115 réponses à ce sujet

[Torious]

Magic Zarim wrote...

Why is everyone like "I don't like it so I don't want you to have it"? MMOs.. Combat logs.. You guys realize how selfish you are? MMO development doesn't have to mean you can't have single-player experience. Like I said before, they are not mutually exclusive. Heck even I would get bored if MMOs were the only thing left to play. There's time for a wonderful singleplayer experience like DA:O is and there's time to hook up with some buds and play together in an MMO in your favourite universe.

Blizzard clearly proves your point, from 1994 (the first Warcraft) to 2003 (the last WC3 expansion) they released at least one single player game or expansion per year, then come 2004 (release of WoW) and they haven't released a single player game ever since.

That's six years almost exclusively devoted to mining the sheep in WoW. If Bioware strikes gold with an mmo, I'll expect the same level of "commitment" to their SP franchises. Money talks, nothing else. Now with EA at the helm more so then ever.

[Bann Duncan]

Micajah wrote...

The guys at ZAM have posted a little feature piece on what they think a Dragon Age MMO might look like. Pretty interesting take on the idea, especially the multi-unit combat thing.

http://www.zam.com/s...tml?story=20588

Let me know what you think.

My mabari pees on you.

[nubbers666]

think id be pissed if bio ware ruin the game by maken it a mmo this game has no real object for a mmo its all about 1 main person i just dont see it ever happing but meh iv seen stranger things happen to mmos so wouldnt suprise me

[FlintlockJazz]

Torious wrote...

Magic Zarim wrote...

Why is everyone like "I don't like it so I don't want you to have it"? MMOs.. Combat logs.. You guys realize how selfish you are? MMO development doesn't have to mean you can't have single-player experience. Like I said before, they are not mutually exclusive. Heck even I would get bored if MMOs were the only thing left to play. There's time for a wonderful singleplayer experience like DA:O is and there's time to hook up with some buds and play together in an MMO in your favourite universe.

Blizzard clearly proves your point, from 1994 (the first Warcraft) to 2003 (the last WC3 expansion) they released at least one single player game or expansion per year, then come 2004 (release of WoW) and they haven't released a single player game ever since.

That's six years almost exclusively devoted to mining the sheep in WoW. If Bioware strikes gold with an mmo, I'll expect the same level of "commitment" to their SP franchises. Money talks, nothing else. Now with EA at the helm more so then ever.

This sums up what I was thinking perfectly.  Also, to those saying "Don't you want to adventure with your friends and join up with other people on epic adventure?" my answer is akin to Sten's, "No".  The average MMO player has as much personality as a muddy rock, I should know I've been one, and being forced to interact with such people again horrifies me, I would much prefer to adventure with the much more developed and personable Bioware NPCs, you know people with personality. 

Adventuring with friends would be good, but not in an MMO environment, with others doing the same quests and being led around on an amusement ride, but a 4-player multiplayer version of the normal game, done in small modules so that you don't have to spend days doing it but just a couple of hours for each one so that you can all join up with no worries of someone having to drop out before finishing.

[SuperFly_2000]

The problem with you people is that you do not understand how the multiplayer worked in Neverwinter nights....and hence you are assuming things that are totally incorrect.

As soon as you hear the word "MMO" you start blindly thinking about the horrible games that have come to define the genre, instead of thinking about what it really means and that it could be done in a different way.

And also most importantly...you must understand that if multiplayer would be added this wouldn't effect your single player experience at all and Bioware would continue to make single playe campaigns and expansion for you to play (please note that the original campaign WOULD NOT be remade...but instead builders could make their own persistent worlds...just like in NWN...and hence...you who play the single player campaigns only wouldn't even know it existed....just as in NWN).

The thing is I am getting sick about this. I am seeing perfectly now what audience this game has been aimed at. Clearly it is aimed for the masses...and not for the die hard NWN players. The posts in this forum are just a painful and embarassing result of that.

I can clearly see why the game has been so "simplified". It is to accomodate this large group.

