276 réponses à ce sujet

[MegaBadExample]

Mulitplayer is fun. The story is more important to me though so first things first.

[Ebenezer]

I was just coming to post a link to this same article. I am absolutely sickened by the entire interview and how clueless and in denial Mike sounds. I know he cant rightly come out and say "OK yeah maybe this game sucks and deserves the low scores" but come on. They thought it was a good idea to reuse soooooo many environments? The "difficulty" is why people dont like the game?" And the absolutely most insulting piece I am absolutely sick of "people dont like the game because they dont like change." What a pathetic attempt at an excuse. The "It's you not me" defense.

I could care less about the multiplayer stuff. This guy and anyone else at Bioware who truly thinks like he does need to get their heads out of their backsides and take a look at reality. This is a poor game.

[Warlokki]

So? Multiplayer for third gmae in the series. *shrugs* If it works and is done well... what would be the issue then? People make themselves look a bit moronic when they react with big NO!" everytime something new is suggested...

[Merchant2006]

*sighs*

[Lord Kalorin]

this isnt my name wrote...

Ideas for DA3, DA2 only just released how about supporting this game before rushing out another.
Especially since you didnt even bother to finish the story, or will this be like ME were we are with Hawke for the rest of the games until its all wrapped up ?
BW rethink this.

They actually mentioned heavy DA2 support in the preview.

I edited it into the OP.

[Captain Crash]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

I'm 100% positive that any multiplayer component of a Dragon Age game would be co-op along the lines of BG or NWN, not some 16-player deathmatch style garbage.

That I would be quite fond of then.  Whenever I hear multiplayer now I think of deathmatch rubbish.  Im sure many others do too!

The best memories I have of Baldurs Gate are with my friends playing Co-op.  It used to be really good fun, as im sure those of you which tried it can also attest to.   Plus it still focuses on the single player aspect so it wont be dampened down as many fear of when speaking about multiplayer.  I think a co-op campaign would really add to DA a lot for me.  

Ok it still may not be to everyones tastes, but you have to remember Bioware up until the onset of Mass Effect did use Co-op multiplayer.  Its easy to say EA because of what they have said and what they are like but honestly I think it would be an informed decision made by Bioware themselves if it is included.    

Again I say Co-op not full on multiplayer!!

[Babli]

So passes Bioware, son of EA.

[Xewaka]

Baldur's Gate 2 had cooperative multiplayer, pitting the players in the main campaign and splitting the party between the players. It worked, sort of. This however would require that companions become full player characters again, rather than the cut off options characters they are in DA 2.

Modifié par Xewaka, 11 mars 2011 - 11:23 .

[Wulfram]

Co-op is the only thing which could make sense, but I've never got the impression Co-op is popular enough to be worth implementing it - it'll use up resources, and force compromises on the campaign to accomodate it.

[this isnt my name]

Lord Kalorin wrote...

this isnt my name wrote...

Ideas for DA3, DA2 only just released how about supporting this game before rushing out another.
Especially since you didnt even bother to finish the story, or will this be like ME were we are with Hawke for the rest of the games until its all wrapped up ?
BW rethink this.

They actually mentioned heavy DA2 support in the preview.

I edited it into the OP.

O h I read that in the interview, but its obvious iof planning 3 2 wont get much support, remember how they supported origins ?

[ErebUs890]

Oh, so Baldur's Gate 2 can have MP but Dragon Age can't? People need to stop whining.

[Xewaka]

ErebUs890 wrote...
Oh, so Baldur's Gate 2 can have MP but Dragon Age can't? People need to stop whining.

Actually, the way companions works in DA 2, no, DA can't have MP. At least not as satisfying, with some people controlling half characters.

[sssfreak]

ErebUs890 wrote...

Oh, so Baldur's Gate 2 can have MP but Dragon Age can't? People need to stop whining.

If this was old Bioware I'd be like, sure ok, I trust you guys.

But current Bioware, hmmmmm no.

[Ari87]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Well, it's not like BioWare has a history of ****ty multiplayer. NWN as a single-player game was crap, but it's multiplayer aspect (which many would call the focus of the game) was widely acclaimed. I wouldn't mind something similar in the Dragon Age franchise, but it would have to be done just as well, and without the rubbish was the NWN main campaign.

