2368 réponses à ce sujet

[Han Shot First]

darknoon5 wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

Dear God EA, please don't let this be another DA2.

If this turns out to be another DA2 I'm done with Bioware.

The single player campaign better not be shorter or less satisfying than the single player campaigns in ME1 or ME2.

Seeing as they've said it's the same length as ME2 but more replayable, and that what we've seen so far suggest Bioware Montrel (not Edmonton, who make the Mass Effect games) are working on it, it seems likely the campaign will be the same length as ME2, if not longer.

The proof is in the pudding.

We really won't know until the full & complete game gets in the hands of critics. Of course Bioware isn't going to say the single player game in ME3 is shorter and less satisfying than the previous two titles, even if it is. Their job is to market the game, not give a fair and balanced assessment.

I'll be waiting to see what those reviews say before I make my decision on whether I'm going to pick up ME3 new or used.

[shepskisaac]

The PLC wrote...

Thank you so much, man. You just saved my life. I think my head would've exploded if it weren't for that gif. Man, I'm so grateful. It's unbelieveable. Really. I'm serious! And it's not something I'm just saying to be cool. I'm for real. Thanks, man!

You're welcome

[didymos1120]

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

So Didy, what did you say about multiplayer again?

That it wasn't confirmed and I thought it unlikely to ship with the main game, but could see it being a DLC.    And your point being...what? That you guessed correctly and I didn't.  OK.  Such is life.

[sorentoft]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Nyoka wrote...

This was my main reason for no multiplayer. If you tell me this co-op thingy won't involve having to join some chat full of obnoxious pricks then in that case it's alright.

Hopefully, we can change preferences to FRIENDS ONLY or something.

What, you don't want random geth programs jumping around shooting your monsters while giving out insulting but accurate descriptions of your performance? My artificial feelings are hurt.

[Gavinthelocust]

This is a big god damn bomb shell that just dropped, from now until the end of time if anything is lacking in ME3 people will blame it on wasting time on the multiplayer. Reviewers won't be as kind as they were with ME2 if the multiplayer is terrible and I'm sure there are people canceling their preorder as we speak. Really big gamble, Bioware, I just hope for everyone's sake this ends well.

[Ramus Quaritch]

 I'm not against the idea of having a game in the ME universe with multiplayer.  What I am against is having multiplayer in ME3.  I think the ME universe would make a good setting for multiplayer, but do it with a new game and story arc in the ME universe, not in Shepard's trilogy.  This trilogy has always been single palyer for me.  I could get the full experience myself and not have to rely on other people to get the full experience (or worry about other players changing my experience).  

Also, this just feels tacked on (especially if you read between the lines of the delay in ME3's release).  It took two Gears of War games to get multiplayer right (or at least good).  I do not expect the quality of this multiplayer "mode" in ME3 to be good.  Maybe I'm wrong and I'll be happy to be proven wrong, but it doesn't look like that considering how many other areas ME3 is trying to improve upon.  It's just too much to do with in one game.  

[Il Divo]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

Oh really? So skyrim has a predefined character like ME2 and  ME3? They have dumbed down RPG mechanics, completely removed exploration and loot, and included multiplayer? Oh I guess I didn't do my research then. :innocent:
-Polite

Did you read the part where they completely removed the attribute system, classes, removed yet more skills, and dropped the total number of factions?

[darknoon5]

Han Shot First wrote...

darknoon5 wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

Dear God EA, please don't let this be another DA2.

If this turns out to be another DA2 I'm done with Bioware.

The single player campaign better not be shorter or less satisfying than the single player campaigns in ME1 or ME2.

Seeing as they've said it's the same length as ME2 but more replayable, and that what we've seen so far suggest Bioware Montrel (not Edmonton, who make the Mass Effect games) are working on it, it seems likely the campaign will be the same length as ME2, if not longer.

The proof is in the pudding.

We really won't know until the full & complete game gets in the hands of critics. Of course Bioware isn't going to say the single player game in ME3 is shorter and less satisfying than the previous two titles, even if it is. Their job is to market the game, not give a fair and balanced assessment.

I'll be waiting to see what those reviews say before I make my decision on whether I'm going to pick up ME3 new or used.

Fair enough, and that's quite sensible, but I'm just saying every piece of information we've got suggests a campaign of at least the same length.

[Killjoy Cutter]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Jorina Leto wrote...

It is going to suffer, because we can't mod the game.

You mean, you actually have to suck it up for once? 

Means buying the game became less likely, as I wouldn't get as much out of my money as I would have if I could play around with the guts after a few playthroughs. 

