1170 réponses à ce sujet

[JukeFrog]

Anyone else notice that the Hitman fella could pass for Sheploo's brother?....no?

[Niddy']

Merchant2006 wrote...

IF YOU PLAY MASS EFFECT 3 SOMETHING AWESOME HAPPENS, MULTIPLAYER AWESOME.

[Ruud333]

The PLC wrote...

If this turns out to be true, this forum is going to explode.

That is a bit of an understatement

I know it is not nice to laugh at people who are upset about something, but there are so many arrogant, highly strung and pompous people on these forums, it is hard not to have a bit of a giggle at their posts. 

I miss the original ME forums when everybody was all excited about the game and the majority of the discussion (apart from release date threads) was friendly and positive.  I'm not trying to imply that 'veteran' forum members are in any way better than newer ones, it is just that the forums back in 2007 generally seemed more pleasant, probably because people only have something to b*tch about once the game has been released

We should play 'forum bingo' (EDIT: assuming MP is actually confirmed) and see how many of the following posts/threads we can spot:

·         EA has ruined ME.
·         BW has betrayed their hardcore fans.
·         The inclusion of MP is the fault of younger/console/casual gamers.
·         I’m going cancel my pre-order for ME3.
·         I’m going cancel my pre-order for ME3 and sell my copies of ME1 and ME2 (I have actually seen somebody post that they would do this if MP was confirmed).
·         BW has sold out and I will never buy another one of their games.

Modifié par Ruud333, 05 août 2011 - 11:22 .

[AlphaJarmel]

Dionkey wrote...

 You have to understand that the people who get feedback off these forums report it to marketing and then it goes to EA, if you don't speak with your wallet, they won't listen. MP won't destroy ME3, I realize that, but it is putting BW on the path of Activision. We don't need over-priced DLC maps and packages instead of single-player content. Bioware should make compelling stories and well made games, there is no need for MP in a trilogy that is all about building a web of choices, leave that for a spin-off.

I fully agree you should vote with your wallet but you should wait till some reviews or hands-on come out first before saying this is a godawful decision.  I'm strongly of the opinion if Montreal is doing this, then it doesn't really matter.  The thing that will make or break this game is the writing.

[VampireCommando]

Mesina2 wrote...

BS.

It was confirmed twice by Casey there's no multiplayer in ME3

[Merchant2006]

Anyway I won't rage, because Casey Hudson did clearly state there is no MP in ME3.

Modifié par Merchant2006, 05 août 2011 - 11:20 .

[The Elder King]

Dionkey wrote...

You have to understand that the people who get feedback off these forums report it to marketing and then it goes to EA, if you don't speak with your wallet, they won't listen. MP won't destroy ME3, I realize that, but it is putting BW on the path of Activision. We don't need over-priced DLC maps and packages instead of single-player content. Bioware should make compelling stories and well made games, there is no need for MP in a trilogy that is all about building a web of choices, leave that for a spin-off.

I understand it,But there's way and way to do it. Openin a thread where people express concern about MP in ME3, because it could took time for SP development, or because there's no need for MP at the end of a trilogy, or whatever other reason (and with poll too) is right. Opening a thread where people say that they've cancelled their preorder and say they goodbyes to Bioware, will not be useful. It'll be only stupid and immature, and Bioware will not take that as feedback, but as whining.

Modifié par hhh89, 05 août 2011 - 11:20 .

[Niddy']

[emanziboy]

Ghost-621 wrote...


You really are that pathetic..it's like I'm talking to a brick wall.

Crysis 1 had amazing visauls and a long campaign, Crysis 2 was a console game with COD-style multiplayer tacked-on. The visuals were half as good as the first.

Gears of War 2 was imbalanced. Heavily. Campaign was shorter than the first.

Medal of Honor turned into a COD clone.

Ghost Recon could be better or worse. Gotta see more Future Soldier.

Rainbow Six, oh, what has Ubisoft done to you. The original (see Raven Shield) was a heavily tactical and realistic game. You couldn't run out and take a full clip of ammunition to the chest, if you were lucky, the first hit would wound you instead of killing you. You had to plan your entries, exits, when and how to rescue hostages and defuse bombs, and which teams would do what. Vegas is not Rainbow Six.

