991 réponses à ce sujet

[shepskisaac]

Bring_the_rain wrote...

What ME 3 will be like if it has a multiplayer mode:



















STRAIGHT.

Fixed that for you

[Chris Priestly]

You are welcome to continue to discuss this rumor, but breaking the site rules will result in people being banned and the thread closed.

This is the only warning.

[themonty72]

Chris Priestly wrote...

You are welcome to continue to discuss this rumor, but breaking the site rules will result in people being banned and the thread closed.

This is the only warning.

Just a rumor thats what I saw it as,,,,people go crazy when they hear rumors.

Modifié par themonty72, 03 octobre 2011 - 10:46 .

[Whatever42]

The latest IGN story certainly has me in the "there will be MP camp" now.

I honestly don't believe this will affect the SP campaign. I do think that Bioware is trying to break into new genres with the signature storytelling (ME2, SWTOR) but that they didn't like the sales of ME2. I'm guessing that marketing decided that lack of multiplayer hurt so they decided to add it in.

However, if MP is in, it would be hard to convince me that this is not part of the reason for the delay in the release.

I am really interested in how they do it. I'm going to boldly predict that there will both be PvP action and co-op action. I'm going further out on a limb to predict that we will see SWTOR's group dialogue system. If I'm right then my only complaint is that I probably well never use it. Sigh.

[Savber100]

themonty72 wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

You are welcome to continue to discuss this rumor, but breaking the site rules will result in people being banned and the thread closed.

This is the only warning.

Just a rumor thats what I saw it as,,,,people go crazy when they hear rumors.

So what do you think of the image that's been circulating around gaming websites? Do you think it's a fake / an elaborate hoax?

[Yakko77]

I don't play a lot of multi-player but just so long as a multi-player aspect doesn't take away from the single player game then go a head and add it. Heck, I'll even play it multi-player as well when I'm done with my solo campaigns. If it takes nothing away then there shouldn't be a problem. There are lots of great single player games with meaty solo campaigns that have awesome multi-player like Uncharted and Halo: Reach for example. There's no reason to limit Mass Effect 3 either. Before I might have been somewhat against the idea but the more and more I think about it the more I think it can benefit the game and the series as a whole.

BRING ON MULTI-PLAYER!!!

[don-mika]

How many times BioWare should tell people that there's no multiplayer....  <_< 

[Yakko77]

don-mika wrote...

How many times BioWare should tell people that there's no multiplayer....  <_< 

Infinite.

All I'm saying is I wouldn't mind it and I don't think it'll break the game experience jf jt's simply and option.  If a multi-player aspect gives me more of my all time favorite xbox360 game then go ahead and through it in I say but as you said, not likely to happen.

[Arcadian Legend]

Why can I remember this thread from ages ago, with the same exact title?

[Raiders Fan 223]

don-mika wrote...

How many times BioWare should tell people that there's no multiplayer....  <_< 

link... quote?

I have yet to see a definitive one.  Not saying there is or isn't multiplayer... but I haven't seen anything concrete.

[mineralica]

Savber100 wrote...

So what do you think of the image that's been circulating around gaming websites? Do you think it's a fake / an elaborate hoax?

I personally think it's an inaccuracy in data transfer. Journalists heard one loose term, likely "online pass to [Cerberus?] network", and imagined the rest.

Edit: for example, right before ME1 release one central Russian game sites claimed that "the third romance option, aside humans, is China - inspired alien constantly wearing a helmet, who will strictly platonic mind meld with Shepard of both genders". Sorry, who and what?

Modifié par mineralica, 03 octobre 2011 - 11:23 .

[Whatever42]

Raiders Fan 223 wrote...

don-mika wrote...

How many times BioWare should tell people that there's no multiplayer....  <_< 

link... quote?

I have yet to see a definitive one.  Not saying there is or isn't multiplayer... but I haven't seen anything concrete.

Yup. I never recall a flat out denial. 

It's possible that this "online multiplayer pass" is a mistake or a hoax but Bioware does do leaks and they are promising a big announcement. I have to admit, short of a Bioware outright denial, I'm in the MP camp.

[don-mika]

Yakko77 wrote...

don-mika wrote...

How many times BioWare should tell people that there's no multiplayer....  <_< 

Infinite.

All I'm saying is I wouldn't mind it and I don't think it'll break the game experience jf jt's simply and option.  If a multi-player aspect gives me more of my all time favorite xbox360 game then go ahead and through it in I say but as you said, not likely to happen.

