119 réponses à ce sujet

[Monica83]

casadechrisso wrote...

XxTaLoNxX wrote...

Heck I can't think of one BioWare game that is multiplayer. 

Baldur's Gate? 
Neverwinter Nights? 

Besides the fact that most people probably didn't even notice it, I've not heard anyone saying that the multiplayer component ruined Baldur's Gate, or has it?  <_<

It's a legend dear... I think all this fear don't have valid reason at all

[casadechrisso]

Lord_Valandil wrote...


Well, no. But DA2 wasn't exactly a polished and amazing game.
And knowing that DA3 is in the works, with multiplayer included...

I mean...just kill the damn franchise already.

That's a totally different matter, actually. Because if DA3 is again a rushed out game like DA2, I won't buy it anyway, multiplayer or not. My whole opinion is based on the assumption that Bioware learned from the mistake and puts more time and effort into DA3 again.

Modifié par casadechrisso, 11 avril 2011 - 04:34 .

[Lord_Valandil]

casadechrisso wrote...

Lord_Valandil wrote...


Well, no. But DA2 wasn't exactly a polished and amazing game.
And knowing that DA3 is in the works, with multiplayer included...

I mean...just kill the damn franchise already.

That's a totally different matter, actually. Because if DA3 is again a rushed out game like DA2, I won't buy it anyway, multiplayer or not. My whole opinion is based on the assumption that Bioware learned from the mistake and puts more time and effort into DA3 again.

One can only hope.
But I'm starting to think that they won't, and Dragon Age will become the new Call of Duty, sort of.
Templar vs. Mages deathmatch, or horde mode, I don't know. But I don't like the sound of it.

[berelinde]

Sweet Andraste, no!

The Dragon Age series is supposed to be heroic. One iconic figure rising to overcome the challenges that beset her (or him, if you must play a male character). Time passes and the Pawn of Destiny ™ wears a different face for a while, Warden, Champion, whatever comes next, but it's one person's struggle. It is not the Chronicles of the Thursday-Evening-At-Nine Gaming Group.

BG2 had multiplayer, true, and fiance and I played it together over our home network, but being Player2 was really a downer. Your buddy's character <CHARNAME> got all the glory and all your character got was a vague, class-appropriate statue in Trademeet with no name, just "Companion of <CHARNAME>".

Resources are finite. I would rather see them spent on creating a truly awesome single-player game.

[mgd9932]

I've come to warn you about MAN-GIRAFFE-DOG!! It's the single greatest threat to humanity!! RUN AWAY!!



More Serial than ever guys.

[SteelRaptor]

Personally, I do not want multiplayer in the DA franchise (if I'm brave enough to check it out again).

Every time I think of what the multiplayer might be like, I think on what Fable 2/3 offer us already and I cringe.

[Duncaaaaaan]

I hate how theres multiplayer rumours for all RPGs nowadays.

[Hyunsai]

So this is how they will make us eat the "No more pause" in combat...


Ah by the way, Neverwinter Nights was a great multiplayer game thanks to its community, but solo campaign sucked very hard. Baldur's gate series had great campaign, but multiplayer was atrocious.

This will be... Interesting.

Modifié par Hyunsai, 11 avril 2011 - 05:49 .

[Wyndham711]

They didn't have time/resources/wisdom enough to make an improved experience of the single player game for DA2. They'll have enough challenges in just regaining the Origins level of grandness in DA3 even without forcing in some redundant multiplayer components.

[TheMadCat]

casadechrisso wrote...


You missed my point, being that adding that option doesn't take anything away from your SP experience and people not interested in MP can simply ignore it, contrary to a MMO or whatever where they'd actually spend a lot more resources. 
It's like saying "I'm totally against having a cigarette lighter added to my car, if they do that I'm not buying it!". 

But is does take away from the single player experience. Time and resources in game development are finite, and adding in something new detracts from polishing already established aspects. They would have to build the MP component from scratch and to do it right would take a lot of time and a lot of testing. Combine that with the fact EA isn't big on letting a title sit in the oven a bit longer for no reason other then some TLC, yeah I don't see how adding a MP would not have a negative effect on the SP experience.

[InvaderErl]

While I'm in no way endorsing a Dragon Age multiplayer component, that's not necessarily true.

Dead Space 2, Uncharted and Red Dead come to mind as games that included multiplayer without hurting the single-player experiences.

[Lord_Valandil]

InvaderErl wrote...

While I'm in no way endorsing a Dragon Age multiplayer component, that's not necessarily true.

Dead Space 2, Uncharted and Red Dead come to mind as games that included multiplayer without hurting the single-player experiences.

That's correct.
I find it kind of funny that Dead Space 2 is an IP of EA and still managed to deliver a good SP experience and an "all right" mutiplayer that didn't harm the overall result.
However, I'm pretty sure that trying to force multiplayer in DA3 can only result in a bigger mess than DA2 was.

