually did suffer because of the Muliplayer attention.  Look at NWN single player and compare that to KOTOR, Mass Effect, Jade Empire, and Dragon Age, and you will notice that NWN single player is no where near the calibur that these games were.

I agree that original NWN campagin wasn't all that hot compared to DAO. Yet, to claim that is due to multiplayer capability is a conclusion without any basis. NWN campaign's inferiority could be attributed to any number of things, which can be easily seen in game industry in general, as many games have campaigns  better than their sequels or prequels without a tangible reason, like added multiplayer.

I would argue that some expansions of NWN series were definitely on par with DAO (they were shorter and smaller scope of course).

In any case, it's a waste that a game like DAO has no multiplayer capability. Even if the core campaign is unsuited for multiplayer play, the game offers a toolset, art, game engine, very moddable classes, spells etc...and all of that is wasted, as no modder won't be able to make a multiplayer game out of that. 
The argument that campaign and playstyle is unsuited for multiplayer is an extremely weak one. I've never felt the need to coop NWN or BG main campaigns either and yet the multiplayer capability gave me dozen times more playtime on persistent worlds with their own lore. A small community of 30 regular players playing on one server. It was a bliss compared to today's MMOs and yet much more fun than single player. Sadly this possiblity is gone for DAO.

[JonOsterman]

Bioware could put very little effort into the multiplayer. Most people would be happy with a basic client that would allow the community to develop the modules instead of the developers. Everybody wins.