972 réponses à ce sujet

[Tony_Knightcrawler]

UnadoptedTrack wrote...

Kail Ashton wrote...

and thus the zealots of bioware rage and burn down the forums in their over reaction to added content

*sits back, sips a glass of wine*

marvelous

If you act like this in real life your friend count is anywhere from 0-2...probably.

Dunno about you, but I'd rather have NO friends than friends who riot over the results of a sports game or the like, and that's pretty much the closest thing I can think of to that situation.

Modifié par Tony_Knightcrawler, 10 octobre 2011 - 12:35 .

[didymos1120]

Gotholhorakh wrote...

On an entirely unrelated note, I wonder how many reviews of ME3 were posted on Amazon today. (I don't really, nobody tell me).

That'd be zero.

[Candidate 88766]

If this is true, then does anyone know if it has been said anywhere what type of multiplayer it will be? The wording of the magazine hints at co-op, which I'm actually rather excited about. I hope the single-player remains so, but a separate co-op campaign could be awesome.

[masterkajo]

I have an unrelated question amidst all this ranting.

If I calculate the reduced density matrix of two 2-level systems amongst a spin-1/2 chain in the Bell Phi-Plus state, do I end up with 2 or 4 entries nonzero?

[Pink_Pyro]

Amazon, the only place where user reviews mean less than the Metacritic user opinions.

[Blooddrunk1004]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

If this is true, then does anyone know if it has been said anywhere what type of multiplayer it will be? The wording of the magazine hints at co-op, which I'm actually rather excited about. I hope the single-player remains so, but a separate co-op campaign could be awesome.

Seperate co-op campagin most likely.

[culletron1]

Gotholhorakh wrote...

culletron1 wrote...

I think its made by a seperate studio as well.But people will be blinded by their misguided rage.

What difference does that make???

Resources don't get magiced into existence just because they outsourse MP development! 

Any resource used to create MP could have been used to polish/expand the single player... 

Ah, the good old mythical unit of game development stuff, available by the tonne or the pound, now all you need is enough developers with enough shovels to shovel the zots into the game oven.

I'll let you in on a little development secret (I don't work on BioWare games or for BioWare, btw) - that is a most famously misguided concept - shovels full of software development do not exist.

I am a developer by profession... I work on developing embedded Operating Systems so give it a rest. 

I am not saying there isn't dimishing returns but creating a team to implement multiplayer costs money and time. That money and time could have been applied to the single player.

I'll let you in on a little economic secret called opportunity cost. It is a famoursly misguided concept - It says that the cost of any activity measured in terms of the value of the best alternative that is not chosen...

Multiplayer is choice A
A more polished Single player is choice B

EA chose A

[wildannie]

DuckSoup wrote...

wildannie wrote...

Even though it seems that the MP element was developed by a different team, I find it hard to believe that the budget for the SP would not have been cut to fund this. I expect that some extra funds were available but I doubt that the budget for the SP was the same as it would have been without the MP.

They may have had the time to make the content but whether they had the money to do it well is the question.

A question that hasn't been answered and probably never will.

I don't see how people can "doubt" whether they had the budget to do an extra MP element. We have no idea what money the company has. None at all.

It's not just about how much money a company has it's about how much income an extra feature will generate and how much extra money that company is willing to put into it over and above the standard SP budget.  I'm not convinced that the costs will have been fully covered by a separate unrelated budget.  I hope I'm wrong but it hardly outrageous to have doubts... or to speculate... that's what we're all doing here isn't it??

[UnadoptedTrack]

Tony_Knightcrawler wrote...

UnadoptedTrack wrote...
Let me just state what I see wrong with these statements. 1-3 seems implausible. We're not saying that they'll get rid of content, we're saying it might not be as good because the budget has been spread between SP and MP and finally, we don't know if it's a cool feature yet. Right now, it's all speculation.

Tony_Knightcrawler wrote...
1) My main game with my best friend over the internet.
2) My best friend's main game as the coop companion over the internet.
3) A local friend's main game as the coop companion at his house (if there's split screen).
4) Possibly play my main game by myself.

Well I'm glad I have experts like you guys around to tell me that a game featuring multiplayer will make multiplayer implausible.

UnadoptedTrack wrote...
Okay, you're either 1. not thinking or 2. just stupid.

Or 3: Have WAY more knowledge of video game development and economics than you AND 4: Laughing at your attempts to convince yourself you are right despite your ignorance.

I'm not saying that there's no multiplayer. I've accepted that there is. I'm saying that co-op is implausible. Co-op would end up either messing with the original controls or annoy the other people.

[culletron1]

JukeFrog wrote...

Haha, this topic was 4 pages before I went to sleep. Anyway, I'm not too concerned about multiplayer being in ME3. I trust BW knows what they're doing, and who knows, MP might be *GASP* fun.

You should have a play of DA2 then becuase I'm not sure they know what they are doing anymore 

[frustratemyself]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

If this is true, then does anyone know if it has been said anywhere what type of multiplayer it will be? The wording of the magazine hints at co-op, which I'm actually rather excited about. I hope the single-player remains so, but a separate co-op campaign could be awesome.

We of the Aussie brigade can read the magazine article next week and update everyone
If BW doesn't fess up with any news sooner of course.