[Riloux]

Adding multiplayer into DA3 is a surefire way to permanently lose customers.

[TheMadCat]

InvaderErl wrote...

While I'm in no way endorsing a Dragon Age multiplayer component, that's not necessarily true.

Dead Space 2, Uncharted and Red Dead come to mind as games that included multiplayer without hurting the single-player experiences.

So true, because DS2 and Uncharted had single player experiences and designs so comprable to a BioWare title being an 1/8 of the length and so much less complexity it's mind boggling. Maybe we should also cite Call of Duty and Battlefield series as well for further proof since that's about on level with Uncharted and DS2. .

Red Dead was actually a somewhat better compairson, but that had the luxury of already being built and simply being ported to Red Dead making life much easier and inexpensive then building it from scratch as BioWare would have to do.

Modifié par TheMadCat, 11 avril 2011 - 06:21 .

[Chaos Lord Malek]

Hawke + Warden as Co-op?

But i hope they both will be voiced. Though with Warden it might be tricky, to find good actor for all 3 races, or done it separate for them.

[Warheadz]

Chaos Lord Malek wrote...

Hawke + Warden as Co-op?

But i hope they both will be voiced. Though with Warden it might be tricky, to find good actor for all 3 races, or done it separate for them.

Just no.

Even if DA MP wouldn't be bad enough, we don't need to rape the Warden.

Modifié par Warheadz, 11 avril 2011 - 06:24 .

[orbit991]

I wonder how much less content we would get from DA3 if the development resources where tied up in a multiplayer.

[Paraxial]

o0mofo0o wrote...

So are you telling me that you would like some half assed dlc campaigns, instead of balance updates and new maps and arenas for multiplayer...

Yes.

I would much prefer a few solid DLC packs like Lair of the Shadow Broker or Awakening than a bolted on unecessary multiplayer element. You're talking about a game like Gladius, you want a Dragon Age version of Gladius. Only you want it to be multiplayer. So you would warp the gameplay to merge an RTS and a RPG together making some strange hybrid of the two, which would inevitably turn into some turn based awkward spinoff.

But this is all pointless, this rumor probably isn't true. Even if it was us ****ing about it is not going to do anything anyways. If I want a multiplayer experience I play an MMO, if I want to experience a deep and emotional storyline I play a Bioware game.

o0mofo0o wrote...
Blizzard approach 

No thanks.

[In Exile]

I really enjoyed DA2, and generally think the vitrol is unwarranted for the game, but if Bioware adds multiplayer at the cost of single player there is now way I'd buy the game. This is a 100% dealbreaker for me.

[the_one_54321]

Got redirected to this thread.

NWN multiplayer or no multiplayer. No compromise.

[The Elder King]

I'd prefer to not have multiplayer (especially if this means real time game). Howewer my main concern for the future DA game is that they put more time and money on the game, and that the game isn't a buggy mess at the release. We already have Bethsesda and Obsidian for this.

[o0mofo0o]

Bible Doctor wrote...

o0mofo0o wrote...

So are you telling me that you would like some half assed dlc campaigns, instead of balance updates and new maps and arenas for multiplayer...

Yes.

I would much prefer a few solid DLC packs like Lair of the Shadow Broker or Awakening than a bolted on unecessary multiplayer element. You're talking about a game like Gladius, you want a Dragon Age version of Gladius. Only you want it to be multiplayer. So you would warp the gameplay to merge an RTS and a RPG together making some strange hybrid of the two, which would inevitably turn into some turn based awkward spinoff.

NO NO NO no no no. Not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about things like Witch Hunt, Leliana's song, etc. Those in my opinion were absolutely worthless to the game. That's why they're ancillary campaigns. Awakening is an expansion.

You didn't even read my original post obviously because I said REAL TIME a few different times. Not turn based like FF tactics or gladius as you put it, but a real time multiplayer arena based strategy game where you control multiple heroes like you controlled them in DA:O...except with no pause so it involves a high amount of apm and high intensity of reaction. As I said you didn't read what I said before.

o0mofo0o wrote...
Blizzard approach 

No thanks.

So what do you want? A game that took 2 1/2 years to make that ended up terrible (DA:2) or a game that took its time til it was completed and was absolutely amazing (DA:O 6 years). All I'm saying is that if they have an indefinite release, the application of multiplayer to the franchise WILL NOT take away from the single player experience. It's a win win and makes sense because then they would truly be hitting every possible market.

[Wye]

I don't care about Multiplayer in a RPG.

[Persona]

I am pretty sure it will be cause EA is going to do whatever it wants. So if they want it to be an mmo it will be an mmo. No matter how many times people protest.

[WoahitsMuna]

DA3 better not have multiplayer. it would ruin the game.