Perhaps there must come a new developer who will make games for a smaller audiende. Just like Bioware was before making Baldur's gate. Now they are to big....

Modifié par SuperFly_2000, 21 janvier 2010 - 12:44 .

[FlintlockJazz]

SuperFly_2000 wrote...

The problem with you people is that you do not understand how the multiplayer worked in Neverwinter nights....and hence you are assuming things that are totally incorrect.

As soon as you hear the word "MMO" you start blindly thinking about the horrible games that have come to define the genre, instead of thinking about what it really means and that it could be done in a different way.

Or maybe some of us just want some good quality CRPGs to be made instead of more MMOs flooding the market?  There isn't enough of singleplayer CRPGs these days, so lets support the few that are and not cry for another MMO please.

[SuperFly_2000]

FlintlockJazz wrote...
Instead of more MMOs flooding the market?  There isn't enough of singleplayer CRPGs these days, so lets support the few that are and not cry for another MMO please.

You didn't read my post.

Sure....there are millions of MMO's out there. But NONE OF THEM ARE GOOD! That is what I am trying to say.

And also...your precious single player CRPG experience will not me taken away...on the contrary..

...as I said...you simply do not understand ....because you do not know how multiplayer works in NWN...and hence are just assuming that it will be something like WoW.

Besides....CRPG's are meant to be played in multiplayer anyway.

C stands for "Computer"
RPG stands for "Roleplaying Game"

Have you ever played a table top game (PnP) with just one person, you? I guessed so...I guess your friends where there as well...and probably a DM....just pointing this out...even though I am quite sure it will be misunderstood....

Please note that I am not disrespecting your single player experience. Perhaps I can somewhere understand why people like that. heck...before there was any internet I was playing a LOT of single player game myself like Baldur's Gate, Pool of Radiance, Bard's tale, Ultima 4, Demon's Winter...the list grows long...

But please...do not stamp on me because I like to play mutliplayer...

*signed*

"An RPG gamer who does not play WoW or any of its clones"

Modifié par SuperFly_2000, 21 janvier 2010 - 12:57 .

[FlintlockJazz]

SuperFly_2000 wrote...

The problem with you people is that you do not understand how the multiplayer worked in Neverwinter nights....and hence you are assuming things that are totally incorrect.

As soon as you hear the word "MMO" you start blindly thinking about the horrible games that have come to define the genre, instead of thinking about what it really means and that it could be done in a different way.

And also most importantly...you must understand that if multiplayer would be added this wouldn't effect your single player experience at all and Bioware would continue to make single playe campaigns and expansion for you to play (please note that the original campaign WOULD NOT be remade...but instead builders could make their own persistent worlds...just like in NWN...and hence...you who play the single player campaigns only wouldn't even know it existed....just as in NWN).

The thing is I am getting sick about this. I am seeing perfectly now what audience this game has been aimed at. Clearly it is aimed for the masses...and not for the die hard NWN players. The posts in this forum are just a painful and embarassing result of that.

I can clearly see why the game has been so "simplified". It is to accomodate this large group.

Perhaps there must come a new developer who will make games for a smaller audiende. Just like Bioware was before making Baldur's gate. Now they are to big....

You added more that changed your entire post after I posted mine, so I should take this into account.

People are responding to this thread with how they view MMOs because the thread title is asking about a Dragon Age MMO, and the main topic is about the potential for a DA MMO.  

I never really liked NWN, but I loved Baldur's Gate 1 & 2, and while there are some things I don't like about DA:O it is still a good game, and simplification isn't a bad thing.  There are smaller companies making games like Ego Draconis that are good, and Bioware games are still good even if they are trying to reach out to a wider market, who are not necessarily stupid but merely have different tastes. 

Adding in multiplayer during development would have affected development of the single player game, all devs says this, as they have a budget that they have to work from, and adding it later is not a priority to them as they don't consider the costs required worth the profit they would get from it.  NWN was built from the ground up as a multiplayer experience, and this affected everything including the single player experience, which was why I could never get into it as much.

