2368 réponses à ce sujet

[Phaedon]

IsaacShep wrote...
No he didn't lol. "It didn't fit, the mode we at Edmonton developed, but the stuff the guys at Montreal is developing is amazing!". Interpretation. You interpreted originally his words as denial, I saw that as PR question dodge.

Except that he talked in behalf of BioWare and ME3 in general. NOT just what the Edmonton guys did. Also, if you think that one studio starts something, fails, abandons it and sends it to another one, well...that's not how it works, mate.

The question was "Will ME3 have MP?"

"We tried to fit it in for a quite some time, but we didn't get it in. Besides, it wouldn't fit"

Paraphrased, but you get what I mean. The fact that he is actually saying "it wouldn't fit" dismisses the theory of a studio failing and another one picking it up.

Fiery Phoenix wrote...

He was trying his best to dodge the question, that's all. He couldn't tell the truth just yet.

Answering the question doesn't really work well with dodging.

Modifié par Phaedon, 10 octobre 2011 - 08:30 .

[Fiery Phoenix]

BatmanPWNS wrote...

Rakia Time wrote...

Welcome to the future of gaming, multiplayer everywhere....gotta say, the future really sucks

Multiplayer has existed since 1958 and were almost everywhere in the 80's and 90's so I don't know what you mean by the "future of gaming"

It's an EA representative who called multiplayer the future of gaming in the first place.

[Olwydd]

bobobo878 wrote...

Olwydd wrote...
There is a limit to funds, manpower, and time. Nothing is free. You might have an extra team to work on MP, but those people still need to be paid, and most of the time those funds come from the same pool (if not, great, fine!). That MP component still needs to be worked into the greater game, which requires QA time. Sometimes you can't have X & Y at the same time; it's not feasible due to time and resource limits, so you're stuck with having either X OR Y. Many people, including myself, are a bit nervous that an unknown multiplayer element means fewer funds being diverted to elements of the single player campaign they know and love. Whether or not that turns out to be a valid concern remains to be seen.

I'm sure that they wouldn't make multiplayer content if it would leave them without sufficient resources to finish the single player content.

It's not so much an issue of 'finishing' as it is of quality and the inclusion/improvement of other features. Like it or not, MP is a big draw. They may be willing to put some SP features on the backburner in favour of MP inclusion if itmeans more sales. We'll get a full SP camapaign either way. It's just an issue of how fleshed out that experience is. And it's a valid concern for people who've no intention of playing MP, since the draw for them is the SP experience, which was there from the start of the series.

[atheelogos]

javierabegazo wrote...

Official XBOX Magazine | OXM December issue reveals Mass Effect 3 Multiplayer

There we go. Discuss.

BioWare officially confirming MP>
http://twitter.com/#...440240147955712

Well I love co-op so this is all good news for me 

[Genshie]

Good job Bioware. You just made a perfect excuse for people to hammer on singleplayer if they don't like it. If reviews are going to blame anything about singleplayer now the adding of the "multiplayer feature" will most likely be first thing they comment on for reasons why. (Happened for Bioshock 2, happened for Assassin's Creed Brotherhood (although one of the few cases where inserting multiplayer was actually good yet still weakened and decreased singleplayer))

[Archer Two Four]

I don't think Bioware will make a competitive MP mode. The clue is in the word 'co-op'. Maybe a survival mode, or a small seperate campaign mode specially designed for two players, like the splinter cell games.

[Degenerate Rakia Time]

Fiery Phoenix wrote...

BatmanPWNS wrote...

Rakia Time wrote...

Welcome to the future of gaming, multiplayer everywhere....gotta say, the future really sucks

Multiplayer has existed since 1958 and were almost everywhere in the 80's and 90's so I don't know what you mean by the "future of gaming"

It's an EA representative who called multiplayer the future of gaming in the first place.

That was exactly what i meant 

[zico291]

Did they not say at one point that Mass Effect 3 was fully playable at christmas?

[CannonO]

Oh Casey, it's nothing of what we feared? So it isn't multiplayer. Thank god.

