972 réponses à ce sujet

[Lunatic LK47]

DuckSoup wrote...



What the hell? Nobody has said it's the "Be all, end all" solution.

Current gaming industry standards now-a-days, apparently. Last time I checked, an EA publicist did say "Fire and forget single player games is not worth it now-a-days." Not sure if anyone can pull up that link for me.

Where did you get that from? What do you think will happen, exactly? They are going to suddenly stop making all single player games? Be realistic for one second.

Uh, let's see. Just about every gaming franchise I've known has been jumping on the multiplayer band-wagon in one way, shape, or form. Resident Evil 5? Entire franchise was mostly single-player, but oops, 5 wanted to shoe-horn in co-op. F.E.A.R. franchise? First two games, and their non-canon expansion packs were primarily focused on single-player while multiplayer was bare bones. Apparently, F.E.A.R. 3 wanted to make it the other way around. 

Even if some of these games have single-player campaigns, they're often portrayed as less desirable because you got idiot squadmates ruining your fun or a mediocre campaign overall.

[AdmiralCheez]

I look forward to meeting all the colorful people (read: morons) that make online multiplayer such a unique (read: f*cking awful) experience.

Eh. I'll use it as a device to bond with (read: ****** off) you people.

[ItsPhilsTime]

UnadoptedTrack wrote...

ItsPhilsTime wrote...

DuckSoup wrote...

UnadoptedTrack wrote...

My biggest problem with co-op would be one that I stated earlier, with "who would be who".

I doubt they will run the main campaign as co-op. I should imagine it'll be Deathmatch and Fire-fight etc.

That right there is what I'm afraid of but I think they'll make it where its Co-op if they even end up doing it, I'm just wounder what they going to do make it like Fable and split the cash and XP or what, which XP you get on ME after completing a mission?!?!?!

...What?

Simple I think it will be co-op not no team deathmatch or anything like that. But how they going to do it, they going to make them split cash and XP or is it just going to be the main person getting all the cash and XP.

[CptBomBom00]

what this multiplayer is supposed too offer?

[UnadoptedTrack]

Lunatic LK47 wrote...

DuckSoup wrote...



What the hell? Nobody has said it's the "Be all, end all" solution.

Current gaming industry standards now-a-days, apparently. Last time I checked, an EA publicist did say "Fire and forget single player games is not worth it now-a-days." Not sure if anyone can pull up that link for me.

Where did you get that from? What do you think will happen, exactly? They are going to suddenly stop making all single player games? Be realistic for one second.

Uh, let's see. Just about every gaming franchise I've known has been jumping on the multiplayer band-wagon in one way, shape, or form. Resident Evil 5? Entire franchise was mostly single-player, but oops, 5 wanted to shoe-horn in co-op. F.E.A.R. franchise? First two games, and their non-canon expansion packs were primarily focused on single-player while multiplayer was bare bones. Apparently, F.E.A.R. 3 wanted to make it the other way around. 

Even if some of these games have single-player campaigns, they're often portrayed as less desirable because you got idiot squadmates ruining your fun or a mediocre campaign overall.

RE5 was actually better with co-op since the AI couldn't do ****.

[UnadoptedTrack]

ItsPhilsTime wrote...

UnadoptedTrack wrote...

ItsPhilsTime wrote...

DuckSoup wrote...

UnadoptedTrack wrote...

My biggest problem with co-op would be one that I stated earlier, with "who would be who".

I doubt they will run the main campaign as co-op. I should imagine it'll be Deathmatch and Fire-fight etc.

That right there is what I'm afraid of but I think they'll make it where its Co-op if they even end up doing it, I'm just wounder what they going to do make it like Fable and split the cash and XP or what, which XP you get on ME after completing a mission?!?!?!

...What?

Simple I think it will be co-op not no team deathmatch or anything like that. But how they going to do it, they going to make them split cash and XP or is it just going to be the main person getting all the cash and XP.

Again, co-op would be worse.

[RamirezWolfen]

UnadoptedTrack wrote...

Again, co-op would be worse.

How so?

[karthikc]

Co-op is fine if you don’t care about the story and characters and have no interest in being absorbed in the world you are escaping to. It worked for Borderlands, for instance.

The cognitive dissonance of co-op is at odds with the highly personal, directed nature of the story.

[Haseeo]

A multiplayer I never wanted thanks. Seriously I hope to hell it's not co op Mass Effect should remember a single player experience. With others in co op the atmosphere will be completely ruined. Keep the single player game just that single.

If it's co op missions away from the main game fair enough but you'd ruin what Mass Effect has if you main it the campain

[Izhalezan]

UnadoptedTrack wrote...


Again, co-op would be worse.

