140 réponses à ce sujet

[Golden Owl]

nitefyre410 wrote...

Golden Owl wrote...

nitefyre410 wrote...

Golden Owl wrote...

Epic777 wrote...

Here is a question to you, do you want multiplayer?

Don't really care one way or another myself.

 


Competive - No .... Co-Op Yes - some of the best  online experiences I have had has been with  Co-Op  Multiplayer . 

Kingdom Hearts: Birth By Sleep had  co-op arena and mission modes and that was fun  and you received usefully rewards for the single player campaign.  RE 5,  Left 4 Dead 1 and 2  and most recently  Dead Island. 

The only Co-op game I have played is GRAW....Hubbies trying to get me into Battle Field also...is that anything like either of those?....I have never played Competative, never interested me. Though admittedly there is a part of me that would be curious to see how my Shep Infiltrator would stand up against a Shep Vanguard.

 

RE 5  - is  good because it requires team work  and planning just -    Kingdoms Hearts BBS  is great  because there is a very deep  skill creation systems in that game.   Left 4 dead is more run and gun but you need  communicate ,pay attention and not got lost.   

For Competitive you need balance and more importantly you need balance around   Player vs Player gameplay and not  Player vs Enivorment.   ME  is balanced for player vs enviroment so   Co-Op is an easier fit for the game.   

Graw is like Left 4 Dead and  RE 5 -  Faster than RE 5  but you still need the planing and team work element.

Thank you Nitefrye...I may have to look into some of these games....I very much enjoy team work and tactical planning.

[Gatt9]

didymos1120 wrote...

Well, you'd think if this was for ME3, they'd have hired the necessary staff already by this point in development. It's a bit late in the day to get all the stuff done that the position demands. I'd say it's more likely to be for a potential future title, and possibly even one in the ME setting.

Way to late in the development cycle for ME 3.

Multiplayer functionality needs to be considered, developed, and designed along with the rest of game from the beginning, not later in the development cycle.

Both statements are technically incorrect in context of the OP.

The position in question is for a tester,  not a developer.  As far as testing goes,  it'll take ~2 weeks to get up to speed on the internal process and the game.  It'll take about 1 week to write the tests. 

Given that it's 6 months to release,  this is about when you'd want to hire the testers and start writing executing the tests extensively.  Especially since they're using Agile to develop,  which means they've been bug fixing with experienced testing pretty much since day 1.

It is entirely possible that this is ME3 related.  Especially if the position's goal is testing the experience and not the code,  you wouldn't hire that person until you've implemented all of the features and have it reasonably playable. 

[marshalleck]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

Come on, marsh, tell me: how could NOT having multiplayer after this hype be bad for Bioware? like, give me an example.

How are you struggling with this? Product received is not the product expected. That's bad when it's a result of Bioware ALLOWING rumors to circulate about multiplayer, if they know with absolute certainty there won't be multiplayer. Don't try to take my statements out of context; it was always my position that indulging the rumors in order to sell more pre-orders--knowingly, under false pretenses--could very well come back to bite Bioware. 

I never said "Bioware will be sorry for not including multiplayer!" That's a deliberate misrepresentation of what I said.

Modifié par marshalleck, 11 septembre 2011 - 05:04 .

[Omega4RelayResident]

I honestly cant make heads or tails of the position. Not what its for I mean.

Game companies are so damn paranoid with all of their security measures about hiring practices. They make game engine requirements known yes but typically they would never state what project it is for because they keep everything so damn hush hush. Doesnt thit strike anyone as an odd situation that they reveal the project intention in the hiring ad?

My older cousin answered an ad for Blizzard years back for some odd project that was never heard from again but he himself ended up working on Data Analysis for WoW.

Game companies always end up confusing the hell out of me.

[Gatt9]

Omega4RelayResident wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

Omega4RelayResident wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

They already posted an opening for MP dev for Mass Effect over a year ago

I would have to be something other than ME3 or a DLC for ME3... its its multiplayer v.s. you cant justify the use of certain abilities. Adrenaline Rush for example.... it would have to be totally redesigned.