[1136342t54_]

E-Type XR wrote...

The Calculator wrote...

So I hear lots of complaining, I heard it since ME1 when ever any one brought up multiplayer. But what I never heard is a valid reason for such complaints. Its always stuff like "lt will ruin the game." "Mass Effect is a singleplayer game if you want multiplayer play Gears of War" "If they add multiplayer that take away from the time they put into singleplayer" Which is not true because with most games there are multiple teams working on the project and other thing like that with out any explanation why. So here is your chance complainers tell me a valid reason you think multiplayer detracts form the game.

Let's create a situation.

You're given 1 million pounds to make the game. No more, no less. You then take off 200,000 to hire people and make the MP aspect. Even if the base game only cost 800,000 to make, thats 200,000 ppunds you could spend on Q/A people, engine optimisation, new resources, or better graphics/polishing. Anyway you turn it, the singleplayer game could have been out 4 months or earlier, or 4 months better. Instead, we get a MP segment that only EA would have actually wanted.

That is your worst case scenario. This is what likely happened. The game was given 1 million pounds. When it was basically finished another 200,000 pounds were added on for a new feature. This seems most likely since the SP was basically finished almost a year ago. Then it seems they added on the MP likely due to EA's insistence.

[Ghost-621]

IsaacShep wrote...

cachx wrote...

Ghost-621 wrote...

Casey lied. Outright, freakin' bold-faced lied to everyone.

Not that it surprised anybody.
Remember when TOR news leaked out? Bioware was pretty aggresive denying it, even AFTER Riticello spilled the beans.

I still remember that. The most hilarious denial ever, denying your own boss' words xD

Seriously people, DON'T PAY THESE LIARS!

[mranderson25]

"It's not the fact that there's MP or that Bioware lied to us, it's the fact that everyone there has 2 eyes, and smells like delicious pancakes."

As long as we're complaining...

[yoshibb]

As long as multiplayer isn't required I don't see the big deal. And like I said before, I like playing co-op games with my brother and cousins when they are away at college. This is finally a game that I actually like that is co-op unlike all the generic shooter games.

[-Skorpious-]

Am I disappointed? Yes. Is it the end of the ME universe for me? No, but my level of frustration with the ME series may increase significantly depending on Wednesday's BW Pulse episode.

[Jalisurr]

Honestly, I'm all for this, so long as it's well done and the singleplayer is just as good as it would be otherwise. I believe in you, Bioware!

[TrumpetzGuy55]

well im even more excited now. Co op Mass Effect will be cool.

[Abirn]

Archer Two Four wrote...

I don't think Bioware will make a competitive MP mode. The clue is in the word 'co-op'. Maybe a survival mode, or a small seperate campaign mode specially designed for two players, like the splinter cell games.

That is insane,  why should I be forced to play with others just to experience the campaign in a freaking RPG. 

And they deliberatly and intentionally lied to us.  Which should have EVERYBODY up in arms to be honest.

[Killjoy Cutter]

darknoon5 wrote...

Jorina Leto wrote...

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.

You call that modding? I call it cheating, tbh. That's like me putting my strenght to 99 in Kotor using KSE and saying I'm modding it, lmao.

And how are thermal clips idiotic? Infinite supply of fire with frictionless materials was idiotic as it destroyed anything challenging about the concept of the shooter part of the RPG-shooter ME is anyway. This is what I mean, every single ME1 elitist refers to things they don't like as stupid, as if people who don't like them are stupid. ME is just as much shooter as RPG, and guess what, a shooter with infinite ammo isn't challenging. ME2's system was better and more tactical, and actually made you think about where you aimed and what guns you carried. (eg. Mattock has low ammo capacity but high DPS)

It is literally impossible to cheat in a single-player game.   Cheating requires that someone else be harmed, put at a disadvantage, or otherwise wronged. 

If I want to see how a single-player game plays with different parameters on any particular thing, then there's nothing wrong with me doing so, and it's between me, myself, and I.  It is literally no one else's concern. 

