2368 réponses à ce sujet

[Drone223]

SilentNukee wrote...

Just saying, if Origins doesn't change its **** and is required for ME3, all of you should come to Xbox. We'll have good times.

DRM free FTW 

[Squallypo]

eh i dont care and never wanted any multiplayer options on Mass Effect saga , its singleplayer perfect as it is :] this is not MW3 , uncharted saga, GeoW saga , etc etc.
*flameshield on *

[kidbd15]

I don't mind MP, in any form or fashion, as long as it's an OPTION and doesn't take anything away from single player. For example, I WOULD DEFINITELY BE PISSED if the co-op missions REQUIRED you to play with other people... if that was solely an option, and we could go at it solo with AI squadmates, then all is well.

However, to the more pressing matter, is how BioWare mind-[wiped] us all these past few months in regards to MP. If they had clearly stated they were doing MP back in April, I wouldn't mind. But hiding it from us, denying it, essentially lying to us, is a pretty [jerky] move IMO. There is absolutely no reason for it, and as a fan who trusts BW, this just feels like that trust was used and abused.

[No swearing, please.]

Modifié par Stanley Woo, 10 octobre 2011 - 10:23 .

[shepskisaac]

SilentNukee wrote...

Let the purists whine!!!

Frankly, even GAF is more positive after co-op confirmation than BSN right now. And that's rare

[The Elder King]

SilentNukee wrote...

Just saying, if Origins doesn't change its **** and is required for ME3, all of you should come to Xbox. We'll have good times.

Yup, and spending money every month for playing MP.
Even if I don't like MP that much, a ME3 coop could have made me try it. But I'm not going to give MS money for play a game that I bought.

[gamer_girl]

So long as the time and money invested in the multiplayer doesn't impede the production of single player, and the multiplayer is of quality and isn't the same rubbish that Call of Duty has recycled since the stone ages, I'm on board. Also I don't think it would be fair to have achievements for the multiplayer as not everyone plays online. That's all I really care about. Otherwise, BW, I approve. =P

[PJRobinson]

You lot are going to hate me for this but... I think it'll be good. I'm certain bioware wont mess this up and co-op is always great if it has offline availability.

I just think that this is going to be like uncharted's co-op modes. Both standalone, you have the horde which isn't part of the main plot - you play as a team of 3 where you pick the characters you will play as against waves of mooks.
The other co-op mode in uncharted is a short story - 3 characters going through their own short story.

I think that either of these (or both) would be great ways to use the multiplayer - without editing as much from the single player - heck the locations were spots from single player that had been slightly tweaked.

P.S. those of you saying most of the fanbase don't want multiplayer don't seem to realise that a vast majority of mass effect players don't use these forums.

[1136342t54_]

Darkeus wrote...

I think more people will not buy it than you think..

Oh Wikipedia.  That is such a great source.  Not exactly scientific but whatever.

Nor are the polls I was looking at.  Game sites...

Anyway, point is that MP is the lowest common denominator.  They may sell but they really are not good.  They sell because people can be really dumb sometimes.

Interesting. So anyone who plays MP is basically unintelligent and stupid? Interesting very interesting.

[SavesTheDay]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

For god's sake people I have seen more inane arguments about this topic than I care to remember.

It has co-op. It was delayed for several months. How in the hell is that taking away resources from the single player? Resources were ADDED, not diverted.

Every day of development is part of the game's budget. Every day of development is a resource spent. If you add days, you have to add resources. Programmers don't work for free people. Electricity isn't free, managers don't work for free, Casey goddam Hudson does not work for free.

If they delayed the game to add coop AFTER completing singleplayer to the best of their ability, what the freak are you complaining about? That they didn't fix what wasn't broken? That they didn't make a unique romance with Conrad Verner? That X, Y, and Z minute details didn't carry over?

Get. The freak. Over yourselves. If you don't care enough about the story to buy the game then fine, don't. If you are getting the game even though you hate Bioware, you're a hypocrite. If you are getting the game despite your reservations, fine, good for you.

Just for all that is intelligent and holy in this universe, stop these completely stupid complaining matches.

This is exactly how I feel about multiplayer. Plus, that bolded part just made me laugh out loud.

[Darkeus]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

For god's sake people I have seen more inane arguments about this topic than I care to remember.

It has co-op. It was delayed for several months. How in the hell is that taking away resources from the single player? Resources were ADDED, not diverted.

Every day of development is part of the game's budget. Every day of development is a resource spent. If you add days, you have to add resources. Programmers don't work for free people. Electricity isn't free, managers don't work for free, Casey goddam Hudson does not work for free.

If they delayed the game to add coop AFTER completing singleplayer to the best of their ability, what the freak are you complaining about? That they didn't fix what wasn't broken? That they didn't make a unique romance with Conrad Verner? That X, Y, and Z minute details didn't carry over?

Get. The freak. Over yourselves. If you don't care enough about the story to buy the game then fine, don't. If you are getting the game even though you hate Bioware, you're a hypocrite. If you are getting the game despite your reservations, fine, good for you.

Just for all that is intelligent and holy in this universe, stop these completely stupid complaining matches.

