151 réponses à ce sujet

[Khayness]

This ever-changing and ever-growing market is united by a common goal: entertainment. Video games, above all else, have to be fun.

Dear EA, stop telling me how to have fun. Multiplayer isn't for me after 5 years of MMO binge, thank you very much. I value having 100% control over my playtime (or less, thanks to your excellent DRM policy).

Nobody would care about wearing an epic set of armor if there were no one around to see it!

If that is your priority and not getting better equipment in order to be able to participate in more PvE content (and have more fun perharps), then you have some self-esteem issues.

the presence of other people in online games validates emotions, and I think that’s exactly what’s going on: Doing something in the presence of other people who share the same interests and objectives makes it much more attractive.

People you probably don't know and never will.

Screw it, I'm too nihilist for this sh*t.

Modifié par Khayness, 27 avril 2011 - 12:27 .

[Liou]

Multiplayer games will never be able to give me what i am looking for in games. The fact that they are multiplayer and therefor not about me and me alone makes this an imposssibility. I want games centered around me and my choices, i want to play the game in my own tempo and i want to play when i have the time for it, which is sometimes in the middle of the night. Sure i could probably always find someone on the net but here is another problem. When i finaly want to play with someone (which is rare) it has to be someone i actually know, friends or family. I do not want to play with a bunch of strangers i'll never meet in real life. Nothing bore me more than online gaming. Seriously, i would rather play chess with a squrriel.

And even if multiplayer games could give me those things i wouldn't be interested. Why? because, for the most part, i am not looking for a social thing when i buy a game. I use games to get away from other people. When i want to socialize, games is very low on the "what should we do" list.

To dive into a rich and immersive singleplayer game can be incredible rewarding. It is an experience you don't find anywhere else. This is where games surpass books, movies, comics etc. Because the story and characters can be just as deep and interesting, although i admit that dosn't happen often. But the potential is there. Unlike the others, you are not just an spectator, instead of observing, games actually lets you participate in the adventure. To say that there is no room for games which focus only on this aspect is not only very narrow-minded, it's also wrong. That has been proven plenty of times and i am sure games like Mass Effect 3, Skyrim, The Witcher 2 and L.A. Noire will prove it again. Even if they don't surpasses the next Call of Duty, they will probably still sell a lot better than most games could ever hope to, singleplayer and multiplayer alike.

Fact is, there is a market for singleplayer only games, many gamers actually prefer singleplayer. Singleplayer and multiplayer can coexist without the poor hybrids which tries to be both but always fails at atleast one of them. Not all games needs a multiplayer mode and the same is true the other way around.

Modifié par Liou, 27 avril 2011 - 12:26 .

[rolson00]

TRUTHMACHINE wrote...

We better get ready for team deathmatch in DA3.....

dragon age with multiplayer sounds terrible i really hate mmos and multiplayers i have no reasons it just cheapens my experience

[LyndseyCousland]

Mr.Kusy wrote...

It's annoying how publishers and developers rant about all those popular topics. Like digital distribution, multiplayer, next gen, maturity of games.

If a game feels like having a multiplayer then it should have one, if the game is singleplayer orientated and adding the multiplayer would break that, it shouldn't. And you mister publisher shut the duck up and publis games so I can buy them.

I concur with the shutting the duck up!

[HyperLimited]

After reading that, I've never facepalmed so hard in my life... <_<

[Nozybidaj]

relhart wrote...

If DA2 is an indication of the dev resources and time EA is willing to put in, in terms of single player games, then yes, I'm sure just releasing a map where people can run around shooting each other in the head would be more cost efficient for them.

This.  If you don't make the single player experience worthwhile, then yes you better have multi-player.

Of course single player games do just fine when they have good single player experiences.  This is just a round about way to make excuses for cutting content and, more to the point of what Gibeau wants, cutting production costs while still getting people to buy the game.

[Teredan]

the trend is surely going down the hill....

[berelinde]

Blech, this makes no sense.

Fiance and I used to play BG/BG2 in multiplayer mode back before I got into the whole RP aspect of the games. He treated the two games like Diablo with quests and more interesting classes, so our RP was limited to walking up to the various NPCs and accepting quests. We played with entirely player-created parties and never recruited the NPCs that shipped with the game. He loved it, but I found it less than satisfying. It was only after I tried playing by myself and recruited some in-game NPCs to see if they were as annoying as he claimed they were that I really started enjoying the game. Once I discovered that the NPCs actually talked to you, I became obsessed. I learned how to mod the game, an activity that I still enjoy.

