991 réponses à ce sujet

[Gemini1179]

If the rumour is in fact true, the only difference to me is that I'll feel sorry to all the BW employees who put time and effort into something I don't care one bit about at the expense of everything else I do.

[RamirezWolfen]

unfringed wrote...

Personality Disorder wrote...

You know, Bioware, it is not my place or even right to tell you what to do with your IPs and franchises. You want multiplayer in Mass Effect - fine, you want Dragon Age to develop in a new direction - whatever. None of us really have a say in this, nor should we.

Of course we should have a say in it. At least, we should have a say in it if Bioware wants to maintain some shred of their already tattered reputation and wants to keep its fans.

They're not artists. They're producers. They answer to consumers, NOT the other way around.

Up to a point, yes, Bioware does answer to consumers.

[DarkDragon777]

Hmm, so far a lot have people have been reacting negatively on the gaming blogs that posted the news.

[Pink_Pyro]

Youre still here Duck?

Meh, screw the comments on 'gaming' blogs. You know TK, gamm-thingy and onelife? Just imagine dozens of similar clowns posting the same thing over and over.

Modifié par Pink_Pyro, 10 octobre 2011 - 02:58 .

[MGIII]

RamirezWolfen wrote...

Priestly locked the other thread saying "rumor."

He also gave this thread his blessing citing the same "rumor." In days passed, multiplayer as a subject entirely was grounds for locking, so the fact that they're allowing a dedicated thread for it now tells you all you need to know.

[slimgrin]

There's really nothing more to debate if it's confirmed. If ME3 single player is up to snuff, then multi is just icing on the cake, for some fans anyway. If single player sucks, we'll all take Bioware to task for it, and they'll have killed one of the finest franchises in the industry.

We'll know when we play the game.

Modifié par slimgrin, 10 octobre 2011 - 02:58 .

[unfringed]

DaringMoosejaw wrote...

unfringed wrote...

ME2 was a mess from a storytelling perspective. Everything that made ME1 great was ditched for "streamlined gameplay". "Making decisions that count" meant you get an email saying thanks.

Bioware promised "ME3 will focus on story".

HEY GUIES WE HAVE OMNI TOOL BLADES. HEY GUIES YOU CAN SNIPE THE PILOT OF SOME MECHS. HEY GUIES WE HAVE MULTIPLAYER NOW.

It's not irrational to suspect that the downgrade from ME1 in ME2 will continue in ME3 when everything, from the advertising to the gameplay, suggests that all they're really concerned with is attracting cowwadooty fans with multiplayer and combat gimmicks.

What did we lose from ME1 to ME2? A bunch of tiers of relatively worthless skills where each point raised your armor or damage by 2%? 'Exploration' that involved slowly climbing jagged cliffs at 85 degree angles where the only difference between them were the color scheme, the skybox and whether it was the stock warehouse, the stock bunker or the stock mine? An inventory system that gave you the 'choice' of having the exact same armor and guns as everyone else where 98% of the crap you picked up was IMMEDIATELY sold to a vendor or turned into omni-gel, which was also rendered useless when you easily maxed out your credits and omni-gel?

I call that polishing, not losing what made ME1 great.

Polishing doesn't mean COMPLETELY removing all semblance of exploration. Polishing doesn't mean reducing the character to 5 skills, 4 of which you can completely max.

You REALLY believe ditching EVERY sandbox element of ME1 was a good idea, simply because you didn't like the Mako?

[Leonia]

Wait, ME1 had sandbox elements? Are we on the same planet any more?

[TheRealJayDee]

didymos1120 wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

However, if the single player campaign suffers because of it, even just a little, my nerd rage shall be great.

When you run across something in SP that seems less-than-ideal to you, how will you know that it was because of the MP mode?  Surely the mere existence of said mode isn't sufficient evidence?  Maybe they just screwed that part up for entirely unrelated reasons.

It might be just like this for me. Maybe that'd be stupid of me, but every little fault ME3 has might be connected with the inclusion of the MP option...

[RamirezWolfen]

MGIII wrote...

RamirezWolfen wrote...

Priestly locked the other thread saying "rumor."

