1170 réponses à ce sujet

[Rekkampum]

Rekkampum wrote...

  Here is a link to a site that talks about the XBOX World 360 magazine cover.

Also, while Casey Hudson didn't explicitly say there was multiplayer in ME3 during his GI interview, he did allude to some possible form of co-op in his response. Before this latest magazine cover, the consensus was that there wasn't going to be any MP :

"As a single player experience, and just as a world that people want to immerse themselves in and share, we've been trying to think of a way that makes sense for people to experience Mass Effect with their friends," says executive producer Casey Hudson. "We haven't yet come up with a way to do that, so we don't have anything to announce at this time. But, obviously, multiplayer is something we want to do more of in the future as a company."(56)

I doubt it will be the conventional style of multiplayer if it is.

EDIT: Now that I think about it, wouldn't any announcement of something like MP pop up here on the official website's announcements section first anyway? 

I found a different website that goes into more information about the supposedly confirmed MP. Apparently, it will not affect the campaign and is comprised of online co-op missions (sounds like Horde). Here it is.

[Savber100]

EJ107 wrote...

100k wrote...

2. 35 pages and not a word from anyone at Bioware.

Highlighted for emphasis. 

Yes. And That's more disconcerting than the actual magazine article. 

I bet we'll know at Gamescon. 

[rapscallioness]

BW's non response? Frankly, I think they're....."hesitant" because this place is getting like a thresher maw's nest. Ppl are impatient for the game. We are at a fever pitch. Idk if it's gonna get worse or better as the day comes closer. We are obsessive and speculative in the extreme.

Besides, it's still free publicity. Rumor, or no.

As you know, the term "fan" comes from fanatic. Would you want to jump into a hive of fanatics?

We're getting to the point of the old Dionysian rites where the followers got so crazed they just bodily ripped the representative of Dionysus apart.

Or maybe they just like free publicity...hehe

[Saberchic]

EJ107 wrote...

100k wrote...

2. 35 pages and not a word from anyone at Bioware.

Highlighted for emphasis. 

Yes. And That's more disconcerting than the actual magazine article. 

It's not like this is the Dragon Age board where the devs are on all the time.

Mass Effect staff seem to pretty much stay off the boards. When they are on, it's a minor miracle-- heavenly light shines down, a hidden choir starts singing, butterflies and unicorns appear out of thin air.

I think people are reading too much into the silence.

[didymos1120]

Rekkampum wrote...

I found a different website that goes into more information about the supposedly confirmed MP. Apparently, it will not affect the campaign and is comprised of online co-op missions (sounds like Horde). Here it is.

Yes, that's been posted numerous times already.  It's a two-month old piece based on this Eurogamer article that's based on "rumor" and some unspecified, unnamed "separate source" that isn't even said to work at Bioware. 

[shepskisaac]

Savber100 wrote...
I bet we'll know at Gamescon. 

If it's not announced at Gamescom, then it will settle it. But for some reason I'm still sure it's gonna be announced.

[-Skorpious-]

IsaacShep wrote...

Savber100 wrote...
I bet we'll know at Gamescon. 

If it's not announced at Gamescom, then it will settle it. But for some reason I'm still sure it's gonna be announced.

That better not be true, as I had to pull some strings to get my Skyrim CE preorder back - it would suck if I had to cancel my TES:5 preorder again because ME3 has MP!

Modifié par -Skorpious-, 07 août 2011 - 02:34 .

[GreenDragon37]

What's all of this talk about MP in Mass Effect? That better not be true...

[Phaelducan]

Insanity Geth waves? Yes please.

[slimgrin]

Multiplayer?

Crap..

[didymos1120]

GreenDragon37 wrote...

What's all of this talk about MP in Mass Effect? That better not be true...

Does no one bother with even skimming the thread?

Modifié par didymos1120, 07 août 2011 - 02:52 .

[GreenDragon37]

didymos1120 wrote...