In DA:O, the companions were even better than in BG2. Or at least I thought so. They were more interesting, and I loved the fact that you could talk to them about things that weren't necessily quest-related. And then in DA2, I found the companions just as interesting as I did with those in DA:O, even if their dialogue was pretty much limited to quests.

A game cannot do all things equally well. I am very, very concerned that focusing on the mechanics necessary for multiplayer will cause shortfalls in the parts of the game I am interested in: storyline, quests, and companions. I am concerned that DA3 would turn into another Diablo. Don't get me wrong, it isn't that I don't enjoy Diablo. I just don't want every game to be Diablo. The strength of the Dragon Age series is in its NPCs, its storyline, and the interaction companions have with the game world. That is why people return to Dragon Age.

Also, I would hate to see the death of the pause button.

[Sabriana]

I've never touched a Multiplayer (or mmo) in my life, and I never will. I play at my leisure and with my imagination. I want to do whatever tickles my fancy, that includes mods and experiments.

The very last thing I want and/or need are other people who are complete strangers to me interfering in my past-time. A co-op maybe, but only with people I know, like and whose company I enjoy.

These people in the upper echelons are utterly out of touch with their customers. That is really sad. A little more research, perhaps. Research that also included actually observing/talking to real people who play games? Just a suggestion. It might be worth it, you know.

EA seems totally obsessed with on-line game play. I can't understand why that is, the market for SP games is quite large, after all.

[berelinde]

I've got a sinking feeling that the reason EA seems obsessed with on-line game play is online play membership fees.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

I like multiplayer games. I've had some really awesome gaming experiences playing Smash Bros with friends back in high school.

It really depends on two things.

1. The game itself, ie. Would this game benefit from multiplayer? Or is it best enjoyed as a single player experience? What kind of game is it? etc.

and

2. It's implementation. ie. Co-Op? Competitive? Persistent World? etc.

I think we can mostly agree that we don't want any form of competitive multiplayer in our narrative focused and classical RPGs.

Ever.

[ShinsFortress]

berelinde wrote...

I've got a sinking feeling that the reason EA seems obsessed with on-line game play is online play membership fees.

Bingo!

[nicethugbert]

I can't invest in a game series if it doesn't have PW MP and a good Toolset. After I'm done with DA2 and ME2, I'm going back to NWN2. If a new NWN2 expansion came out ten years from now, I will buy it. I did not buy any DA:O, DA2, or ME2 expansions or DLC and I will not. Give me something that builders can work with, and I will buy it. But, don't expect me to invest beyond the initial offering for something without a future. The magic of these games simply fades too quickly without PW MP and Toolset.

And, how exactly does EA plan to get significant numbers of CoD players without MP when MP s practically what CoD is about?

Modifié par nicethugbert, 27 avril 2011 - 01:27 .

[Slayer299]

A multiplayer component to some games can be fine, but it's rather blind of Gibeau to state that all games need MP or they'll fail. I know I don't need MP and I expect a strong story and char's from Bioware which I don't play for a MP component. What is worse is when its tacked on and ends up either making the SP pointless (ala CoD series) or it just wastes resources that would otherwise be used to make a great game..

I don't have the time or luxury or the inclination to play MP with a bunch of kids.

Modifié par Slayer299, 27 avril 2011 - 01:31 .

[ShinsFortress]

Sabriana wrote...

I've never touched a Multiplayer (or mmo) in my life, and I never will. I play at my leisure and with my imagination. I want to do whatever tickles my fancy, that includes mods and experiments.

The very last thing I want and/or need are other people who are complete strangers to me interfering in my past-time. A co-op maybe, but only with people I know, like and whose company I enjoy.

These people in the upper echelons are utterly out of touch with their customers. That is really sad. A little more research, perhaps. Research that also included actually observing/talking to real people who play games? Just a suggestion. It might be worth it, you know.

EA seems totally obsessed with on-line game play. I can't understand why that is, the market for SP games is quite large, after all.

For the most part I am rather the same.  The only CRPG with a lot of multiplayer built into it that I played a lot of was Neverwinter Nights.  I was very lookijng forward to DA because if the single-player focus.  Technical issues with DA1 disappointed me a bit, but I managed.  DA2 is bad (I think) in many ways....

[Sabriana]

ShinsFortress wrote...

berelinde wrote...

I've got a sinking feeling that the reason EA seems obsessed with on-line game play is online play membership fees.

Bingo!