[II Enix II]

It would be a huge amount of money to make it an MMO, and with WoW being so successful it might not be the best idea and they probably know this. Not only that, but it works perfectly as an offline game, i'd much rather see expansions and further titles, not another MMO.


Cool story bro

Modifié par II Enix II, 21 janvier 2010 - 01:09 .

[SuperFly_2000]

No...you do still not understand.



NWN was not built for multiplayer mainly. Just as for Baldur's gate...this was an ADDED FUNCTIONALITY.



Also the buyer of the game where mainly such who where going to play through the "original campaign". Not to talk about the VAST amount of player created single player worlds.



Then there where some people who started trying multiplayer after that..or even people like me...who just jumped on the multiplayer worlds without the detour through the original campaign.



The fundamental thing you are not understanding is the difference between the creation of the module (or the map or whatever you call it) and the creation of the game engine itself.



Do not forgot that a multiplayer functionality just like the one in NWN was in Dragon Age when it was under development. It was simply a management decision out of economical reasons that lead to removing that.



So it is not like the game engine is very far from being a multiplayer platform as well.



The original campaign module of course..could hardly be made into a multiplayer one. That is because of the complexity of decisions and such....that effect the whole...but anyway that was not what I was talking about...but rather player made worlds...that could EITHER single player...OR multiplayer.



Can you understand that?

[Torious]

SuperFly_2000 wrote...

FlintlockJazz wrote...
Instead of more MMOs flooding the market?  There isn't enough of singleplayer CRPGs these days, so lets support the few that are and not cry for another MMO please.

You didn't read my post.

Sure....there are millions of MMO's out there. But NONE OF THEM ARE GOOD! That is what I am trying to say.

And also...your precious single player CRPG experience will not me taken away...on the contrary..

...as I said...you simply do not understand ....because you do not know how multiplayer works in NWN...and hence are just assuming that it will be something like WoW.

Besides....CRPG's are meant to be played in multiplayer anyway.

C stands for "Computer"
RPG stands for "Roleplaying Game"

Have you ever played a table top game (PnP) with just one person, you? I guessed so...I guess your friends where there as well...and probably a DM....just pointing this out...even though I am quite sure it will be misunderstood....

Please note that I am not disrespecting your single player experience. Perhaps I can somewhere understand why people like that. heck...before there was any internet I was playing a LOT of single player game myself like Baldur's Gate, Pool of Radiance, Bard's tale, Ultima 4, Demon's Winter...the list grows long...

But please...do not stamp on me because I like to play mutliplayer...

*signed*

"An RPG gamer who does not play WoW or any of its clones"

Since you're such a buff with abbreviations, you should know, what the first M in MMO stands for.  Massively multiplayer online. There's nothing massive about 16, 32 or however many people can play on a NWN server together. There's nothing massive about someone playing DA:O with 3 friends instead of companions, such a game mode would probably be loved by most people here.

An MMO game is by definition something where you play with thousands of strangers in the same game world and nothing kills your gaming experience faster then some idiot exclaiming: "OMG LOL I just WTFPWNED you!!"
Which will inevidably happen. Over and over and over again. Not to mention the carrot on a stick nature of MMOs.

[SuperFly_2000]

II Enix II wrote...
It would be a huge amount of money to make it an MMO, and with WoW being so successful it might not be the best idea and they probably know this. Not only that, but it works perfectly as an offline game, i'd much rather see expansions and further titles, not another MMO.

FlintlockJazz ... you see what I mean about people not understanding....

[II Enix II]

SuperFly_2000 wrote...

II Enix II wrote...
It would be a huge amount of money to make it an MMO, and with WoW being so successful it might not be the best idea and they probably know this. Not only that, but it works perfectly as an offline game, i'd much rather see expansions and further titles, not another MMO.

FlintlockJazz ... you see what I mean about people not understanding....