Old argument has been refuted decades ago, no point trotting this out yet again

FACT: they posted a job opening for a multiplayer dev for the Mass Effect IP June of...2010 was it? 

FACT: now they're looking for a dev/QA tester to work on an Unreal engine game, still six months short of release date

FACT: they've never said "Mass Effect 3 will never have multiplayer"

Dont talk to me like that youre not my god....

If you bothered to read the entire thread you would see that I did also state that Phaedon still has it confirmed that ME3 multiplayer was a rummor. When you decided to walk in half way through the conversation and put your 2 cents in I was offering possibilities for those people that apparently cant let go of the fact that ME will have MP in their perceptions. ME3 will in no way have MP... the only way they would do that if its a DLC months after the game comes out... In the highly unlikely scenario that they will do a MP this would be this case.

L2ReadBeforeYouTearPeoplesHeadsOff

You may want to avoid using Phaedon as a source,  he's spent the last several months citing a single introductory paragraph in a wikipedia article,  that consists entirely of pure unsubstantiatable conjecture from some random unkown person,  as the definition of "RPG".  Solely because it fits what he wants it to say.

Phaedon posts as fact whatever he can find that supports what he wants to hear,  without regard to the reliability of the data.  It's good to follow anything he posts to the origin,  as it's not at all uncommon to find that what the origin actually stated isn't what Phaedon posted. 

This is another good example,  what was stated by Bioware was ...

Like Ray said, we evaluate lots of tech/designs but as you saw at E3 we're focused on the best SP experience in the series.

and

Game Informer wrote .... "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 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".

Nowhere does Bioware say "No",  but Phaedon claims they did,  and posts as fact that they did even though that's not at all what they said.  Bioware could've easily stated a solid flat "No",  but they won't.

Modifié par Gatt9, 11 septembre 2011 - 05:22 .

[Kaiser Shepard]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

Come on, marsh, tell me: how could NOT having multiplayer after this hype be bad for Bioware? like, give me an example.

How are you struggling with this? Product received is not the product expected. That's bad when it's a result of Bioware ALLOWING rumors to circulate about multiplayer, if they know with absolute certainty there won't be multiplayer. Don't try to take my statements out of context; it was always my position that indulging the rumors in order to sell more pre-orders--knowingly, under false pretenses--could very well come back to bite Bioware. 

I never said "Bioware will be sorry for not including multiplayer!" That's a deliberate misrepresentation of what I said.

No, I'm just wondering HOW it would come back to bite Bioware, since no one is getting ME3 for multiplayer, and I think most would not be unhappy were it shipped without MP.

You can't just extrapolate BSN concensus to the rest of the gaming community. Multiplayer is a huge thing in gaming today, and lack thereof can be a dealbreaker for many. Likewise, having it included might help sell more copies than would otherwise be sold.

Now, promising something, or appearing to in this case, yet not delivering on it is pretty much a capital sin in gaming. Sure, our fellow BSN'ers will only **** and moan about it as if there's no tomorrow (and will likely end up still purchasing subsequent products), but other gamers who don't hold BioWare to the same standard most here do will feel deceived, betrayed... and will actually 'leave' BioWare for good. Just look at Peter Molyneux and how he failed to deliver on many of his promises, or how the a majority of the more hardcore gaming community steers clear of anything Nintendo nowadays.

[ThePwener]

Im not holding my breath on this. Too many "confirmations" and "rumors" for my liking. It's been a damn hot potato game with this thing since it was first mentioned.

Hoorah if there is, wathever if there isn't. I'd still be skeptical if it wasn't for the fact that every month a thread pops up or some online news site goes "OMG online gameplay for ME3!!!111".

[Epic777]

Personally I will be more worried about such a late opening. This guy or gal should have been hired a long time ago (before a teaser trailer).

Modifié par Epic777, 11 septembre 2011 - 05:40 .

[Phaedon]

ITT: Everyone fails to grasp the concept of gameplay metrics which has become extremely popular among developers during recent years.

[Phaedon]

Gatt9 wrote...
Nowhere does Bioware say "No",  but Phaedon claims they did,  and posts as fact that they did even though that's not at all what they said.  Bioware could've easily stated a solid flat "No",  but they won't.