Yeah, that thought came to me after posting. I agree.

If you are the Berelinde I think you are, then TY for your and your teammates fabulous mods. Too bad Haer couldn't be modded, I had such hopes.

Stupid elf. Yes, even today I don't want to say her name. It leaves a bitter tast in my mouth.

@ ShinsFortress

Yeah, that was the game that I did play with friends. It was fun, but it could never take the place of a wonderful SP RPG. The kind that make me look up and see 6 am flashing on the clock. 6 am? WTF? Wasn't it only 9 pm a little while ago?

Modifié par Sabriana, 27 avril 2011 - 01:31 .

[Maverick827]

Every time I read a multiplayer thread on these forums, I can't help but picture one of you acting like Frankenstein's monster to fire.

[doloreg]

Ah, EA, which fiendish ring of hell did you come from?
Greed, i presume.

Seriously though, Mp would not work with the current battle system, given that the tactics work better sp, and you couldn't even pause.
For it to work, the whole combat system has to be redesigned...again, and not for the better.

And lastly, i disagree, me2, the elder scrolls, fallout, and many more games are without multiplayer. Are they failures?

[Tarahiro]

I play CoD online sometimes but not much else. I own both LBP games and they are very focused with online play but I only use the online there to see other peoples created levels. I dont like playing them with other people though. Whilst multiplayer is a good addition for games that can use it well such as FPS's it also comes with far too much cheating for my taste. That's one of the reasons I don't game online much. Even with CoD I mostly play the SP. Actually I think I may just own some multiplayer games I dont know about, because most of the time I dont even bother looking for it. I play single player and I prefer it like that.

[abaris]

I Think, all this online or multiplayer hype is overrated. Sure, there have to be games providing that kind of feature, since there's a demand for it. But, ask yourself this. Who's got the time to play hours upon hours online? Its probably a group of nerds, not something the average gamer does. I for one couldn't. Because of work, because of real life, because I don't want to commit myself to an open ended online session. I want to have the opportunity to hit the quit button whenever I feel like it. That's why I only played some racers online. Because they, as opposed to an adventure, have a set time of laps to finish.

[nicethugbert]

abaris wrote...

I Think, all this online or multiplayer hype is overrated. Sure, there have to be games providing that kind of feature, since there's a demand for it. But, ask yourself this. Who's got the time to play hours upon hours online? Its probably a group of nerds, not something the average gamer does. I for one couldn't. Because of work, because of real life, because I don't want to commit myself to an open ended online session. I want to have the opportunity to hit the quit button whenever I feel like it. That's why I only played some racers online. Because they, as opposed to an adventure, have a set time of laps to finish.

Who says you have to play hour upon hours in order to play MP?  I play MP and I log in/out when I want and my progress is auto saved.

[nicethugbert]

Sabriana wrote...

I've never touched a Multiplayer (or mmo) in my life, and I never will. I play at my leisure and with my imagination. I want to do whatever tickles my fancy, that includes mods and experiments.

The very last thing I want and/or need are other people who are complete strangers to me interfering in my past-time. A co-op maybe, but only with people I know, like and whose company I enjoy.

These people in the upper echelons are utterly out of touch with their customers. That is really sad. A little more research, perhaps. Research that also included actually observing/talking to real people who play games? Just a suggestion. It might be worth it, you know.

EA seems totally obsessed with on-line game play. I can't understand why that is, the market for SP games is quite large, after all.

Reasearch from the interview:

"Prior to recent years, the attitude was that single-player was different from multiplayer, and in fact, there was an implicit distinction between people who liked single-player (solitary, time-intensive) and people who liked multiplayer (mechanics-focused, living in the dynamics, doesn't care about the fiction of the game)," Redding says. "What's happened now is we've arrived at a new generation of players who want complexity and depth in both single-player and multiplayer. It has become socially acceptable to want this."

[abaris]

nicethugbert wrote...

Who says you have to play hour upon hours in order to play MP?  I play MP and I log in/out when I want and my progress is auto saved.

You're probably talking about something like WoW. But if you join some server where a group of people looks for a mage or whatever to join, you won't be treated nicely if you quit whenever you feel like it.

[KilrB]

I do not play games in order to socialize with others.

I play games to be entertained.

Watching other people insult each other, whine, and generally be petty and childish is not entertaining.

Except here ...

[Blooddrunk1004]

Congratulations EA!
You have become more greedier then Activision.

Modifié par Blooddrunk1004, 27 avril 2011 - 02:11 .