Problem is, I doubt that happened. 

You can't have MP in your game without diverting resources from other things.  You can't have MP without devoting memory and disc space. You can't have MP in a game with out focusing on getting it right.

This all sounds like taking resources and time away from the Single Player to me.

[Village_Idiot]

[Violation of Rule #2 removed.]

Modifié par Stanley Woo, 10 octobre 2011 - 10:24 .

[111987]

Darkeus wrote...

111987 wrote...

Darkeus wrote...

111987 wrote...

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.

Multiplayer is not as big as you think.  There are polls out there that say that people still play alone most of teh time.  I also doubt it will bring in "thousands on new fans"  I doubt even a hundred new.  Some tacked on MP is not going to bring all of teh CoD and Battlefield fans, sorry.

And fro the reaction I have seen on Facebook, IGN, Gamefaq boards and on here.  I think it is safe to say that a very loud majority of fans in many forums have expressed their displeasure for this addition....

Show me those polls; I honestly doubt that is true given the obsecene amount of hours played on xbox live, PSN, etc...

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_video_games

If you look at the top games on those lists, you will see the vast majority of them are multiplayer experiences. Fact is, multiplayer sells.

There are millions of people that play games like Halo, CoD, and GoW. You don't think even a few thousand of those players won't see Mass Effect 3, see that it has multiplayer, and will decide not to get it?

How many fans do you think will actually not get the game because of multiplayer? 100? 200? An insigificant number compared to how many people will be buy Mass Effect 3.

I think more people will not buy it than you think..

Oh Wikipedia.  That is such a great source.  Not exactly scientific but whatever.

Nor are the polls I was looking at.  Game sites...

Anyway, point is that MP is the lowest common denominator.  They may sell but they really are not good.  They sell because people can be really dumb sometimes.

I guess we'll see when the game comes out how many of the people screaming now will actually stick to their guns and not get the game.

Um, you can check the list of references that Wikipedia cites if you don't trust it.

Most of those games are some of the top-rated games of all time. If the games weren't good, millions upon millions of people wouldn't buy them. Just because you don't personally think those games are good doesn't mean they aren't good games.

[wolfennights]

Was really hoping this wouldn't happen, but meh. All my friends hate Mass Effect thanks to me talking about it all the time, so it's not like I'll be playing it. But it does seem like a waste of resources to me. I'll just wait until it comes out to judge.

[Darkeus]

1136342t54 wrote...

Darkeus wrote...

I think more people will not buy it than you think..

Oh Wikipedia.  That is such a great source.  Not exactly scientific but whatever.

Nor are the polls I was looking at.  Game sites...

Anyway, point is that MP is the lowest common denominator.  They may sell but they really are not good.  They sell because people can be really dumb sometimes.

Interesting. So anyone who plays MP is basically unintelligent and stupid? Interesting very interesting.

No but anyone who buys the same old thing over and over again like Call of Duty is kind of silly you must admit.  They have changed that game in years....

[Thompson family]

BIG FALLACY AT WORK HERE, which is:

[b]Time and resources spent on multiplayer is taken away from Single player[/quote]

That is simply not true, and here's why.

ME1 sold a little less than 2 million copies, IIRC (includes all formats). ME3 sold a little more than 2 million, IIRC.

BW just makes another single player game, you can count on another 2M seller. This ain't rocket science.

So, how much time and resorces will BW put into another 2M SP game?

Not a whole lot.

But if you're looking for a blockbuster, if you're swinging for the fences, you're going to invest more -- both to make it multiplayer and more to make it a better game.

This idea that game development is a zero-sum game is a worst-case scenario.

[david-esp]

SilentNukee wrote...


*Checks date of thread...5 months ago*
Ah, the troll callings and so forth...Sigh.

Is it madness to see the future. To see the multiplayer rushed to us. To see there is no scape, no hope. No, you are not mad, you are the only sane one left!

They have unearth the heart of evil, awaked the beast, unleashed the darkness!
No one is saved. The age of single player games has ended, soon only multiplayer and shooter games will remain.

Jokes apart, it's a sad day for me. I've never play multiplayer modes. Like some people said it would be better if they spent those resources improving the singleplayer campaign. If the multiplayer part is separated from the singleplayer mode I think i'll be okay. If the multiplayer is merged in the singleplayer I'll be truly dissapointed, because that will probably means that the missions will be shooting galleries. So i'll wait and see.

[challenger18]

hhh89 wrote...

SilentNukee wrote...

Just saying, if Origins doesn't change its **** and is required for ME3, all of you should come to Xbox. We'll have good times.

Yup, and spending money every month for playing MP.
Even if I don't like MP that much, a ME3 coop could have made me try it. But I'm not going to give MS money for play a game that I bought.

You don't spend money eve y month for XBL. You pay a bulk some up front for the amount of months you want and that's it. But if you don't want to that at all you can awalys get a ps3.

Modifié par challenger18, 10 octobre 2011 - 10:19 .

[Rip504]

You are missing 1 point and fact. This is also an EA title. So yes to play online co-op you will need an online EA pass. So live users will need both live and the EA pass.Paying twice to play online. etc.