Because NWN had very powerful tools to tailor the MP to peoples wishes.

DA doesn't have such a thing.

[Warlokki]

Ari87 wrote...

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Well, it's not like BioWare has a history of ****ty multiplayer. NWN as a single-player game was crap, but it's multiplayer aspect (which many would call the focus of the game) was widely acclaimed. I wouldn't mind something similar in the Dragon Age franchise, but it would have to be done just as well, and without the rubbish was the NWN main campaign.

Because NWN had very powerful tools to tailor the MP to peoples wishes.

DA doesn't have such a thing.

Nothing says DA3 cannot have such thing.

[Mox Ruuga]

 Adding co-op would prolly be the swan song of the "pause in combat" feature.

[keyip]

ErebUs890 wrote...

Oh, so Baldur's Gate 2 can have MP but Dragon Age can't? People need to stop whining.

Nice post.

I just hope they don't focus on perfecting multiplayer to the point where other aspects of the game suffers. DA2 felt a bit rushed to me so if they're struggling for time there are more important things to focus on *cough* tiny text *cough*

[17thknight]

You've got to be ****ing kidding me.

[Perfect-Kenshin]

Warlokki wrote...

So? Multiplayer for third gmae in the series. *shrugs* If it works and is done well... what would be the issue then? People make themselves look a bit moronic when they react with big NO!" everytime something new is suggested...

Nah, just when somethings stupid is suggested. Sort of like what we were doing all these months in pointing out that Bioware has only spent a little over a year on DA2 and that we feel they are rushing it, only for it to turn out that we were RIGHT all along (i.e. repeat environments, bugs galore, lack of interesting side quest, etc).

[Alexus_VG]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Alexus_VG wrote...

Twaddlefish wrote...

Mike, no. Knock this **** off. You've already sunk $300 million into The Old Republic, and you'll have enough fun keeping that running once it's done.

Stick to what you guys have proved you know best, an immersive single player experience.

I would say this exept I think DA 2 has already proven the franchise will be departing from it's roots more so with every expansion or sequel, so nothing could really surprise me at this point.

Hmmm... you're aware that, given Baldur's Gate and Neverwinter Nights, multiplayer in DAIII would actually be more a return to its roots?

I am well aware of what was in the BG series(even then I don't think they were talking about coop single player mode). I am talking about the DA franchise, which was started off as a solidly single player experiance.

[Warlokki]

Mox Ruuga wrote...

 Adding co-op would prolly be the swan song of the "pause in combat" feature.

Unless the game would use fully turn based system.
The current gameplay wouldn't suit multiplayer of course...  but carefully made system could have both pausing in single player yet work in multiplayer without issues (and without pausing of course).

[MDarwin]

ML defending DA2, is he on ****s or what? If so, it must be a damn good one! Carry on Mike.

[Warlokki]

Alexus_VG wrote...

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Alexus_VG wrote...

Twaddlefish wrote...

Mike, no. Knock this **** off. You've already sunk $300 million into The Old Republic, and you'll have enough fun keeping that running once it's done.

Stick to what you guys have proved you know best, an immersive single player experience.

I would say this exept I think DA 2 has already proven the franchise will be departing from it's roots more so with every expansion or sequel, so nothing could really surprise me at this point.

Hmmm... you're aware that, given Baldur's Gate and Neverwinter Nights, multiplayer in DAIII would actually be more a return to its roots?

I am well aware of what was in the BG series(even then I don't think they were talking about coop single player mode). I am talking about the DA franchise, which was started off as a solidly single player experiance.

Why the hell would a franchise be limited to a single player games? DOES NOT COMPUTE!

[Ari87]

Warlokki wrote...

Ari87 wrote...

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Well, it's not like BioWare has a history of ****ty multiplayer. NWN as a single-player game was crap, but it's multiplayer aspect (which many would call the focus of the game) was widely acclaimed. I wouldn't mind something similar in the Dragon Age franchise, but it would have to be done just as well, and without the rubbish was the NWN main campaign.

Because NWN had very powerful tools to tailor the MP to peoples wishes.

DA doesn't have such a thing.

Nothing says DA3 cannot have such thing.

Well, NWN2 didn't, DA:O didn't, DA2 doesn't... I see a trend there.