276 réponses à ce sujet

[Scottish TaZeR]

Hmmm could be fun... I hated playing BG2 alone, Great when a Mate came round and Co-Op on the go... Bloody Magic

[Dansayshi]

A singleplayer RPG sacrifices ALOT when it attempts to step into the multiplayer realm.

[jds1bio]

Dansayshi wrote...

A singleplayer RPG sacrifices ALOT when it attempts to step into the multiplayer realm.

Unless its Demon's Souls, or it's an RPG with a real life Dungeon Master.

RPGs started out as real-life multiplayer games, it's the computer/console that has turned them into single-player games.  A multiplayer computer/console RPG that hosted a real-life Dungeon Master could be interesting.

[ExtinctRPG]

Dragon Age: Black Ops

[Lord_Valandil]

No.
Please, just...no. Unless it's a versus mode like the one in Dead Space 2, or something like a "Horde" mode, but don't mess with the main campaign.

[Jimmy_Jazz79]

Please, no.

[morgueanna]

Multiplayer sucks valuable resources and staff from game development. Many people already believe that DA2 was a rush job, how much do you think the single player campaign would suffer if they diverted even 5% of their focus to multiplayer?

[Mox Ruuga]

ACDimps wrote...

can wait for The Old republic to flop. mike is going bye bye. Get rid of the gigglesquee writers while you're at it. DA3 needs more grimdark

Who are the "gigglesquee writers"?

[Lord_Valandil]

I swear it, along with the DLC, Multiplayer is like the cancer of this gaming generation.

[Thiefy]

I'd rather not, really. it would just remind me of fable, and fable is a huge disappointment . i would rather the resources be put towards companions, or better dungeons

[corym77]

Woot, this is a pleasant surprise. I would love to see this happen. I think they could do it right and make it an Epic experience.

[Nozybidaj]

Twaddlefish wrote...

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

Didn't you hear?  Single player gaming is dead.......

[Vpsycho]

First fix this da 2 crap then talk about da 3. And you know? I wont buy da 3. Cause i learned my lesson well.

[AmunRa]

I think a co-op would be just fine.

One player could be the main character and the other could play the role of a companion.

No part of the story changes.

[mya11]

Please No and No, I don't want multi :sick:

[Asch Lavigne]

All I ask is that if they do put in multiplayer they do not screw over the single player experience. I do not want to play a watered down crappy mode where I miss out on so much because I'd rather play solo than with others. Not all of us are into multiplayer. So if you are going to do so, please, please make it optional.

How would that even work with two people's completely different characters and choices?

Also, please for the love of god do not put it into ME3.

Modifié par Asch Lavigne, 11 mars 2011 - 05:12 .

[Lord_Valandil]

AmunRa wrote...

I think a co-op would be just fine.

One player could be the main character and the other could play the role of a companion.

No part of the story changes.

Yeah, right, and what happens to the decisions?

[Planeforger]

Dansayshi wrote...

A singleplayer RPG sacrifices ALOT when it attempts to step into the multiplayer realm.

Sure, just look what it did to BG2.

Anyway, before people complain or blame EA...I'm about 99% certain that Dragon Age was always intended to have multiplayer. I remember following the game back in the mid-00s, and Bioware's FAQ clearly mentioned things like online cooperative play, adventure creation tools, and all of the rest of it.

So this wouldn't be a huge departure from the original design. Moreover, Bioware have always done multiplayer well, and cooperative play would be essentially perfect for a part-based RPG (who didn't love the multiplayer modes of the old Inifinity Engine RPGs? Anyone?).

Modifié par Planeforger, 11 mars 2011 - 05:03 .

[cloudstrife070]

next will be :

dragon age : fps

OMG you guys don´t learn ...

[Planeforger]

Lord_Valandil wrote...

AmunRa wrote...

No part of the story changes.

Yeah, right, and what happens to the decisions?

The party leader makes them, like in Bioware's older RPGs (or the people initiating the conversations, depending on how much freedom the party leader would want to give the other players). Perhaps they could improve on that with some sort of voting system.

The only thing that would be missing would be the party-members' unique personalities...but so what? They'd still be there in the singleplayer mode.

*edit* Actually, if anything, your party members could be more unique and interesting with real people controlling them. Roleplaying works a lot better when people are making decisions/actions for themselves, rather than letting the combat AI automate everything, and...well, you get the picture.

Modifié par Planeforger, 11 mars 2011 - 05:10 .

[Lord_Valandil]

Planeforger wrote...

Lord_Valandil wrote...

AmunRa wrote...

No part of the story changes.

Yeah, right, and what happens to the decisions?

The party leader makes them, like in Bioware's older RPGs (or the people initiating the conversations, depending on how much freedom the party leader would want to give the other players). Perhaps they could improve on that with some sort of voting system.

The only thing that would be missing would be the party-members' unique personalities...but so what? They'd still be there in the singleplayer mode.

Well, it would be really lame to be the second player and being there just to watch.
And...of course, the personalities would be lost, but so what? Right?

Nah, I don't buy it. DA: O and DA2 were created as a single player game, and they shouldn't stay away from that formula...maybeee creating a spin-off or something apart would work, but forcing multiplayer into DA3 is not the way to go.

Call me an antisocial guy, but I prefer to play alone. It's not like I have a lot of friends and relatives with a console and the same games, and also...Live Gold is kinda expensive for me.
Besides, I like to explore, to take my time, and don't have to be following another guy who wants to rush.
I don't support multiplayer in DA3, and I don't think I'll ever will, just my two cents.

Modifié par Lord_Valandil, 11 mars 2011 - 05:13 .

[Down_with_EA]

The ship has holes in it and they're worried about the storm on the horizon?

Modifié par Down_with_EA, 11 mars 2011 - 05:14 .

[Pyrate_d]

I'd rather have them focus on improving the single player

honestly, I feel like DA2 ended just when things were getting interesting

[Melness]

Lord_Valandil wrote...

Planeforger wrote...

Lord_Valandil wrote...

AmunRa wrote...

No part of the story changes.

Yeah, right, and what happens to the decisions?

The party leader makes them, like in Bioware's older RPGs (or the people initiating the conversations, depending on how much freedom the party leader would want to give the other players). Perhaps they could improve on that with some sort of voting system.

The only thing that would be missing would be the party-members' unique personalities...but so what? They'd still be there in the singleplayer mode.

Well, it would be really lame to be the second player and being there just to watch.
And...of course, the personalities would be lost, but so what? Right?

In theory, it would be like BG2. You can play with friends but the single-player experience remains great, with great companions.

And don't forget, people, that the interview does confirm what they've been talking about for a long time now. DA2 will still have heavy support of expansions, dlcs and patches.

Modifié par Melness, 11 mars 2011 - 05:19 .

[Asch Lavigne]

Pyrate_d wrote...

I'd rather have them focus on improving the single player

honestly, I feel like DA2 ended just when things were getting interesting

Agree.