972 réponses à ce sujet

[sedrikhcain]

frustratemyself 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.

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.

Greetings, fellow Aussie gamer! We are dedicated. We have to be. It costs us more.

[fdgvdddvdfdfbdfb]

With the amount of multiplayer threads on the same page this is starting to feel like the DA2 section.

[Gotholhorakh]

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

Yeah, but you're still looking at a black box, guessing what's in it and making a pronouncement about zots on the basis of... nothing.

Pull the other one, mate, it's got bells on.

Modifié par Gotholhorakh, 10 octobre 2011 - 12:46 .

[culletron1]

Blooddrunk1004 wrote...

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.

Maybe they can, time will tell if it has effected the quality of the SP...

But there is a trade off and we will never know what the SP would have been like if they put the money into that

[frustratemyself]

masterkajo wrote...

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.

Is this so you've got mint condition copies? If so that's true dedication.

[Pink_Pyro]

According to some RPG-tards, BW was already dead when they made the very first ME.

[UnadoptedTrack]

Pink_Pyro wrote...

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.

Why does everyone on these forums hate Oblivion so much? It was game of the year for 2005, and alot of people loved it.

[Juztinb42]

DuckSoup wrote...

Juztinb42 wrote...

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

Isn't this the last Mass Effect game in the series anyway?

You really think EA are going to leave Mass Effect (or even Shepard) alone forever?

[fdgvdddvdfdfbdfb]

Pink_Pyro wrote...

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.

Nope, you forgot about fallout. If it was a graph, it would have dipped and then pointed up again.

[RamirezWolfen]

culletron1 wrote...

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?? 

The part I put in bold.

[Juztinb42]

UnadoptedTrack wrote...

Pink_Pyro wrote...

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.

Why does everyone on these forums hate Oblivion so much? It was game of the year for 2005, and alot of people loved it.

Because it's cool to hate non-BW games here.

[Gotholhorakh]

UnadoptedTrack wrote...

Pink_Pyro wrote...

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.

Why does everyone on these forums hate Oblivion so much? It was game of the year for 2005, and alot of people loved it.

...Oblivion may have been GOTY in the way lots of things are GOTY. In the end, it's a game we all bought and it's a game that got modded to be better (which is probably what we all expected, right?).

I mean, we can like Oblivion while acknowledging its rather prominent and extensive problems at release, can't we?

Modifié par Gotholhorakh, 10 octobre 2011 - 12:49 .

[culletron1]

Gotholhorakh 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

Yeah, but you're still looking at a black box, guessing what's in it and making a pronouncement about zots on the basis of... nothing.

Pull the other one, mate, it's got bells on.

Basic economics... go online and have a read.

[Pink_Pyro]

We hate on Oblivion for the same reason those ES clowns hate on ME.Go mention ME in the Skyrim forum and watch how many insults get thrown your way. Some of the most delusional, despicable humans there.

[Estel78]

Tony_Knightcrawler wrote...

Sorry to burst your bubble too, but no. It would not require drastic changes to the campaign. You're making silly assumptions, and just making things up.

You're not thinking this through. Imagine the ME1 or ME2 campaign, now where/how would another player fit in? How would dialog work? Could anybody make decisions? If your answer is, the other player would chose replace the AI of one squad mate in battles but otherwise twiddle his thumbs, that is not fun.

Mark my words, there won't be campaign co-op, you'll see it soon enough (when the game comes out at the latest).

[frustratemyself]

sedrikhcain wrote...

frustratemyself 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.

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.

Greetings, fellow Aussie gamer! We are dedicated. We have to be. It costs us more.

True that. $108 for new release console games

[Centauri2002]

UnadoptedTrack wrote...

Why does everyone on these forums hate Oblivion so much? It was game of the year for 2005, and alot of people loved it.

Not a clue. It's one of my favourite games, along with some of BioWare's. I think people just like to hate for the sake of it sometimes.

[culletron1]

RamirezWolfen wrote...

culletron1 wrote...

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?? 

The part I put in bold.

Ya true we don't know for definite they have put in MP yet... though it does look like it..

I am just saying there is a trade off between using resouces to do that and using those resources for something else

[UnadoptedTrack]

Juztinb42 wrote...

UnadoptedTrack wrote...

Pink_Pyro wrote...

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.

Why does everyone on these forums hate Oblivion so much? It was game of the year for 2005, and alot of people loved it.

Because it's cool to hate non-BW games here.

Well then, everyone who hates it for a reason as stupid as that can **** off.

[masterkajo]

frustratemyself wrote...

masterkajo wrote...

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.

Is this so you've got mint condition copies? If so that's true dedication.

Something like this, yeah. I never felt like this with a game before. I just have to have unopend free of dust copies in case my opend ones somehow get damaged. They will be sealed in a glass case with an unopend ME CE and ME2 PC and Xbox CE.

Modifié par masterkajo, 10 octobre 2011 - 12:50 .

[Il Divo]

UnadoptedTrack wrote...

Pink_Pyro wrote...

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.

Why does everyone on these forums hate Oblivion so much? It was game of the year for 2005, and alot of people loved it.

Personally, it's a result of thinking it an inferior game, especially compared to Morrowind, its predecessor. When I first bought Oblivion, it felt like the greatest game ever. Then I realized that it did not the sheer amount of content found in its predecessor. It was all down hill from there.

[didymos1120]

culletron1 wrote...

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.

The operative word is "could".  Yes, it most definitely could have been.  That is not the same thing as would have been.

[ElitePinecone]

sedrikhcain wrote...

frustratemyself 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.

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.

Greetings, fellow Aussie gamer! We are dedicated. We have to be. It costs us more.

Don't remind me, I just forked over $130 for the Collectors Edition at JB.