2368 réponses à ce sujet

[Travie]

Spectreshadow wrote...

 I just wanted to say it speaks volumes of immaturity for the people who are boycotting this game because of optional co-op that has no impact on the single player experience.

If by 'no impact' you mean 'taking a large amount of resources away from', then sure.

[Kaiser Shepard]

IsaacShep wrote...

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

S/S romances still are a horrible addition, if only for the fact that they took precious time and resources away from the multiplayer mode(s). 

Who said s/s ain't one of MP modes?

Hey now, they don't want their servers to be empty from the get go. 

Modifié par Kaiser Shepard, 10 octobre 2011 - 10:02 .

[shepskisaac]

IronSabbath88 wrote...

I guarantee BioWare confirms that these missions are a standalone DLC that comes from a new sort of Cerberus Network and is free for people who buy the game new. I can almost guarantee that will be one of the details of it.

It is very possible.

[Dragoonlordz]

IsaacShep wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

They were clearly not diluding themselves given in fact there is MP based on those rumours which in reality is a truth and was BW who used misdirection, misleading plus withholding the truth and telling others not to put much faith in rumours, that rumours are rumours and does not make them true.

Yet they never exploctly denied it. Just as lots of folks here like to say "it ain't truth until BioWare confirms it", they should also tell themselves "it ain't a untruth until BioWare explictly denies it".

Try that stance on your wife next time she says does my ass look big in this, the moment she goes up to her friends and says do I look ok and they tell her the truth that it makes her butt look big I promise you'll be the one who ends up suffering for deceiving her when she asked you at home earlier. Thats the point it was deceit, by withholding the truth even if not flat out lie. Thats one of the major EA factors (EA Effect) that people talk about on here how EA has changed Bioware from a developer that cared mostly about the fans/gamers to one that cares now mostly for PR and $.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 10 octobre 2011 - 10:02 .

[Jonathan Shepard]

Chris Priestly wrote...

Happy Canadian Thanksgiving everyone. I am at my inlays having dinner, so ma typing this on an iPhone. Excuse the larger than usual amounts of spelling errors.

As mentioned by Casey on Twitter, we are confirming that there will be 4 player Co-op multiplayer missions for Mass Effect 3. We will have more details on this feature on Wednesday when the announcement was supposed to be made.

I know the immediate reaction by some is to panic and think of how this will ruin the Mass Effect series or whatever. PLEASE do not over react or assume the worst until you actually hear details on this feature and how it will work. I will try to get approval to give you details so you can make up your minds with the correct details. Marketing's plan was to announce on Wednesday, but I'll see if I can speed this up.

So, until you learn the details, I urge people to have cautious optimism or wary negativity until you get the real details. Thanks everyone. Stay tuned.

You're about 14 hours late to qwell the panic.

[77bug]

Spectreshadow wrote...

 I just wanted to say it speaks volumes of immaturity for the people who are boycotting this game because of optional co-op that has no impact on the single player experience.

BSN imuture nah. really. I thougt all those tali threads were normal.

[Lord_Valandil]

Darkeus wrote...

It does have an effect on Single player. It takes resources and money that could be used for Single Player and shoehorns it into a mode that nobody really wants. They majority do not want this co-op crap.

Quoted for truth.
Even if it takes a single day to develop, it's a wasted day.

[skinned77]

wright1978 wrote...

Reaction. Disappointed but unsurprised. Yet i'll still play ME3 because i want to see how it finishs.

Now say that like an Elcor.

[jakal66]

Brotherhood wasn't that short, still I'll tell you something, I think I played its MP twice...
These kind of games don't need MP or coop, but still I will judge it when I play it.But what torubles me is the fact that I think they delayed the game for this...which if it's the case it sucks.And remember this will be an origin exclusive-

[Darth_Ravor]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!! now i have to buy xbox live!!!

[111987]

Darkeus wrote...

It does have an effect on Single player. It takes resources and money that could be used for Single Player and shoehorns it into a mode that nobody really wants. They majority do not want this co-op crap.

The majority of people where? On BSN? Maybe. In the entire video game market? I highly doubt that. Some of the best-selling games of all time are multiplayer games. Multiplayer is a feature that will undoubtedly bring in thousands of new fans.

You don't know if resources or money were taken from the single player; that is your assumption. If the game is very buggy/sloppy/whatever, then you might have a case, but no game is perfect. The problem is people are going to blame every bug on the existence of multiplayer, ignoring the fact that ME1 and ME2 were pretty buggy themselves.

[77bug]

Alistair4Ever wrote...

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!! now i have to buy xbox live!!!

Or a ps3 trololololol

[didymos1120]

Mister Mida wrote...

Last I checked, volunteer mods are instructed to answer a certain way in certain situations.

Yeah, and do a search for that sentence on this site.  You'll notice it doesn't make many recent appearances in the thread-lock posts.

[BatmanPWNS]

Travie wrote...

Spectreshadow wrote...

 I just wanted to say it speaks volumes of immaturity for the people who are boycotting this game because of optional co-op that has no impact on the single player experience.

If by 'no impact' you mean 'taking a large amount of resources away from', then sure.