[Siven80]

As long as the single player isnt hurt then im happy that there will be lultiplayer.

I'm not scared of change unlike some, i play many types of games and i like them all.

If you dont like multiplayer, then dont play ot. Simple as. And theres no need to whine about it unless you have played it.

[Drone223]

I think it would be great if co-op is

1. A stand alone campaign where you DO NOT take the role of Shepard
2. Can be done via split screen

Also people cancelling their pre-orders because it has multiplayer......... really grow up 

Modifié par Drone223, 10 octobre 2011 - 07:16 .

[TheGreenAlloy]

Siansonea II wrote...

DarkDragon777 wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...

Cosmon wrote...

Epic Legion wrote...

Jorina Leto wrote...

The funny part of the MP announcement:

The ME fanbase doesn't want multiplayer.

Sorry but small community called BSN =/= ME fanbase. Try harder.

Erg, you seem to be pretty oblivious to the world. Go to any gaming website or go to the facebook group. The ratios seem at a constant 80% don't want to 20% want. 

Funny, here I thought multiplayer was an attempt to draw in NEW customers, not cater to the existing fanbase. Why wouldn't BioWare try to add features that would draw in new customers? This is a product, an item for sale, that is intended to generate revenue for the company. If this feature improves sales, it's a good thing for BioWare.

So losing their original fanbase to a bunch of CoD players and then having them eventually abandon them for MW4 is a good thing?

Not for us, maybe, but for them, sure. The bottom line is The Bottom Line, the number of units sold. We are obviously not a very loyal fanbase in the first place, since the mere announcement of a new feature is enough to get people to jump ship. So why cater to us?

Well said.

[Medhia Nox]

I'm also glad they're putting in the online Auction House where you can sell in game gear for real money... so freak'n awesome.

What? Oh, not the Diablo 3 forums. My bad.

Can I at least sell my Shepard? He's uber-badass... his Paragon Hugs due maximum DPS.

[Han Shot First]

Gavinthelocust wrote...

This is a big god damn bomb shell that just dropped, from now until the end of time if anything is lacking in ME3 people will blame it on wasting time on the multiplayer. Reviewers won't be as kind as they were with ME2 if the multiplayer is terrible and I'm sure there are people canceling their preorder as we speak. Really big gamble, Bioware, I just hope for everyone's sake this ends well.

I cancelled my pre-order this morning.

Modifié par Han Shot First, 10 octobre 2011 - 07:22 .

[Jorina Leto]

darknoon5 wrote...

Jorina Leto wrote...

Nashiktal wrote...



Here's hoping single player doesn't suffer. Some games just don't need multiplayer tacked on to it. Bioshock 2 was a good example.

Le sigh.

It is going to suffer, because we can't mod the game.

Like you could mod ME1 or ME2?

Yes. The most important:

• make the idiotic thermal clips to go away
• add resources so you don't need to strip mine planets.

[Gterror]

Gavinthelocust wrote...

This is a big god damn bomb shell that just dropped, from now until the end of time if anything is lacking in ME3 people will blame it on wasting time on the multiplayer. Reviewers won't be as kind as they were with ME2 if the multiplayer is terrible and I'm sure there are people canceling their preorder as we speak. Really big gamble, Bioware, I just hope for everyone's sake this ends well.

The co-op multiplayer missions(its sounds great tho in theory) is like 50/50 maybe worth the gamble, maybe not

[N7Infernox]

Drone223 wrote...

I think it would be great if co-op is

1. A stand alone campaign where you DO NOT take the role of Shepard
2. Can be done via split screen

Also people cancelling their pre-orders because it has multiplayer......... really grow up 

This, times infinity

[1136342t54_]

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

Jorina Leto wrote...

1136342t54 wrote...
I'm saying some of the reasons people blame DA2 for being bad was due to bioware listening to some of BSN complaints.

Wait? The BSN wanted race selection and origins to be gone?
The BSN wanted no blood mage recognization?
The BSN wanted decisions not to matter at all?
The BSN wanted iconic outfits?

And we are supposed to take your posts seriously?

The BSN wanted faster combat - the devs overcompensated, but we got what we asked for.
The BSN initially didn't like all the brown of DA:O - look out, the brighter color palette of DA2 offended some people.
The BSN wanted better graphics - whether or not it meets your particular standards, they succeeded in some ways, if not others.
The BSN wanted more challenging combat - and then they complained about the assassins, etc.

Are we supposed to take your posts seriously?