How much of our dlc,will now be made for MP instead of SP?

Modifié par Rip504, 10 octobre 2011 - 10:21 .

[CrazyRah]

PJRobinson wrote...

You lot are going to hate me for this but... I think it'll be good. I'm certain bioware wont mess this up and co-op is always great if it has offline availability.

I just think that this is going to be like uncharted's co-op modes. Both standalone, you have the horde which isn't part of the main plot - you play as a team of 3 where you pick the characters you will play as against waves of mooks.
The other co-op mode in uncharted is a short story - 3 characters going through their own short story.

I think that either of these (or both) would be great ways to use the multiplayer - without editing as much from the single player - heck the locations were spots from single player that had been slightly tweaked.

P.S. those of you saying most of the fanbase don't want multiplayer don't seem to realise that a vast majority of mass effect players don't use these forums.

I'm with you, i belive it will be a fun experience

[SilentNukee]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

For god's sake people I have seen more inane arguments about this topic than I care to remember.

It has co-op. It was delayed for several months. How in the hell is that taking away resources from the single player? Resources were ADDED, not diverted.

Every day of development is part of the game's budget. Every day of development is a resource spent. If you add days, you have to add resources. Programmers don't work for free people. Electricity isn't free, managers don't work for free, Casey goddam Hudson does not work for free.

If they delayed the game to add coop AFTER completing singleplayer to the best of their ability, what the freak are you complaining about? That they didn't fix what wasn't broken? That they didn't make a unique romance with Conrad Verner? That X, Y, and Z minute details didn't carry over?

Get. The freak. Over yourselves. If you don't care enough about the story to buy the game then fine, don't. If you are getting the game even though you hate Bioware, you're a hypocrite. If you are getting the game despite your reservations, fine, good for you.

Just for all that is intelligent and holy in this universe, stop these completely stupid complaining matches.

QFT.

[Darkeus]

111987 wrote...

Darkeus wrote...

111987 wrote...

Darkeus wrote...

111987 wrote...

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.

Multiplayer is not as big as you think.  There are polls out there that say that people still play alone most of teh time.  I also doubt it will bring in "thousands on new fans"  I doubt even a hundred new.  Some tacked on MP is not going to bring all of teh CoD and Battlefield fans, sorry.

And fro the reaction I have seen on Facebook, IGN, Gamefaq boards and on here.  I think it is safe to say that a very loud majority of fans in many forums have expressed their displeasure for this addition....

Show me those polls; I honestly doubt that is true given the obsecene amount of hours played on xbox live, PSN, etc...

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_video_games

If you look at the top games on those lists, you will see the vast majority of them are multiplayer experiences. Fact is, multiplayer sells.

There are millions of people that play games like Halo, CoD, and GoW. You don't think even a few thousand of those players won't see Mass Effect 3, see that it has multiplayer, and will decide not to get it?

How many fans do you think will actually not get the game because of multiplayer? 100? 200? An insigificant number compared to how many people will be buy Mass Effect 3.

I think more people will not buy it than you think..

Oh Wikipedia.  That is such a great source.  Not exactly scientific but whatever.

Nor are the polls I was looking at.  Game sites...

Anyway, point is that MP is the lowest common denominator.  They may sell but they really are not good.  They sell because people can be really dumb sometimes.

I guess we'll see when the game comes out how many of the people screaming now will actually stick to their guns and not get the game.

Um, you can check the list of references that Wikipedia cites if you don't trust it.

Most of those games are some of the top-rated games of all time. If the games weren't good, millions upon millions of people wouldn't buy them. Just because you don't personally think those games are good doesn't mean they aren't good games.

No, people get caught up in hype.  It happens....

[Drone223]

hhh89 wrote...

SilentNukee wrote...

Just saying, if Origins doesn't change its **** and is required for ME3, all of you should come to Xbox. We'll have good times.

Yup, and spending money every month for playing MP.
Even if I don't like MP that much, a ME3 coop could have made me try it. But I'm not going to give MS money for play a game that I bought.

That is gold membership only, silver is free and allows you to get DLC

[b09boy]

Ok let me get this straight.

Bioware, a developer which has never been adept at gameplay and has basically lived off their writing team, is now adding a gameplay only mode of a sort they have never done before when few are clamoring for it and many are against it.  (And yeah, you read that right.  Bioware has never had very good gameplay or balance.  BG, KotOR, DA, ME, and NWN especially showed this off.  They were crap without story.  Think of your favorite Bioware game.  If your fondest memory of that game was fighting something or another then I'll be very surprised)

So basically, they're spending resources which could have been used on the SP to bring in new fans which have probably not even given the previous games a second thought.  Problem?  They probably delayed the game past the holiday season just to include a feature which, lets face it, won't be good.  Sooooo...Bioware/EA is wasting resources to implement what is likely to be a mediocre feature for what I project to be a loss of sales.

That's some great management there. 

Modifié par b09boy, 10 octobre 2011 - 10:21 .

[Yeti13]

Wow, just ran through all 73pgs... the internets are blowings ups! RUNS FORS THE COVERS!!!!