And where did you get the evidence? Oh yeah from thin air, right?

[frostajulie]

string3r wrote...

Waste of resources if you ask me. That extra 3 months could have been spent polishing the single player.

fully agreed:(

[Errationatus]

<nerd rage>

Oh, well, Mass Effect 3 had been going so well.  I had high hopes of a really long, really deep game that took hours and hours and hours and had massive replay value for the story alone.  Now we get, what - a 15 hour campaign (if we're lucky!) with a lot of Quicktime events and intrusive cutscenes?  Wonderful!  Gawd knows that's what made playing the COD series so amazingly fun to play alone. </sarcasm>

Every multiplayer game with a single player campaign screws the single player campaign in favour of the multiplayer component.  Every. One.  *stomps foot*

Nice going, Bioware.  Fecking hypocrites.  I am not spending my hard-earned money on a game that is 80% multiplayer, and basically craps on those of us who love this series for the story and characters, not how many killshots we can make!  Not every gamer plays multiplayer! Daaaammmnnnn!  *gnashes teeth*

What next?  ME3 gonna be console only, going down that Halo route and screwing PC owners?  Why not, you've taken the first step.  *waves fist*

I officially no longer believe anything this company says.  Thanks for taking a giant p!ss on all of those who had hoped Mass Effect would have been that rare series to have resisted the temptation.  Is this why ME3 was moved to next year - so you could pull of this giant d!ck move of douchebaggery? *howls out window, stomps about, points a lot for no real reason*

</nerd rage>

<calm adult mode>

Personally, I think this is a bad move.  ME does not need this "feature" and will not benefit from it, as experience has shown that any game with this combination always tends to sacrifice the single player experience for the multiplayer component, and that's pretty much always.

Unless ME3 is going on a Blu-ray, there's only so much you can stuff on a disc intended to run on a console.  Something has to give, and it's not looking hopeful.

I will, however, reserve judgment until all the facts are in.

Modifié par JakeMacDon, 10 octobre 2011 - 10:05 .

[Bekkael]

Alistair4Ever wrote...

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!! now i have to buy xbox live!!!

There are some awesome people that use XBL.

[firefireblow]

77bug wrote...

Alistair4Ever wrote...

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!! now i have to buy xbox live!!!

Or a ps3 trololololol

or the PC version

[DiebytheSword]

I was hoping it would be confirmed to be Co-op and not competitive multiplayer. Now I hope they did something novel, not just Left 4 Reapers. It would be awesome to have conversation options and interrupts for all players, though horribly complex to work with.

I reserve judgement until they say more, but I am optimistic.

[NPH11]

RolandX9 wrote...
Look, I know this is not your fault, but someone completely screwed the pooch on the way this was handled. Months -- months -- of dancing delicately around multiplayer. Touting the SP campaign while carefully not denying the existence of MP. Talking up the "looking into all options" thing while trying to pretend it wasn't a done deal. This. Was. Not. Cool.

Look, I'm not happy with any MP, but co-op sure beats mindless deathmatch with a stick. Most of we SP diehards will suck it up, and the rest will simply not buy ME3. I have no doubt that this will ultimately improve sales in spite of the latter. Here's the thing: EA (and by extension Bioware) messed with us, ME's most loyal customers, for months, for no good fracking reason. This is too soon to be a "big final-stretch marketing push" and too late to be "hey, we just added this". Am I buying ME3? Definitely. There's no way I'm blowing off Shepard's grand finale, not after years of personal investment. After DA 2 and this, though, I'm not going to pre-order another Bioware game (or, most likely, any game without Zelda in the title) for a long time.

Took the words right out of my mouth.

[Raw_Shotgun v]

Why do they need to add multiplayer
i have played both me1 and me2 many many times, its one of my favourite game trilogys and at no point while playing both have i wanted multi player added. either bioware have become ea servants or they dont give a crap about there hardcore fans and just want the abomination of a crowd that is the COD fans.
multiplayer ruins single player games, all it does is bring in loads of casual gamers. Assasins creed brotherhood was ruined by multiplayer. while the MP was good, the SP was much shorter and repetitive and was the worst SP out of the whole series. Dead space 2 was ruined by multiplayer, the SP was no where near as good as Dead space 1 and the MP died with in about 2-3 weeks. portal 2 was ruined by MP. it wasnt as good as 1 and lasted about 5mins.
Then theres dragon age 2. while it didnt have Mp it was ruined by EA gettin there grubby hands all over it. I loved dragon age 1 but 2 was shocking and was only made to bring in all the casual gamers just like there trying to do with me3.
i will still buy mass effect 3 but ill probarly get it pre owned now.

ARGHH RAGEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!

[challenger18]

JakeMacDon wrote...

Personally, I think this is a bad move.  ME does not need this "feature" and will not benefit from it, as experience has shown that any game with this combination always tends to sacrifice the single player experience for the multiplayer component, and that's pretty much always.

Unless ME3 is going on a Blu-ray, there's only so much you can stuff on a disc intended to run on a console.  Something has to give, and it's not looking hopeful.

Alas. 

Baldur's Gate 2 had multi-player.

My personal fav game ever.