Dungeon Siege had a good story and gamplay. You made your own character and leveled him up the way you wanted to. DS3 became an ultra-linear console-port with mass-effect conversation mechanics. 

Again, Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood had a short, awful campaign. 

Dragon Age 2 compared to Dragon Age 1: DA2 is a third-person hack-and-slash.

Randomly throwing out games? Hm. Aight. 

On another note, the "I cancelled my preorder" thread would be a slap right back at bioware.
 

Crysis 1 was not better looking than Crysis 2, what are you talking about?

Gears 2 was imbalanced, it was all shotgun v. shotgun, and the person with the better connection would win, but that has absolutely nothing to do with casuals.

Medal of Honor was a reboot a series that had run itself into the ground by releasing the same game over and over again, not changing or adapting as better games like COD passed them by. The reboot tried to incorporate features from COD while trying to be more realistic, but do either very well.

Haven't played Ghost Recon in a long time, but I was never really impressed when I did play it.

The old Rainbow Six games were too niche to really be successful. That's just the reality of it.

Never played any Dungeon Sieges, so wouldn't know.

Brotherhood had a shorter non-awful SP than AC2 because it was only made in a year.

Dragon Age: Origins only had nostalgia going for it. It had a good story, but overall it was just an OK game. Dragon Age 2 was different, but it was neither better nor worse than Origins.

[InkognitoY]

If they meant by multiplayer: downloadable DLC side missions that you could play co-op with a friend (or maybe up to 4), that they would develop AFTER the game has been released, then I would okay with it.

Anything else would bother me to no end.

But the title is most likely misleading, they probably mean this is what we discuss in the interview.

[LuPoM]

The Big Bad Wolf wrote...

Merchant2006 wrote...

Anyway I won't rage, because Casey Hudson did clearly state there is no MP in ME3.

Where did he actually say "no multiplayer"?

Here: 

He clearly states "no multiplayer, focusing on single player experience, we tried to fit it in since the frist Mass Effect but it never worked" and "it's a good thing to explore for the future of the franchise"
The question comes after the Samsung Galaxy Tab AD and it's the second one.

Modifié par LuPoM, 05 août 2011 - 11:28 .

[The Spamming Troll]

ME1 never needed a multiplayer, because it was an excelent game. there doesnt need to be any mroe of an explanation.

ME2 sucked balls, and ME3 looks like ME2:episode 2, so im not surprised bioware went for multiplayer. it certainly is a game that needs something more. im not dissapointed because i gave up on ME1 showing up in ME3 about the same time i fired that pistol on the lazerouse station. atleast i know what im getting when i rent ME3.

WTF happened to my ME?

[Dionkey]

The Big Bad Wolf wrote...

Merchant2006 wrote...

Anyway I won't rage, because Casey Hudson did clearly state there is no MP in ME3.

Where did he actually say "no multiplayer"?

He never did, he just says "We have nothing planned at this time" or "We don't plan to have multiplayer in ME3". In reality, he just avoided the question.

[GreenSoda]

Dionkey wrote...

The Big Bad Wolf wrote...

Merchant2006 wrote...

Anyway I won't rage, because Casey Hudson did clearly state there is no MP in ME3.

Where did he actually say "no multiplayer"?

He never did, he just says "We have nothing planned at this time" or "We don't plan to have multiplayer in ME3". In reality, he just avoided the question.

No he did get more concrete at one point. No mp for ME3.

Modifié par GreenSoda, 05 août 2011 - 11:31 .

[ThanesSniper]

I don't see what the big deal is IF the development is being handled by a separate group. Some people are just so opposed to change. I for one would like to play Mass Effect with my friends.

If it's not being handled by a separate group, well then I suppose it would take away resources from the single player. I'm sure it would still be a fantastic game though, and I plan on buying it either way.

[Dionkey]

GreenSoda wrote...

Dionkey wrote...

The Big Bad Wolf wrote...

Merchant2006 wrote...

Anyway I won't rage, because Casey Hudson did clearly state there is no MP in ME3.