Did I reply to you?  Hmm, no, no I didn't.  I've never played NWN and so I wouldn't be expected to understand or have the patience to read your wall of text posts.  

[FlintlockJazz]

SuperFly_2000 wrote...

FlintlockJazz wrote...
Instead of more MMOs flooding the market?  There isn't enough of singleplayer CRPGs these days, so lets support the few that are and not cry for another MMO please.

You didn't read my post.

Sure....there are millions of MMO's out there. But NONE OF THEM ARE GOOD! That is what I am trying to say.

And also...your precious single player CRPG experience will not me taken away...on the contrary..

...as I said...you simply do not understand ....because you do not know how multiplayer works in NWN...and hence are just assuming that it will be something like WoW.

Besides....CRPG's are meant to be played in multiplayer anyway.

C stands for "Computer"
RPG stands for "Roleplaying Game"

Have you ever played a table top game (PnP) with just one person, you? I guessed so...I guess your friends where there as well...and probably a DM....just pointing this out...even though I am quite sure it will be misunderstood....

I didn't read your post because I couldn't, as you hadn't added most of it in till after I had started responding to it, so shut your mouth there mate. 

I have done tabletop, I do LARP (full contact) regularly, and know what the letters stand for, so don't you try and talk down to me mate, so you can back off there with your attitude.  Yes, I play with others while playing tabletop and larp, but that is what they are built around. 

A computer-based RPG is a different environment, with the most important change being that the DM is most often replaced by the computer, and therefore is not able to perform the same functions.  A CRPG has a different emphasis, such as more on the player's interaction with the NPCs, and is more difficult to set up for multiplayer.

When you play tabletop, do you have thousands playing?  No you don't, because even if you could it wouldn't be fun because it is geared up for small groups of 6 or 7 at the optimum.  In LARP, however, you can have several hundred playing, with the more playing the better (especially if they're monstering).   This shows how different mediums can drastically alter the style and requirements of play, and so saying that it works in one doesn't mean it will work in another.

People don't want a DA MMO because it will stop any more single-player RPGs set in DA, being made, as has been explained elsewhere, and besides when will we ever get another KotOR?  Not everyone wants them, and just because you don't like the ones currently out does not make them bad, there seems to be alot of people who likes them so your statement that none of them are good is patently false. 

I have explained in detail in my other post about a normal multiplayer, so I think this about covers it.

[bjdbwea]

SuperFly_2000 wrote...

I am seeing perfectly now what audience this game has been aimed at. Clearly it is aimed for the masses...and not for the die hard NWN players.

And thank BioWare for that! As far as I can see, this game was never meant to be a successor to NWN - if anything, it was meant to be like BG 2. And while BG 2 had a multiplayer mode, it was first and foremost a story-driven single player game featuring your PC. That's why it had so much depth and atmosphere, that's why DA has some depth and atmosphere too. An MMO can never provide that. A normal multiplayer mode with either co-op or DM play might, but its development would still take resources away from the single player campaign, as the NWN 1 OC cleary showed.

[II Enix II]

I'm not going to have pointless banter with you in which you roll dice to determine if I get killed by a zombie+5 on the way to college. So i'm not going to respond to any wall of text you say, just saving you the troubles of having a one sided argument.

[FlintlockJazz]

SuperFly_2000 wrote...

No...you do still not understand.

NWN was not built for multiplayer mainly. Just as for Baldur's gate...this was an ADDED FUNCTIONALITY.

Also the buyer of the game where mainly such who where going to play through the "original campaign". Not to talk about the VAST amount of player created single player worlds.

Then there where some people who started trying multiplayer after that..or even people like me...who just jumped on the multiplayer worlds without the detour through the original campaign.

The fundamental thing you are not understanding is the difference between the creation of the module (or the map or whatever you call it) and the creation of the game engine itself.

Do not forgot that a multiplayer functionality just like the one in NWN was in Dragon Age when it was under development. It was simply a management decision out of economical reasons that lead to removing that.