He also gave this thread his blessing citing the same "rumor." In days passed, multiplayer as a subject entirely was grounds for locking, so the fact that they're allowing a dedicated thread for it now tells you all you need to know.

I guess so. When I saw his post it made me question whether mp was confirmed or not.

[LPPrince]

DarkDragon777 wrote...

Hmm, so far a lot have people have been reacting negatively on the gaming blogs that posted the news.

As if that's any surprise. Like I said, confusion, apprehension, anger, it'll all be felt.

Those people who've been looking at Bioware differently than before? This is not more fuel to the fire, this is like drowning a forest in napalm.

[Xewaka]

MGIII wrote...

RamirezWolfen wrote...
Priestly locked the other thread saying "rumor."

He also gave this thread his blessing citing the same "rumor." In days passed, multiplayer as a subject entirely was grounds for locking, so the fact that they're allowing a dedicated thread for it now tells you all you need to know.

The community manager is tired of chasing threads to lock and decided to instead redirect all the derpiness to a thread he can safely ignore?

[DarkDragon777]

Oh well, if this is true, you know what this means. Future DA games are probably going to be multiplayer too.

[Pink_Pyro]

What about the gaping flaws in ME 1? Blame it on consoles?

[didymos1120]

Ohei wrote...

Hell, even if a 20 % goes to multiplayer, it means the single player could've been improved even MORE.

Jesus Christ, this line of argument needs to die.  OK, look: that hypothetical 20%?  Without MP, it could've also ended up being allocated to some other title entirely, and very possibly not even one being developed by Bioware.

[Personality Disorder]

unfringed wrote...

Personality Disorder wrote...

You know, Bioware, it is not my place or even right to tell you what to do with your IPs and franchises. You want multiplayer in Mass Effect - fine, you want Dragon Age to develop in a new direction - whatever. None of us really have a say in this, nor should we.

Of course we should have a say in it. At least, we should have a say in it if Bioware wants to maintain some shred of their already tattered reputation and wants to keep its fans.

They're not artists. They're producers. They answer to consumers, NOT the other way around.

I'm not sure about that. The things we can change are the little ones. The really big decisions - like a new artstyle or the inclusion of multiplayer will not be altered because of our opinions here. 
If they don't want to make the games I'm willing to play - who am I to  blame them or demand they do otherwise?
I just move on. That's how it works. 

[Gorosaur]

DarkDragon777 wrote...

Oh well, if this is true, you know what this means. Future DA games are probably going to be multiplayer too.

Doubt it. ME is a little more suited to being multiplayer than DA

[slimgrin]

leonia42 wrote...

Wait, ME1 had sandbox elements? Are we on the same planet any more?

Of course it did. the planets were sandbox.

[Leonia]

I'm saying it again: BIOWARE. MONTREAL. This has been in development for quite some time without cutting into the resources of ME3.

[Azbeszt]

leonia42 wrote...

Wait, ME1 had sandbox elements? Are we on the same planet any more?

You could..
Go straight to the copypasta base
OR
Go through the mountain with the wtf mako to the copypasta base.

[upsettingshorts]

didymos1120 wrote...

Ohei wrote...

Hell, even if a 20 % goes to multiplayer, it means the single player could've been improved even MORE.

Jesus Christ, this line of argument needs to die.  OK, look: that hypothetical 20%?  Without MP, it could've also ended up being allocated to some other title entirely, and very possibly not even one being developed by Bioware.

This has been your 5 minute reminder that zot arguments are stupid.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 10 octobre 2011 - 03:01 .

[DarkDragon777]

LPPrince wrote...

DarkDragon777 wrote...

Hmm, so far a lot have people have been reacting negatively on the gaming blogs that posted the news.

As if that's any surprise. Like I said, confusion, apprehension, anger, it'll all be felt.

Those people who've been looking at Bioware differently than before? This is not more fuel to the fire, this is like drowning a forest in napalm.

Yes, and I'm one of those people. I am genuinely upset about this, ecause this gives huge implications about their future as a gaming company.

[didymos1120]

leonia42 wrote...

Wait, ME1 had sandbox elements? Are we on the same planet any more?

It's actually not uncommon to hear people use that descriptor.  I'm guessing they mean the uncharted worlds.  Pretty paltry sandbox though.