In the future, yeap. But not in Shepard story
ME Trilogy all about Shepard, and multiplayer does not converge the story
Dozens of Shepards runing on one level 

DarkRiku7 wrote...

Why can I remember this thread from ages ago, with the same exact title?

yeah, ME2 same story 

[AlexXIV]

DarkRiku7 wrote...

Why can I remember this thread from ages ago, with the same exact title?

Don't know, good memory?

And on topic: No there won't be multiplayer in ME3.

[III Achilles II]

With the new "killer feature" coming out the 26th in Xbox World and this new image, Multiplayer is probably the culprit.

IMO- Multiplayer would be a fresh take on Mass Effect especially for people who do love the series and would enjoy playing Co-op with other players in their "created" worlds. And for people who don't like the new feature. It's optional.

If they added in PvP, that "could" be fun, but I don't know about the pacing. If they do incorporate PvP, I hope it's well balanced and a lot of fun. Gears of War is the king of 3rd person shooters at the moment.

What else would the "killer" new feature be?

[gammameggon]

Gatt9 wrote...

Lunatic LK47 wrote...

happy_daiz wrote...

@ACWolfe

I think it might be more the fear of multiplayer allowing BW games to turn into a story-deficient type of game like COD: Black Ops. The main campaign was about 10 hours, and the rest was multiplayer. If you ignore the multiplayer as you've mentioned, and just play the main campaign, you feel ripped off. Well, I did, anyway...

I think people generally have a different set of expectations for BioWare than they do for other game developers.

Of course, that's just my humble opinion, that you didn't ask for.

Bolded for emphasis. I always held multiplayer in a very low regard, and co-op suffers the worse mainly for the fact that unless I had friends in real life that actually like the game or own a copy of the game in question, I'm S.O.L. with playing with another person. On top of this, we're in the hey-day that is 4 hour long games. I'm not going to spend $70 on a 4 hour game. I'm not going to pay $50 for a movie ticket if it ever comes to that, if the film industry were to end up using this standard in the not-so-distant future.

Twice in a thread,  I agree with Lunatik's whole post,  wow.

It's the way the Industry works now.   What's happened is this...

Around 00,  Starcraft sold fantastic numbers of units and Half-Life outsold any other FPS ever,  publishers had previously been supporting every possible genre.  Suddenly the suits saw what Blizzard and Valve pulled off,  and they wanted in too,  they figured all they had to do was ship an FPS or an RTS,  and they'd sell just as many units.

Keep in mind,  we're not talking the A+ graduates of buisness school,  they went to work for AT&T,  Microsoft,  Sun-Micro,  and other billion dollar buisnesses.  These were the not-as-gifted buisness people,  because gaming wasn't considered "Acceptable" for adults.

So they thought they could ship just any old thing,  and they did.  Any idea brought to them was shoehorned into those genres.  Tim Cain once wrote a piece on Gamasutra "If it isn't RTS or FPS,  publishers don't want to hear about it,  they won't fund it".

Predictably,  the vast majority of the games failed.  Everquest,  UO,  and Asheron's Call hit big numbers,  more studios jumped on that bandwagon.  They also failed pretty consistently,  over the course of the next 5-7 years it wiped out an easy half or more of the studios in existance,  nearly bankrupt Atari,  Ubisoft was on the edge,  Midway drowned,  Sierra disappeared,  Interplay died.

To make a long story short,  you've got an entire industry risk-adverse,  because they suffered making endless clones of Starcraft and Doom,  afraid anything but those two games won't sell.  Pushing out endless copies with the hopes of making a small profit,  and cutting expenses by making games smaller and shoehorning in Multiplayer to compensate.

Predictably,  people are getting increasingly sick of it,  and now people aren't buying them en-masse anymore.  EA had Shadows of the Damned fail for no real reason,  other than gamer fatigue.  Bulletstorm underperformed despite having a unique take on the genre.  With Dead Space 2, EA had to resort to reporting units shipped instead of units sold in their quarterly,  the same with DA2,  which is a strong indicator of underperformance.  People are tired of the same game over and over.

Here we are today,  EA and Ubisoft declaring not even RTS is worth making anymore,  meaning the only game to make is FPS.   Which prompted a number of analysis articles discussing how things work now...