So it is not like the game engine is very far from being a multiplayer platform as well.

The original campaign module of course..could hardly be made into a multiplayer one. That is because of the complexity of decisions and such....that effect the whole...but anyway that was not what I was talking about...but rather player made worlds...that could EITHER single player...OR multiplayer.

Can you understand that?

I perfectly understand, and I think you are wrong on your assumption that NWN was not built with multiplayer as the main focus.  It had respawning as a death mechanic, including xp-loss, instead of just reloading, amongst other things.  Yes, you could play it single player, but the mechanics of multiplayer were incorporated into it, which is the point I was trying to make: it was made with multiplayer in mind and the mechanics assume it, whether the player is playing with others or not.

NWN also lost on many of the single-player aspects such as indepth plot and interesting NPC companions that BG2 has, and while the BG games had multiplayer it was an afterthought that did not work well as the single-player mechanics took precedence.

Modifié par FlintlockJazz, 21 janvier 2010 - 01:23 .

[SuperFly_2000]

Torious wrote...
Since you're such a buff with abbreviations, you should know, what the first M in MMO stands for.  Massively multiplayer online. There's nothing massive about 16, 32 or however many people can play on a NWN server together. There's nothing massive about someone playing DA:O with 3 friends instead of companions, such a game mode would probably be loved by most people here.

Ahh..this is just the reply I was waiting for... *makes a cracking sound with his fingers*
I just love getting into this discussion. So...32 isnt massively...hmm..what about 64? Is that massively?

What about a couple of NWN servers interconnected to each other? Lets say 4 of them. That makes for 256 players....massively enough for you?

Torious wrote...
An MMO game is by definition something where you play with thousands of strangers in the same game world.

And just who made that definition? ....wait ...let me take a wild guess...."WoW"?

The only definition about "massively" is that there is no definiton...but instead it is a rather broad term that unfortunately has come to be associated with WoW....all too much.

What I am saying is, is that NWN Persistent World servers are a kind of mini-MMO in their own right...and can probably be called an MMO as well....

Thus...I am not weighing in meaning into the word MMO that is not really there...or at least shouldn't be.

....this is like the 5:th time i'm explaining this to the people in this forum and every time i'm getting drowned in comments like:

"Oh nooo, we don't want another MMO".....

But that is the whole point...because this wouldn't be "just another MMO...but a whole different bag.

*Relaxes and awaits the "No MMO" spammers to arrive*

[Tekbear]

i might be allright with a 4 people multiplayer but an mmo? no thanks!!! especially the ideas the yhad on ZAM sounded horrible!



pvp factions - templars vs mages? NO THANKS!!!

[FlintlockJazz]

SuperFly_2000 wrote...

Torious wrote...
Since you're such a buff with abbreviations, you should know, what the first M in MMO stands for.  Massively multiplayer online. There's nothing massive about 16, 32 or however many people can play on a NWN server together. There's nothing massive about someone playing DA:O with 3 friends instead of companions, such a game mode would probably be loved by most people here.

Ahh..this is just the reply I was waiting for... *makes a cracking sound with his fingers*
I just love getting into this discussion. So...32 isnt massively...hmm..what about 64? Is that massively?

What about a couple of NWN servers interconnected to each other? Lets say 4 of them. That makes for 256 players....massively enough for you?

Torious wrote...
An MMO game is by definition something where you play with thousands of strangers in the same game world.

And just who made that definition? ....wait ...let me take a wild guess...."WoW"?

The only definition about "massively" is that there is no definiton...but instead it is a rather broad term that unfortunately has come to be associated with WoW....all too much.

What I am saying is, is that NWN Persistent World servers are a kind of mini-MMO in their own right...and can probably be called an MMO as well....

Thus...I am not weighing in meaning into the word MMO that is not really there...or at least shouldn't be.

....this is like the 5:th time i'm explaining this to the people in this forum and every time i'm getting drowned in comments like:

"Oh nooo, we don't want another MMO".....