GreenDragon37 wrote...

What's all of this talk about MP in Mass Effect? That better not be true...

Does no one bother with even skimming the thread?

Jeez, no need to be so rude. I don't want to have to go through 36 pages!!

Modifié par GreenDragon37, 07 août 2011 - 02:54 .

[Gatt9]

didymos1120 wrote...

Savber100 wrote...

So what did I miss?I'm getting a lot of mixed messages here. Was the magazine just a bunch of hogwash?

Yes.  People have posted the "content" multiple times now in the last few pages.

Actually,  it likely wasn't hogwash.  Note that didymos doesn't actually have an explanation for anything I posted,  other than claiming that the origin of the rumor was an old article without any real evidence.  The origin of it is actually just as likely,  or more likely, the preview pieces the press sites would've been instructed to delay until after some finite date..

Yeah, them doing pretty much same thing they always do is disconcerting. Wait....why is that disconcerting?

Now would probably be a good time for you to notice how quickly they responded to all of the other magazine/interview quotes that were inaccurate,  generally didn't take much beyond page 2 for them to respond.

So doing what they always do would've been responding to the article really quickly on Friday. 

Modifié par Gatt9, 07 août 2011 - 02:55 .

[didymos1120]

Gatt9 wrote...

Actually,  it likely wasn't hogwash.  Note that didymos doesn't actually have an explanation for anything I posted,  other than claiming that the origin of the rumor was an old article without any real evidence. 

Yeah, I tend to find a lack of any actual evidence to be unpersuasive.  Strange that.  As to your unsubstantiated speculation: not my job to prove you wrong.  It's up to you to back them up with some of that pesky "evidence" stuff.  Burden of proof is on the one making claims.

[didymos1120]

Gatt9 wrote...

Now would probably be a good time for you to notice how quickly they responded to all of the other magazine/interview quotes that were inaccurate,  generally didn't take much beyond page 2 for them to respond.

Tell you what:  I'll start if you can provide some examples.  I haven't particularly noticed them doing that, so what else would you expect my reaction to be?  If you can show me otherwise, great.  I'll change my tune.

[Epic777]

They wonder why video game journalism is seen as a joke....

[Whoo71]

Gatt9 wrote...

Actually,  it likely wasn't hogwash.  Note that didymos doesn't actually have an explanation for anything I posted,  other than claiming that the origin of the rumor was an old article without any real evidence. 

Here's a quote from the CVG article:

A reliable development source has since informed CVG that the Mass Effect 3 multiplayer feature will be built around "original missions made for online", which will be totally unique from the solo campaign. 

A "reliable" development source can be anyone: the article author's uninformed neighbor, his/her 89 year old father, or his/her video game hating ex-wife/husband. Please learn how journalism works before running off and saying stuff like that. Sure it might be true, but when articles refuse to point to a source it's more than likely they're just trying to generate hype.

And here is a quote from the source of that The Video Game Writers article:

"Well, if you believe the rumours - which we certainly do - ME3 will have MP. According to various sources, there will be a batch of 3 player co-op missions that run parallel to the main story,

The Video Game Writers article also links some random Twitter "reporter" who somehow happens to know when and where it will be revealed.

I'm calling bull until Casey says anything.

Modifié par Whoo71, 07 août 2011 - 03:46 .

[Smilietime]

I don't understand why people think that Multiplayer = HORRIBLE HORRIBLE UNREDEEMABLE !!!!

The way I understand it, people are just being downright irrational.

I remember when every game had OK multiplayer, like Half-Life, and it wasn't a big deal for anyone. I remember massacuring everyone with my rocket launcher, at the Metal of Honor: Allied Assault multiplayer map that had the V2 rocket.

Of course, everyone's just going to RAAAAAGE! And say RUINED FOREVER!!!!

Modifié par Smilietime, 07 août 2011 - 03:56 .

[Whoo71]

Smilietime wrote...