Take some game that sold well,  reuse the engine and all it's assets,  maybe adding a new feature or two at best,  repackage it with new levels,  sell what's essentially the exact same game.  Which is fine when you're talking an RPG,  where it can still seem different because narrative drives the experience.  Or a Strategy where you can change the entire theater.  But with Shooters,  all you get is the same thing in a different corridor/room. 

The Industry is killing itself because it's chasing after some game that just got everything right,  instead of trying to make games that get everything right. 

Which is exactly why EA's doing Dragon Age 3,  and why there'll be a Mass Effect 4,  because EA will reuse everything all over again. 

But if you want to see the future,  it's easy.  Read the comments in this thread, 

http://www.gamespot....=result;title;0

Then compare it to the comments here in this thread...

http://www.gamespot....=result;title;5

It's the same concept,  turn a game into an Shooter,  but the difference in reception is startling,  especially on a console-centric site that's always been a heavy proponent of shooters.  Most especially when you consider...Syndicate wasn't nearly as popular as Fallout was,  most people have no idea what it was about,  even if you were a gamer when it was released.

-----------------

This was a terrific post, Gatt9. Very interesting and informative, and it is precisely correlates with my views and how I've been feeling lately. It's a big reason, along with DA2, why I feel Mass Effect 3 will be a huge letdown and receive massive, harsh and thunderous backlash. It looks uninspired, linear, reused and too much of a third person shooter. Also, artificial plasticness has become apparent with the omniblade/FemShep redo.

I am calling it like I see it. I know that i as a consumer have been burned several times now with the new gaming 'economy' and I have become very skeptical and pessimistic about the simplifying of everything and the lack of genuine care and compassion and love going into games. I as a fonsumer will reward those I deem worthy with a full price purchase, in essence supporting good gaming.

There will be companies that rise to meet the new demand in gamers tired of the same thing....it will happen; its like clockwork.

You would think the DA2 backlash was indicative enough, but I guess not.

[SaY4cT]

Multiplayer is happening, really, you can tell by undying rumors and fans crying, unfortunate but true

[Bluko]

Well the way it looks to me there will probably be a multiplayer component of some sort.

The fact that no developer has yet to say "There will not be any multiplayer in ME3." kind of makes it hard to believe they aren't at least considering adding some kind of multiplayer aspect. If Bioware was really serious about just making ME3 a singleplayer game they would say no multiplayer. But they have as yet to say this despite constant questioning... so if you use that space between your ears for anything you've got to know something's up.

Now a number of folks are saying "Well if there was going to be multiplayer they would have told us by now!"

I can think of several reasons why we haven't been told:

1) They are still working on it.

And that could very well mean that they don't have something ready to show. I believe Bioware is committed to working on singleplayer first and foremost. So any multiplayer feature this far from release is very likely not ready to be shown to the public. Remember they weren't even ready to show any singleplayer stuff  til E3. Bioware will not show you any multiplayer footage until they feel it looks good enough for marketing.

2) The Community.

I think it's fairly well known that a substantial part of the community does not want multiplayer in ME3. I heavily suspect the reason Bioware has yet to announce this as they've got to know the backlash is going to be pretty extreme. Bioware is holding off on telling everyone until they've got enough positive media (articles, ads, etc.) to counter-act any outcry from the community. I think they're hoping to put a positive spin on multiplayer. Although I think EA/Bioware fails to recognize that "word of mouth" is still what ultimately sells games. And if enough of the player base gets ticked off you can bet at the very least a lot of Pre-Orders are going to get cancelled.

3) They may be undecided themselves.

It could still very well be true Bioware even at this point is still debating whether or not to add MP. I'm sure the Devs are likely as torn about the issue as many players are, so they probably have held some heated debates too.


All that said I will honestly be surprised if ME3 does not include some kind of MP. These rumors have been floating around for far too long to simply be gossip. I'm quite certain a few naughty gaming journalists likely got the scoop on what's coming, but they obviously can't outright say anything about it. So hence the rumors are started. Also I believe some time ago it was noted Bioware was looking for Devs with past MP experience. That if anything should make their intentions clear.

Then let's also remember Bioware is part of EA. And I think EA has made it pretty clear they want all their games to feature some sort of multiplayer. I'm pretty sure they believe any kind of multiplayer helps sell a game. And while I hate to say it they're probably right. However this could very well backfire with ME3 as people are getting rather fed up with "tacked on" multiplayer. Only time will tell how this pans out.