But that is the whole point...because this wouldn't be "just another MMO...but a whole different bag.

*Relaxes and awaits the "No MMO" spammers to arrive*

MMO refers to a specific genre of games, what you seem to be asking for is just multiplayer, there is specific naming conventions and MMO refers to a game involving several hundred people on one server.  WoW did not create the definition, as despite common misconception it was not the first MMO around.

What you are asking for is a NWN 3, and isn't what most people are complaining about when they say they don't want another MMO.

[Torious]

SuperFly_2000 wrote...
Ahh..this is just the reply I was waiting for... *makes a cracking sound with his fingers*
I just love getting into this discussion. So...32 isnt massively...hmm..what about 64? Is that massively?

What about a couple of NWN servers interconnected to each other? Lets say 4 of them. That makes for 256 players....massively enough for you?

Well, no on all accounts. And why are we talking about NWN here anyway, when the topic at hand is a DA:O MMO? Look, NWN isn't an MMO, it was designed for small group play and if some geek builds himself a server farm and the game allows him to scale the number of players to a few thousand that's great for him and massive! It still doesn't make NWN a MMO, though sorry.

SuperFly_2000 wrote...
And just who made that definition? ....wait ...let me take a wild guess...."WoW"?

The only definition about "massively" is that there is no definiton...but instead it is a rather broad term that unfortunately has come to be associated with WoW....all too much.

What I am saying is, is that NWN Persistent World servers are a kind of mini-MMO in their own right...and can probably be called an MMO as well....

Thus...I am not weighing in meaning into the word MMO that is not really there...or at least shouldn't be.

....this is like the 5:th time i'm explaining this to the people in this forum and every time i'm getting drowned in comments like:

"Oh nooo, we don't want another MMO".....

But that is the whole point...because this wouldn't be "just another MMO...but a whole different bag.

*Relaxes and awaits the "No MMO" spammers to arrive*

I'm sorry, but  your style of writing is giving me a headache. Over and out.

[SuperFly_2000]

FlintlockJazz wrote...
MMO refers to a specific genre of games, what you seem to be asking for is just multiplayer, there is specific naming conventions and MMO refers to a game involving several hundred people on one server.  WoW did not create the definition, as despite common misconception it was not the first MMO around.

I like you. You are actually one of the few here that I can discuss this with. It is a shame you cought some of my posts as being offensive...I didn't wish for that although my style of writing could perhaps be interpreted as such in worst case....

You are both right and wrong.

MMO is a really broad term...

...and yes...I am asking for a multiplayer...that is true...but actually...what I am asking for is something on the border to what an MMO is....(still not talking WoW here....)

FlintlockJazz wrote...
What you are asking for is a NWN 3, and isn't what most people are complaining about when they say they don't want another MMO.

Actually...I am asking for an NWN2. That game was huge failure as I see it and there is still hope that a real NWN2 will come...I am just afraid that it is called Dragon Age...and that it has been stripped of some things that I loved....

And yes...my posts will probably be misunderstood...but then..I love destroying peoples misconception of what an MMO game is....

[Killian Kalthorne]

NWN1 was primarily an online game. The lackluster Single Player OC is proof enough for me in that regard. I consider NWN1 the worse game Bioware has ever developed. As for MMOs I have played plenty and all of them, every single one of them, has sucked.

[SuperFly_2000]

Killian Kalthorne wrote...
As for MMOs I have played plenty and all of them, every single one of them, has sucked.

Actually this is what I am getting at. A change would be nice wouldn't it?

I'm sorry you had to play them all by the way. I hope you didn't reach level 80 before understanding it....

[TyroneTasty]

"Hey, thanks for getting me those 10 wolf pelts! Here's your 3 gold!"



1. "No problem! Here you go!"

2. (Intimidate) "3 Gold!? You better give me more!"

3. "Nah, I think I'll keep these wolf pelts, oh, and kill you! Mwahaha!" (Kill him.)



Riveting.