991 réponses à ce sujet

[Personality Disorder]

Fiery Phoenix wrote...

I hope it's DLC.

I wouldn't count on that. 

Fiery Phoenix wrote... 

Also, there better not be multiplayer achievements...

Agreed.

[Someone With Mass]

RamirezWolfen wrote...
Name one game with multiplayer that didn't have multiplayer achievements.

Saints Row: The Third won't.

[Pink_Pyro]

GTA: SA MP.

Modifié par Pink_Pyro, 10 octobre 2011 - 03:18 .

[Gorosaur]

Candidate 88766 wrote...


On a side note, there seem to be way too many pseudo-hipsters in this thread. 

Welcome to the majority of BSN.

[DarkDragon777]

"We listen to everyone" - Bioware

" RAEEEEEEEG MULTIPLAYER SUCKS" - Fan


*makes multiplayer*

[ItsPhilsTime]

Announcement verified "There will not be no Reapers in ME3, you will only being fighting a heard of Darkspawn, yes they made it to the Future!!!!"

[Dionkey]

Fiery Phoenix wrote...

I hope it's DLC, at least. Or better yet, it's on its own disk. I really don't want this crap to be part of the main game.

Also, there better not be multiplayer achievements...

You bet your ass there will. Look at Dead Space, a completely useless and god-awful multiplayer mode that's only purpose was to add content to a game that was already only 6 hours.

[LPPrince]

RamirezWolfen wrote...

Fiery Phoenix wrote...

I hope it's DLC, at least. Or better yet, it's on its own disk. I really don't want this crap to be part of the main game.

Also, there better not be multiplayer achievements...

Name one game with multiplayer that didn't have multiplayer achievements.

Modern Warfare 2, for one. And that's a heavily concentrated MP game.

[unfringed]

DarkDragon777 wrote...

"We listen to everyone" - Bioware

" RAEEEEEEEG MULTIPLAYER SUCKS" - Fan


*makes multiplayer*

That about sums up Bioware "logic".

[RamirezWolfen]

Someone With Mass wrote...

RamirezWolfen wrote...
Name one game with multiplayer that didn't have multiplayer achievements.

Saints Row: The Third won't.

Okay, fine, but the majority have multiplayer achievements.

[DCarter]

News just in! Liara and Tali to be cut from ME3 to make room for multiplayer.

[MGIII]

AlphaJarmel wrote...

It's an extremely stupid argument.  People make it seem like the budget for the game was set in stone long ago and that multiplayer would come out of that budget instead of say EA just raising the budget to include a multiplayer option.  I mean it's not like EA is extremely short of cash and compared to TOR, any sort of budget increase would be a drop in the ocean.

The bigger issue would be developer time and Montreal would lessen that.

It's not a matter of timing or seperate budgeting. Resources are used to make MEM (multiplayer). Those resources (be it time, man power, or money) did not go into MESP (the "main game") exclusively. People don't like that, and never will like that, if they are biased againt multiplayer. Regardless of if the budget was raised to compensate or if multiplayer shares a lot of assets with singleplayer, purists will assign blame of any poorly executed facet of the game--no matter how small--on the fact that time was spent on a feature unwanted to them.

I wouldn't call it a stupid argument. I would call it ignorance in general.

[Candidate 88766]

Gorosaur wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...


On a side note, there seem to be way too many pseudo-hipsters in this thread. 

Welcome to the majority of BSN.

Touché

[Chugster]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Chugster wrote...

how is it stupid when neither ME1 or 2 had MP

There's lots of stuff ME1 and ME2 didn't have that's in ME3, like the Omniblade, and rail shooting, and weapon mods.

It's stupid because your argument is a blanket one against all innovation, not just ones you don't like or don't appreciate.

Chugster wrote...

nobody asked for MP on either of them, no one wants MP on ME3.

[Citation Needed]

Chugster wrote...

How many times have other devs ruined a gaming series by changing or adding too much?

Typically it's the other way around, you know - "dumbing down."

Chugster wrote...

IF IT AINT BROKE DONT FIX IT....simples

This is one of those application of simple for which dumb would be a synonym.

never ceases to maze me just how dumb people can be, how they cant even read properly or understand english.....what part of ME is a SP game and doesnt need MP dont you get?

Geez, how long have you been gaming? a year or two? You obviously dont have a clue

[Dionkey]

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.

I try to hold a conservative ideolgy when it comes to gaming (I'm a liberal in real-life), but I think BSN is probably the most unaccepting community when it comes to ideas they don't like.

[LPPrince]

roflchoppaz wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

Fiery Phoenix wrote...

I hope it's DLC, at least. Or better yet, it's on its own disk. I really don't want this crap to be part of the main game.

Also, there better not be multiplayer achievements...

That'd be one hell of a DLC.

But yes, on a minor note-

There better not be multiplayer achievements.

Time to be a realist, LPPrince. Of course there will be.

That would be a minor grievance that I might seethe over, I'm not gonna lie, hahahaha.

[AlphaJarmel]

LPPrince wrote...

RamirezWolfen wrote...

Fiery Phoenix wrote...

I hope it's DLC, at least. Or better yet, it's on its own disk. I really don't want this crap to be part of the main game.

Also, there better not be multiplayer achievements...

Name one game with multiplayer that didn't have multiplayer achievements.

Modern Warfare 2, for one. And that's a heavily concentrated MP game.

Pretty sure Modern Warfare didn't have one either.

[StonedVolus]

Gorosaur wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...


On a side note, there seem to be way too many pseudo-hipsters in this thread. 

Welcome to the majority of BSN.

And the majority of every single gaming website's forums.

[LPPrince]

On the subject of multiplayer game modes, am I the only one who's sick of seeing no-win Horde/Zombie/Survival mode type things?

[RamirezWolfen]

The co-op missions in MW2 had achievements if I recall.

Modifié par RamirezWolfen, 10 octobre 2011 - 03:23 .

[Candidate 88766]

MGIII wrote...

AlphaJarmel wrote...

It's an extremely stupid argument.  People make it seem like the budget for the game was set in stone long ago and that multiplayer would come out of that budget instead of say EA just raising the budget to include a multiplayer option.  I mean it's not like EA is extremely short of cash and compared to TOR, any sort of budget increase would be a drop in the ocean.

The bigger issue would be developer time and Montreal would lessen that.

It's not a matter of timing or seperate budgeting. Resources are used to make MEM (multiplayer). Those resources (be it time, man power, or money) did not go into MESP (the "main game") exclusively. People don't like that, and never will like that, if they are biased againt multiplayer. Regardless of if the budget was raised to compensate or if multiplayer shares a lot of assets with singleplayer, purists will assign blame of any poorly executed facet of the game--no matter how small--on the fact that time was spent on a feature unwanted to them.

I wouldn't call it a stupid argument. I would call it ignorance in general.

Exactly. People can't grasp that maybe EA extended ME3's budget purely for MP - a budget extension that wouldn't have been granted if MP wasn't included. They also forget that ME3 has been delayed by several months, presumably to ensure that both SP and MP are as polished as can be.