Where did he actually say "no multiplayer"?

He never did, he just says "We have nothing planned at this time" or "We don't plan to have multiplayer in ME3". In reality, he just avoided the question.

No he did get more concrete at one point.

But when has he ever flat out said "NO, there will be absolutely no multiplayer in ME3"? He always leaves the smallest bit of breathing room so he isn't locked to a promise, that's what worries me.

[The Elder King]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

ME1 never needed a multiplayer, because it was an excelent game. there doesnt need to be any mroe of an explanation.

ME2 sucked balls, and ME3 looks like ME2:episode 2, so im not surprised bioware went for multiplayer. it certainly is a game that needs something more. im not dissapointed because i gave up on ME1 showing up in ME3 about the same time i fired that pistol on the lazerouse station. atleast i know what im getting when i rent ME3.

WTF happened to my ME?

Simply, it's not yours. Bioware decided to change the direction of the IP. Good or bad the decison was, they have every right to change their IP if they want.

[LuPoM]

Dionkey wrote...

GreenSoda wrote...

Dionkey wrote...

The Big Bad Wolf wrote...

Merchant2006 wrote...

Anyway I won't rage, because Casey Hudson did clearly state there is no MP in ME3.

Where did he actually say "no multiplayer"?

He never did, he just says "We have nothing planned at this time" or "We don't plan to have multiplayer in ME3". In reality, he just avoided the question.

No he did get more concrete at one point.

But when has he ever flat out said "NO, there will be absolutely no multiplayer in ME3"? He always leaves the smallest bit of breathing room so he isn't locked to a promise, that's what worries me.

IF you would just read the post above, you would read this:

Here: 

He clearly states "no multiplayer, focusing on single player experience, we tried to fit it in since the frist Mass Effect but it never worked" and "it's a good thing to explore for the future of the franchise"
The question comes after the Samsung Galaxy Tab AD and it's the second one.

[Personality Disorder]

Gotta love the BSN: panic, hyperbole and disdain rule supreme.
Seriously, people

[Niddy']

hhh89 wrote...

The Spamming Troll wrote...

ME1 never needed a multiplayer, because it was an excelent game. there doesnt need to be any mroe of an explanation.

ME2 sucked balls, and ME3 looks like ME2:episode 2, so im not surprised bioware went for multiplayer. it certainly is a game that needs something more. im not dissapointed because i gave up on ME1 showing up in ME3 about the same time i fired that pistol on the lazerouse station. atleast i know what im getting when i rent ME3.

WTF happened to my ME?

Simply, it's not yours. Bioware decided to change the direction of the IP. Good or bad the decison was, they have every right to change their IP if they want.

>hurrrr I'm a moron and going to literally interpret that you think you own Mass Effect.

If you cannot see that ME has shifted in paradigms you're willingly ignorant.

Modifié par Niddy', 05 août 2011 - 11:40 .

[SomeKindaEnigma]

Ruud333 wrote...

The PLC wrote...

If this turns out to be true, this forum is going to explode.

That is a bit of an understatement

I know it is not nice to laugh at people who are upset about something, but there are so many arrogant, highly strung and pompous people on these forums, it is hard not to have a bit of a giggle at their posts. 

I miss the original ME forums when everybody was all excited about the game and the majority of the discussion (apart from release date threads) was friendly and positive.  I'm not trying to imply that 'veteran' forum members are in any way better than newer ones, it is just that the forums back in 2007 generally seemed more pleasant, probably because people only have something to b*tch about once the game has been released

We should play 'forum bingo' (EDIT: assuming MP is actually confirmed) and see how many of the following posts/threads we can spot:

·         EA has ruined ME.
·         BW has betrayed their hardcore fans.
·         The inclusion of MP is the fault of younger/console/casual gamers.
·         I’m going cancel my pre-order for ME3.
·         I’m going cancel my pre-order for ME3 and sell my copies of ME1 and ME2 (I have actually seen somebody post that they would do this if MP was confirmed).
·         BW has sold out and I will never buy another one of their games.

Lol I love this idea, count me in on the forum bingo 

[Merchant2006]

Button awesome.

[Babli]

prez a buttn