[Knottedredloc]

Not surprising at all.  It's was clear that EA/Bioware has been trying to make Mass Effect into Gears of War for a while now.   If EA/Bioware realized that Mass Effects greatness stemmed from it's uniqueness this would not be a problem but apparently the good Doctors have become trend chasers.    I guess Dragon Age 3 will be multiplayer  also.


To paraphrase Senator Lloyd Bentsen, "Bioware, I play Gears of War daily, I know Gears of War, Gears of War is a favorite of mine. Bioware, Mass Effect is no Gears of War."

Gears of War works because it's pretty much stayed the same game in all three releases.  Mass Effect is/was a excellent single player RPG.

Modifié par Knottedredloc, 10 octobre 2011 - 12:41 .

[Candidate 88766]

Blooddrunk1004 wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

If this is true, then does anyone know if it has been said anywhere what type of multiplayer it will be? The wording of the magazine hints at co-op, which I'm actually rather excited about. I hope the single-player remains so, but a separate co-op campaign could be awesome.

Seperate co-op campagin most likely.

I hope so. The single-player wouldn't benefit from multiplayer imo, but I've wanted to see MP of some kind ever since I heard about the ME universe way back in 2005. A co-op campaign seems ideal for ME.

[RamirezWolfen]

culletron1 wrote...

Gotholhorakh wrote...

culletron1 wrote...

I think its made by a seperate studio as well.But people will be blinded by their misguided rage.

What difference does that make???

Resources don't get magiced into existence just because they outsourse MP development! 

Any resource used to create MP could have been used to polish/expand the single player... 

Ah, the good old mythical unit of game development stuff, available by the tonne or the pound, now all you need is enough developers with enough shovels to shovel the zots into the game oven.

I'll let you in on a little development secret (I don't work on BioWare games or for BioWare, btw) - that is a most famously misguided concept - shovels full of software development do not exist.

I am a developer by profession... I work on developing embedded Operating Systems so give it a rest. 

I am not saying there isn't dimishing returns but creating a team to implement multiplayer costs money and time. That money and time could have been applied to the single player.

I'll let you in on a little economic secret called opportunity cost. It is a famoursly misguided concept - It says that the cost of any activity measured in terms of the value of the best alternative that is not chosen...

Multiplayer is choice A
A more polished Single player is choice B

EA chose A

Proof? I've heard people say that before, but I've never seen proof....

[Juztinb42]

So this is how Mass Effect dies...with unwanted multiplayer.

[masterkajo]

Melrache wrote...
5 CEs? Your mom must be doing more to her boss, than normal secretary stuff.

Come on... don't be rude. But I wasn't kidding about 5CE pre-ordered. There is:
- one for Xbox360 that will be played.
- one for Xbox360 that will not be opend.
- one for PC that will be played.
- one for PC that will not be opend.
- one for PS3 that will not be opend.

And there you have it.

Modifié par masterkajo, 10 octobre 2011 - 12:43 .

[Pink_Pyro]

SP of ME 3 looks more promising than what we knew of DA 2 at the time.

And if BW doesn't know what they're doing, then neither do Beth. If Oblivion was anything to go by, Skyrim will be way worse.

[RamirezWolfen]

Juztinb42 wrote...

So this is how Mass Effect dies...with unwanted multiplayer.

It's totally dying. ME3 is going to be completely horrible because of multiplayer.

[Blooddrunk1004]

culletron1 wrote...


I am a developer by profession... I work on developing embedded Operating Systems so give it a rest. 

I am not saying there isn't dimishing returns but creating a team to implement multiplayer costs money and time. That money and time could have been applied to the single player.

I'll let you in on a little economic secret called opportunity cost. It is a famoursly misguided concept - It says that the cost of any activity measured in terms of the value of the best alternative that is not chosen...

Multiplayer is choice A
A more polished Single player is choice B

EA chose A

And what makes you think they can't polish SP just because they have MP?
Did you play Baldur's Gate?  Mass Effect 3 has more time development anyway then first and second game had.

[culletron1]

RamirezWolfen wrote...

culletron1 wrote...

Gotholhorakh wrote...

culletron1 wrote...

I think its made by a seperate studio as well.But people will be blinded by their misguided rage.

What difference does that make???

Resources don't get magiced into existence just because they outsourse MP development! 

Any resource used to create MP could have been used to polish/expand the single player... 

Ah, the good old mythical unit of game development stuff, available by the tonne or the pound, now all you need is enough developers with enough shovels to shovel the zots into the game oven.

I'll let you in on a little development secret (I don't work on BioWare games or for BioWare, btw) - that is a most famously misguided concept - shovels full of software development do not exist.

I am a developer by profession... I work on developing embedded Operating Systems so give it a rest. 

I am not saying there isn't dimishing returns but creating a team to implement multiplayer costs money and time. That money and time could have been applied to the single player.

I'll let you in on a little economic secret called opportunity cost. It is a famoursly misguided concept - It says that the cost of any activity measured in terms of the value of the best alternative that is not chosen...

Multiplayer is choice A
A more polished Single player is choice B

EA chose A

Proof? I've heard people say that before, but I've never seen proof....

Proof of what?? That scarcity exists??