I'll take co-op over team deathmatch with a 14 year old whos mic is lodged in their throating telling everyone how adorable and pretty Tali is and how wonderful it is he got to romance her and how he wishes she were real.

[UnadoptedTrack]

RamirezWolfen wrote...

UnadoptedTrack wrote...

Again, co-op would be worse.

How so?

Gah...I swear I've explained this already.

My main problem would be a problem I stated earlier with "who would be who".

[Blooddrunk1004]

Multiplayer in my Mass Effect?!
http://t3.gstatic.co...NsutPWlqlAUMtE_

[Merchant2006]

ElitePinecone wrote...

Looks like this is why all the press was at Edmonton, a while ago. Presumably it's been embargoed, but magazines are still hinting stories.

This is an Australian PC magazine. I'm assuming all of the "ME3 killer feature" stories in the next month (Xbox World, etc) come from this one session, where a bunch of media were invited to Bioware studios.

http://www.pcpowerpl...ale-october-19/

Edit: Here's the cover, since people are talking about it:

*rereads over and over* 

Heh, I don't think it's real, as a matter of fact I th- *sees article on Kotaku*

...

Modifié par Merchant2006, 10 octobre 2011 - 10:39 .

[Fiery Phoenix]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

We'll need to do some matchmaking on the forums! Hopefully it will be some kind of team deathmatch. Then we can finally settle all the Paragon/Renegade arguments in a manly fashion.

Co-op would be even funnier. Imagine Dean The Young following Xilihizra around, second guessing all her decisions. The most useless forum buddy would probably be Smudboy. You'd be returning fire and he'd just be telling you how stupid the whole situation was.

[Jenova65]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Meh. If it requires that online pass, I'll just shred it and enjoy the singleplayer, as there won't be a single f*ck given about the multiplayer not even half a year after release.

Thusly? ^ 

[K_Tabris]

It worked fine in Fable 3, with everyone playing as Hero. I don't see the issue, aside from lack of imagination.

If only I can get my partner to play with me, but there's another who hates the MP idea

[Tootles FTW]

No need to bash other games. I loved RE5 and (gasp) FEAR 3 co-op, and will play them quite often when a friend is ready & willing. Also, those are examples that don't really apply since co-op was the crux of gameplay in RE5 and FEAR 3, whereas it will be an optional mode in ME3.

And "shoe-horned in" multiplayer in a decidedly singleplayer game does not equate a death sentence to either the core game or the MP experience...as someone mentioned before, Red Dead Redemption's MP was actually pretty solid and the main story certainly did not suffer from it's inclusion.

[RamirezWolfen]

UnadoptedTrack wrote...

RamirezWolfen wrote...

UnadoptedTrack wrote...

Again, co-op would be worse.

How so?

Gah...I swear I've explained this already.

My main problem would be a problem I stated earlier with "who would be who".

No offense, but that's just an assumption that it will be part of the campaign. We have no knowledge of exactly what kind on multiplayer ME3 is going to have, and saying that co op would be worse because of something that is not confirmed is pointless.

[SmokePants]

As a Soldier, I wonder how Adrenaline Rush works in a multiplayer environment. Can't slow down time for everybody.

I don't think campaign co-op is at all likely. This multiplayer is being worked on in Montreal, while the core game is being done in Edmonton. The only people who could implement co-op are the people making the single-player. Montreal is working on something that has to be somewhat standalone, such as a Horde/Firefight or versus mode.

Modifié par SmokePants, 10 octobre 2011 - 10:41 .

[Zkyire]

Don't like multiplayer.

Not going to use this feature.

Still going to play SP Mass Effect 3.

No need for me to /rage.

*leaves thread peacefully*

[ItsPhilsTime]

UnadoptedTrack wrote...

Again, co-op would be worse.

There I have to disagree, but thats because I can't see a deathmatch style bringing in more fans, not with there being 1st person shooters that would almost be the same, they would want the story, they looking at bringing in more of fans for MMO RPG's not fans of games with a deathmatch in it. But why do you think they would bring in a Deathmatch style?

[Lunatic LK47]

Tootles FTW wrote...

No need to bash other games. I loved RE5 and (gasp) FEAR 3 co-op, and will play them quite often when a friend is ready & willing. Also, those are examples that don't really apply since co-op was the crux of gameplay in RE5 and FEAR 3, whereas it will be an optional mode in ME3.

And "shoe-horned in" multiplayer in a decidedly singleplayer game does not equate a death sentence to either the core game or the MP experience...as someone mentioned before, Red Dead Redemption's MP was actually pretty solid and the main story certainly did not suffer from it's inclusion.

Uh, Rockstar is the EXCEPTION TO THE RULE (i.e. Sandbox games in general have more flexibility). Other games, not so much.