I don't understand why people think that Multiplayer = HORRIBLE HORRIBLE UNREDEEMABLE !!!!

The way I understand it, people are just being downright irrational.

I remember when every game had OK multiplayer, like Half-Life, and it wasn't a big deal for anyone. I remember massacuring everyone with my rocket launcher, at the Metal of Honor: Allied Assault multiplayer map that had the V2 rocket.

Of course, everyone's just going to RAAAAAGE! And say RUINED FOREVER!!!!

Well if the articles are actually true and Bioware Montreal is doing it I'll be fine with it, as there won't be any time taken away from working on the SP campaign.

Plus you're mentioning games that had good multiplayer because the industry back then was still fresh and creative and not full of COD clones.

Modifié par Whoo71, 07 août 2011 - 03:52 .

[Smilietime]

Whoo71 wrote...

Smilietime wrote...

I don't understand why people think that Multiplayer = HORRIBLE HORRIBLE UNREDEEMABLE !!!!

The way I understand it, people are just being downright irrational.

I remember when every game had OK multiplayer, like Half-Life, and it wasn't a big deal for anyone. I remember massacuring everyone with my rocket launcher, at the Metal of Honor: Allied Assault multiplayer map that had the V2 rocket.

Of course, everyone's just going to RAAAAAGE! And say RUINED FOREVER!!!!

Well if the articles are actually true and Bioware Montreal is doing it I'll be fine with it, as there won't be any time taken away from working on the SP campaign.

Plus you're mentioning games that had good multiplayer because the industry back then was still fresh and creative and not full of COD clones.

Well, EXACTLY. Mass Effect IS NOT A CLONE!!!!!!!!!!!! It's not a rip off of Halo of Call of Duty.

lol, sometimes the obvious must be stated. FYI, there is a Mass Effect clone out there, called Alpha Protocol. It's a decent game.

Modifié par Smilietime, 07 août 2011 - 04:02 .

[Whoo71]

Smilietime wrote...
Well, EXACTLY. Mass Effect IS NOT A CLONE!!!!!!!!!!!! It's not a rip off of Halo of Call of Duty.

But if MP is going to included, then you know EA is forcing it and they'll make it suck terribly like they did with Dead Space 2. I still have to look at the multiplayer in the third(?) Assassin's Creed game to see if EA made that suck too. (Whoops, mixed up publishers)

Modifié par Whoo71, 07 août 2011 - 04:10 .

[Smilietime]

Whoo71 wrote...

Smilietime wrote...
Well, EXACTLY. Mass Effect IS NOT A CLONE!!!!!!!!!!!! It's not a rip off of Halo of Call of Duty.

lol, sometimes the obvious must be stated. FYI, there is a Mass Effect
clone out there, called Alpha Protocol. It's a decent game.

But if MP is going to included, then you know EA is forcing it and they'll make it suck terribly like they did with Dead Space 2. I still have to look at the multiplayer in the third(?) Assassin's Creed game to see if EA made that suck too.

How do you know that? I think we've all seen too many Corrupt Corperate Executive characters in fiction.

Oh, and Assasin's Creed is made by Ubisoft.

Modifié par Smilietime, 07 août 2011 - 04:08 .

[100k]

Smilietime wrote...

I don't understand why people think that Multiplayer = HORRIBLE HORRIBLE UNREDEEMABLE !!!!

The way I understand it, people are just being downright irrational.

I remember when every game had OK multiplayer, like Half-Life, and it wasn't a big deal for anyone. I remember massacuring everyone with my rocket launcher, at the Metal of Honor: Allied Assault multiplayer map that had the V2 rocket.

Of course, everyone's just going to RAAAAAGE! And say RUINED FOREVER!!!!

:blush::blush:
I'm not against a horde mode in that sense. I like the idea of this co op taking place parallel to the main plot -- like Aria, Gavorn, and Patriarch defending Omega from husks or mercs after (in the SP) Shepard leaves it (example).