The devs did take feedback into account after DA:O, and while their implementation of certain changes weren't entirely successful, don't try to pass off your questions as a rebuttal. I can list things in DA2 that the BSN clearly did influence, just like you can throw out complaints about things "we" didn't want.

Thanks for being more specific than I was. I wasn't up for discussing DA2 AGAIN. 

[Kaiser Shepard]

didymos1120 wrote...

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

So Didy, what did you say about multiplayer again?

That it wasn't confirmed and I thought it unlikely to ship with the main game, but could see it being a DLC.    And your point being...what? That you guessed correctly and I didn't.  OK.  Such is life.

I didn't guess. 

[VallenValiant]

bobobo878 wrote...

VallenValiant wrote...
That would only matter if future games from Bioware HAVE single player. We have Diablo III as an example of what can happen, with single player gameplay was all but gutted and treated like it is a tutorial for multiplayer.

You know that in Diablo II the singleplayer was exactly the same as the muliplayer except the ability to play it with other players, right? Just like in Diablo II, if you start a private match and don't inivte anyone else, there's no difference except you can use the same character for multiplayer too.  If you don't have any friends or are determined to play alone, just do that.

They completely nerfed the AI companion deliberately so I can't use them past Normal difficulty. They outright said if I found a way to play with AI companions by myself they will nerf it until I am forced to play with other people.

Blizzard made it clear in their offical statements that DIII are only for two kinds of people; those who play single player in Easy difficulty and then quit, or those who play multiplayer. This is from a Blizzard employee in their own forum.

[Amaterasuomikami]

I have no problems with a multiplayer and/or coop mode. The only issue is that it does not affect the singleplayer game. It must not be shorter, of lower quality, less stable on release, or have its release delayed. That is, I think, what ME fans expect of Bioware.

[ObserverStatus]

VallenValiant wrote...

bobobo878 wrote...

VallenValiant wrote...
That would only matter if future games from Bioware HAVE single player. We have Diablo III as an example of what can happen, with single player gameplay was all but gutted and treated like it is a tutorial for multiplayer.

You know that in Diablo II the singleplayer was exactly the same as the muliplayer except the ability to play it with other players, right? Just like in Diablo II, if you start a private match and don't inivte anyone else, there's no difference except you can use the same character for multiplayer too.  If you don't have any friends or are determined to play alone, just do that.

They completely nerfed the AI companion deliberately so I can't use them past Normal difficulty. They outright said if I found a way to play with AI companions by myself they will nerf it until I am forced to play with other people.

Blizzard made it clear in their offical statements that DIII are only for two kinds of people; those who play single player in Easy difficulty and then quit, or those who play multiplayer. This is from a Blizzard employee in their own forum.

links or it didn't happen.

[111987]

No matter how good Mass Effect 3's singleplayer is, all the people upset over multiplayer will blame any bugs, flaws, examples of poor writing, etc... on the addition of multiplayer. The ironic thing is that Mass Effect 1 and 2 are both fairly buggy themselves, and those games don't have multiplayer.

I for one will enjoy what looks to be an amazing campaign, and what hopefully is a meaningful multiplayer experience. If the multiplayer sucks, I just won't play it. It's not like the price of the game goes up because of the multiplayer. I'm not going to complain about a an additional feature that allows me to play Mass Effect with my friends, and expands replay value by possibly dozens of hours.

I think that too many people have a lot of preconceptions about how multiplayer 'dumbs down' games, and cite like 5 examples and call it a day. There are dozens of games out there with both satisfying campaigns and multiplayer experiences. People apply some really fallacious logic in the sense that if there is a flaw in the singleplayer, it is instantly blamed on multiplayer. Isn't it just as possible that the devs just made an error, and wouldn't have caught it regardless? Otherwise, shouldn't all single-player games be almost flawless (yet the vast majority aren't)?

[spirosz]

Is the Co-op feature separate from the story? That's all I really care about so far because I'll judge the actual feature when I play it.

[didymos1120]

VallenValiant wrote...

They completely nerfed the AI companion deliberately so I can't use them past Normal difficulty. They outright said if I found a way to play with AI companions by myself they will nerf it until I am forced to play with other people.

Blizzard made it clear in their offical statements that DIII are only for two kinds of people; those who play single player in Easy difficulty and then quit, or those who play multiplayer. This is from a Blizzard employee in their own forum.

Not that I give a crap about Diablo III, which I definitely don't, but you really ought to back stuff like this up with a source other than "It's somewhere on this one forum".

Modifié par didymos1120, 10 octobre 2011 - 07:22 .