[shepskisaac]

Phaedon wrote...

Except that he talked in behalf of BioWare and ME3 in general. NOT just what the Edmonton guys did. Also, if you think that one studio starts something, fails, abandons it and sends it to another one, well...that's not how it works, mate.

I don't think that's how it went, I just gave you an example how you can interpret the same sentence differently.

Phaedon wrote...

The question was "Will ME3 have MP?"

"We tried to fit it in for a quite some time, but we didn't get it in. Besides, it wouldn't fit"

Paraphrased, but you get what I mean. The fact that he is actually saying "it wouldn't fit" dismisses the theory of a studio failing and another one picking it up.

And the fact he didn't finish with "So no, there won't be MP in ME3 in any form ever" means he didn't deny it.

But it's pointless to argue about it, since neither you or me will change our opinion. The fact is co-op is coming and honeslty, I'm curious about it. Unless Origin is required for MP, then I won't touch it.

[Arcadian Legend]

My video! It has no effect! This has NEVER happened before! I'm afraid I have little else to say at this point regarding MP, so not much else I can do but pull up a chair and eat popcorn while watching. I have NO desire into getting into a fight.

[iloveTali81]

[inappropriate post removed]

Modifié par Stanley Woo, 10 octobre 2011 - 08:38 .

[ObserverStatus]

Olwydd wrote...
It's not so much an issue of 'finishing' as it is of quality and the inclusion/improvement of other features. Like it or not, MP is a big draw. They may be willing to put some SP features on the backburner in favour of MP inclusion if itmeans more sales. We'll get a full SP camapaign either way. It's just an issue of how fleshed out that experience is. And it's a valid concern for people who've no intention of playing MP, since the draw for them is the SP experience, which was there from the start of the series.

That doesn't necessarily have to be true, Metroid Prime 2 had mulitplayer, but Retro Studios still had enough resources to make the singleplayer campaign perfect.  Sure, adventure games are a lot less work to debug than rpg's with millions of variables floating around, but at some point they have to choose how much capital to allocate towards debugging. In the end, most developers usually decide that increasing the total amount of content is a better use of their funds than hunting down obscure and elusive glitches.

[Melchiah109]

Abirn wrote...

Archer Two Four wrote...

I don't think Bioware will make a competitive MP mode. The clue is in the word 'co-op'. Maybe a survival mode, or a small seperate campaign mode specially designed for two players, like the splinter cell games.

That is insane,  why should I be forced to play with others just to experience the campaign in a freaking RPG. 

And they deliberatly and intentionally lied to us.  Which should have EVERYBODY up in arms to be honest.

I'm guessing you missed the word seperate, or maybe you just don't understand what it means. If you want to go all Occam's Razor at least take things in context.

[BatmanPWNS]

Fiery Phoenix wrote...

BatmanPWNS wrote...

Rakia Time wrote...

Welcome to the future of gaming, multiplayer everywhere....gotta say, the future really sucks

Multiplayer has existed since 1958 and were almost everywhere in the 80's and 90's so I don't know what you mean by the "future of gaming"

It's an EA representative who called multiplayer the future of gaming in the first place.

Pfff. I thought BSN thought they were too cool to take EA seriously. (But I didn't know about that so thanks for info)

[Funkcase]

Well I was hoping Bioware would stick to what they do best, making a amazing singleplayer game, but singleplayer gaming seems to be dying thanks to COD, Gears of war and Halo.  I just hope the singleplayer isn't as short as ME2, the side quests (not including dlc) were awful, I hope there's atleast some decent story, decison making and character interaction to them, and not pointless shooting. I hope ME3 is more like ME1 in the amount of quests (hopefully more!) I just hope the multiplayer doesn't affect it. I wont judge it though until I play it (atleast it's co-op missons and not deathmacth I suppose), it's a rare thing for Bioware to let me down, Im sure they wont let me down with my most atticipated game since ME1.

Modifié par Funkcase, 10 octobre 2011 - 08:36 .