BUT

MP is a real cash grab -- now I know that's great for the devs. But for us SP fans, it is hell. Especially in the DLC department. What are you as a developer more likely to spend time on?

-- A DLC that adds 1 - 3 hours of game play for the single player, that maybe 30% of your customers will purchase?

-- Or a DLC MP map that adds 15-100 hours of game play, gets casual gamers excited, and generates buzz that causes more people to buy your game?

If the above is true, then can we expect maybe three additional DLCs for ME3 single player, and 5, or 7 DLCs for multiplayer???

And who's gonna work on the MP DLC, patches, modes, etc? Either the team dedicated to the SP (in which case, fans of the SP are screwed), or a separate team  dedicated to MP (which means ME fans, as with Arrival, could get a real dip in quality of the game's design because of this alien team).

I dunno. Maybe I'm just stressing out about this. All I really wanna see is new SP footage, levels, characters, etc. But MP means that conventions will have to be crammed with MP demos instead of SP demos. It means that a BETA has to be built for play testing. It means that, for the 360, the second CD has to be dedicated (at least partially) to MP -- bringing up the question of whether the first disc will hold less content in its SP or not (keeping in mind that ME2 had to have two CDs for its SP alone).

:crying::crying:

Modifié par 100k, 07 août 2011 - 04:10 .

[Whoo71]

Smilietime wrote...
How do you know that?

Go compare Crysis 2 to Crysis and you'll see what they do when they try to enforce things.

Smilietime wrote...
Oh, and Assasin's Creed is made by Ubisoft.

My bad, I tend to occasionally get the two mixed up.

Modifié par Whoo71, 07 août 2011 - 04:13 .

[Gatt9]

didymos1120 wrote...

Gatt9 wrote...

Now would probably be a good time for you to notice how quickly they responded to all of the other magazine/interview quotes that were inaccurate,  generally didn't take much beyond page 2 for them to respond.

Tell you what:  I'll start if you can provide some examples.  I haven't particularly noticed them doing that, so what else would you expect my reaction to be?  If you can show me otherwise, great.  I'll change my tune.

http://social.biowar...3/index/8019424

There's the thread about norman and the RPG elements,  and a few others I don't have time to search out atm.

A "reliable" development source can be anyone: the article author's uninformed neighbor, his/her 89 year old father, or his/her video game hating ex-wife/husband. Please learn how journalism works before running off and saying stuff like that. Sure it might be true, but when articles refuse to point to a source it's more than likely they're just trying to generate hype.

And here is a quote from the source of that The Video Game Writers article:

Generally speaking,  it isn't a good idea to flame someone while making a massive logic error in the process.

Please note the third word in your quote.  That eliminates pretty much all of your counter-arguement.  The only option at that point is someone who works in development,  and we can reliably infer someone who works for EA,  as companies don't generally tend to let each other in on their feature lists.

I also have a very good idea of how journalism works,  especially in games.  Marketing PR calls them weeks prior to the announcement,  emails them the details after receiving an agreement to wait until the moratorium prior to the announcement ends,  giving them time to prepare those huge articles we see minutes after an announcement.  Just as often,  bigger sites are invited in so that they can play the feature under supervision,  with the understanding that the preview isn't to be released until the day of announcement.

Game Journalism is actually just independent PR firms for companies for the most part,  anything remotely resembling Journalism died over a decade ago when Wilson left Computer Gaming World,  and CGW gave up it's standing as the last remaining publication to review games,  not publsiher's advertising dollars.

The Video Game Writers article also links some random Twitter "reporter" who somehow happens to know when and where it will be revealed.

Of course he does.  EA would've notified the major sites weeks ago when and where the announcement would be made.  They give them time to prepare,  and a list of details to include,  if not outright giving them the whole article to print.

Haven't you ever wondered why any given "Announcement" reads almost exactly the same on every major site on the same day?  It's because they get it from the publishers,  and change a few words,  then post it.