I'm pretty convinced ME3 will include some kind of MP. I was actually surprised ME2 didn't. It could very well be "The killer new feature" may be MP or it may not. If it isn't  I suspect we'll hear about ME3's MP sometime this December whenever they launch the game demo. Frankly the addition of MP doesn't bother me as I doubt it will negatively effect singleplayer campaign and multiplayer is entirely optional to begin with.. No offense people but MP is kind of inevitable, it may not happen with ME3, but eventually someday these games will have multiplayer. Most everyone ate up the more conventional shooter mechanics they added in ME2 (like Thermals Clips a.k.a Ammo). So big surprise they start adding more convetional features, such as multiplayer, as well. 

Modifié par Bluko, 04 octobre 2011 - 02:50 .

[Sunny8872]

Bioware please no multiplayer i beg you!!!!!!

[KainrycKarr]

Anyone who thinks that devoting resources, even if it's simply cash flow and not actual developer time(different studios)to multiplayer won't shorten or otherwise make the SP lesser than it could have been, is kidding themselves.

[TheShogunOfHarlem]

KainrycKarr wrote...

Anyone who thinks that devoting resources, even if it's simply cash flow and not actual developer time(different studios)to multiplayer won't shorten or otherwise make the SP lesser than it could have been, is kidding themselves.

I have mostly agree. There are only two companies that have introduced MP to their games and SP wasn't shortened or underdeveloped. Naughty Dog and Rockstar. But it makes me curious: If more game developers changed their ridiculous notion that the only way to increase the replay value of their games relies on MP and actually tried to make SP replayable. Abandoning MP altogether and working on Smarter AI, Non-linear storys/storytelling/gameplay might be the solution. 

[The Spamming Troll]

wasnt the game already done last year? some devs have posted they are on their 8th playthrough so id think the single player campaign is very much set int stone other then tweaking. i really dont see a downfall to multiplay. itd make things more balacned in single player too. id actually want multiplayer in ME3 if it brought nothing but a few more hotkeys for my controller.

[FDrage]

Personally I don't want multiplayer in ME3, looking at most of the multiplayer heavy games the single player part suffers from length etc.. Mostly a waste to buy it purely for the single player part (aka CoD, BF, etc.). I by ME3 for the single player story part, so multi-=player for me is a waste and it doesn't of effort and money.. Multiplayer aspect shouldn't dictate single player aspects unfortunatly too often they do. .. it wasn't done by last year. Being able to do a play through doesn't mean it is finished and set in stone. and doesn't just require some tweaking.

On the other side I buy BF series not for the single player campaign but purely for the multiplayer part so from my point of few single player is a waste as well and they could save it to expand the multiplayer part. Haven't even touch the played BC2 store more then 1/3 ...

While it is inevitable that at some point they will add multiplayer to Mass Effect as most shooters drift to the multiplayer part over the years and no shooter can get away without on. The question would be ... is it part of the "core game" aka released as part of the "gone gold" bit or and add-on via DLC at a later stage or as a complete new game ... it just seems less likely to be a complete new game then a DLC to ME3 or such. EA Bioware denining the rumour probably has more to do with them not being ready to talk about it as they might not exactly know in what shape and until they are ready to talk about it of course any marketing woukld deny it exists. After all what is true for a game 2-3 years ago will change as the development cycle of a game, specifically as complex as the ME-series, developes.
Also from a business sense they would win more people by adding multiplayer (if done right) then they would loose.
Personally I haven't seen a shooter where either the single or the multiplayer bit didn't suffer in some way shape or form.

Modifié par FDrage, 04 octobre 2011 - 10:31 .

[King Minos]

Part of me wants Mass Effect 3 to succeed as it is the last one for Shepard, the other part of me wants Mass Effect 3 to crash and burn as a punishment.

[Zaalbar]

I'm looking forward to the single player aspect of ME3 but I can not say that I care for a multiplayer aspect of the game but if Bioware feels the need to put this in then so be it. I'm sure someone out there will enjoy it. I can not see it being any kind of distraction to the main story campaign, it will most likely be a completely separate component so there really should not be anything to worry about. On the other hand if it turns out to be similar to Splinter Cell Convictions multiplayer where you team up with a friend and play through a side story that runs parallel to the main game then I may just be interested. But if its gonna be some option where friends can come in and take control of your squad when on missions then I will not be interested and simply will not play it with that option enabled. ME is fundamentally a single player game for me and I can not see that changing in ME3, the multiplayer will simply be an edition, some people will want it some will not but as long as I get ME3 single player campaign nothing else matters for me.