Kindly get out. Three different sources say "Lol, we tried to make it fit, but it just doesn't.", the constant compulsive pessimism and denial is getting ridiculous.

[Phaedon]

marshalleck wrote...
The rumor has hit most major gaming news sites several times now, in addition to being printed in actual magazines.

Because that totally didn't happen with ME2. And you can develop a multiplayer component by hiring a single multiplayer engineer. And you haven't been getting denied for several times.

If you are going to hide between someone's finger try to find one better than gaming journalism and their ultra supah dupa secrit sauses.

Einstein, you should rather go rework your theory of relativity before getting your pants on fire and getting angsty.

[javierabegazo]

Alright, I've peeked in here a few times, and now's the time I say something:

Things are getting far too personal, and far too aggressive in here. When I find myself physically face-palming more than twice after reading posts from any certain user, that's usually a good sign to just leave the thread alone, and go do something else, preferably more productive than pick over semantics with some name on the Internet.

[CroGamer002]

^I think you should lock this thread.

ME3 is in final production since ComicCon, if not even before.
At GamesCom and PAX multiplayer in ME3 wasn't even hinted.


Unless Bioware decides to delay ME3 for another year, multiplayer is a no-go.

[AtreiyaN7]

didymos1120 wrote...

Well, you'd think if this was for ME3, they'd have hired the necessary staff already by this point in development. It's a bit late in the day to get all the stuff done that the position demands. I'd say it's more likely to be for a potential future title, and possibly even one in the ME setting.

^^^ This! There's been no multiplayer announcement (even after the recent hysteria where the more...insistent...people said it would happen) and multiplayer has been repeatedly denied. Some tester gig doesn't seem like credible evidence of multiplayer existing in ME3. On the offhand chance that you somehow end up being right (though I doubt it), you can laugh at us later if it turns out to be true.

Modifié par AtreiyaN7, 11 septembre 2011 - 07:48 .

[Dhiro]

Edit: ...totally posted in the wrong place.

@On topic:

I'm okay with Multiplayer. I wonder if it would be anything like Team Fortress?

Modifié par Dhiro, 11 septembre 2011 - 07:51 .

[Kaiser Shepard]

I think I would prefer a cooperative multiplayer over a competitive one. Something like Halo 3: ODST's Firefight mode or Gears of War's Horde mode would be preferable: just you and a few buds against wave after wave of enemies, simply trying to survive while perhaps also trying to beat a certain score. Completely seperate from the story mode, of course.

[ThePwener]

Mesina2 wrote...

Unless Bioware decides to delay ME3 for another year, multiplayer is a no-go.

Multiplayer wouldn't take a full year to develop. Half a year is alittle more moderate. And guess for how much was ME3 delayed.... 6 months. Huzzah!

[DTKT]

ThePwener wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...

Unless Bioware decides to delay ME3 for another year, multiplayer is a no-go.

Multiplayer wouldn't take a full year to develop. Half a year is alittle more moderate. And guess for how much was ME3 delayed.... 6 months. Huzzah!

A six month "hard" deadline to build a MP mode from the ground up sounds like a recipe for disaster.

[didymos1120]

ThePwener wrote...


Multiplayer wouldn't take a full year to develop. Half a year is alittle more moderate. And guess for how much was ME3 delayed.... 6 months. Huzzah!

More like 4 months. Or less. It was originally slated for November/December 2011.

[Azbeszt]

Me3 multiplayer - big no.
Me4 as a multiplayer game - no problems with it.

[ThePwener]

DTKT wrote...

A six month "hard" deadline to build a MP mode from the ground up sounds like a recipe for disaster.

Didn't say it wasn't.

"We all know who they're real masters are...."

Modifié par ThePwener, 11 septembre 2011 - 08:29 .

[Kaiser Shepard]

The REApers?

Therein also lies one of the advantages BioWare would have/has with a multiplayer mode: EA's resources. The general gameplay is already there, the netcode they could borrow from DICE and who's to say they haven't started developing the MP during the same time they started development of the game itself?

[ThePwener]

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

The REApers?

Very nice.