2368 réponses à ce sujet

[Darkeus]

[quote]Thompson family wrote...

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.


[/quote]

Multiplayer does not need to be in Mass Effect to make it a better game.  Nice faith you have in the Mass Effect series if you think any kind of MP was needed....

[SavesTheDay]

Rip504 wrote...

Your 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?

You'd only pay twice if you bought the game used.

[heyimacrab]

the fact that it will die out so soon is why im so dissapointed, now i wont want to replay the game im sure, although if it has a 6on6 pvp multi thats just disqusting ill snap the disk

[didymos1120]

Darkeus wrote...

You can't have MP in your game without diverting resources from other things.

And those other things may or may not be the other aspects of ME3.  Maybe they got diverted from some other project.  Do you know any actual details of the budgeting process for this game? 

[Darkeus]

b09boy wrote...

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 gaemplay 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. 

So true.

[gammameggon]

In the original Game Informer article it said no multiplayer....so BioWare LIED. How much other stuff...stuff about rpg elements and who knows what else, was also a complete fabrication and has been/will be flip-flopped?

This series has become a joke. First the corny omni-blade....the rail shooting...the plastic new FemShep, and now multiplayer.

THAT IS WHY THE GAME WAS DELAYED, FOLKS. NOT TO IMPROVE SINGLE PLAYER, BUT TO ADD MULTIPLAYER AFTER IT WAS ALLEGEDLY CONFIRMED IT WAS NOT IN THE GAME.

You say there is rpg elements, BioWare??? I don't friggin believe you. Who knows what the heck you'll do to it....might be gutted out and changed on us, flip-flop style. Even if you say its in, why should I believe you...YOU SAID NO MULTIPLAYER!!

As other fans have stated, time spent on multiplayer could have been time and resources spent in single player. Although, phhhh, you probably would have only crammed it with as many guns as humanly possible so those narrow corridors have as many different pew pew machines as possible.

I'm DEFINITELY not getting this Gears of War want-to-be til a price drop. I swear on my grave. And I'm only getting it after a price drop to complete the story....which I also fear will be lackluster and sloppy.

[didymos1120]

Rip504 wrote...

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

We don't know.  We'll just have to see.

[1136342t54_]

heyimacrab wrote...

the fact that it will die out so soon is why im so dissapointed, now i wont want to replay the game im sure, although if it has a 6on6 pvp multi thats just disqusting ill snap the disk

Considering that only co op has been mentioned many many many times in this thread I seriusly doubt pvp is the case.

[Darkeus]

didymos1120 wrote...

Darkeus wrote...

You can't have MP in your game without diverting resources from other things.

And those other things may or may not be the other aspects of ME3.  Maybe they got diverted from some other project.  Do you know any actual details of the budgeting process for this game? 

That is a lot of "if" there.  Point is, odds say that this took away from resources that could have been better used beside adding a feature no one really wants.

[Luigitornado]

Oh gawd I hope it is separated from Shepard's story.

[cachx]

Thompson family wrote...

BIG FALLACY AT WORK HERE, which is:

Time and resources spent on multiplayer is taken away from Single player

That is simply not true.

THIS, oh god, this.

It's a given by now that Co-Op will be named the sole culprit of whatever people don't like about ME3

[M8DMAN]

Jonathan Shepard wrote...

NPH11 wrote...

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.

And mine as well.

Same here. I just don't know if I can trust Bioware anymore.

For some reason this Co-op news feels like a stab in the back...

Modifié par M8DMAN, 10 octobre 2011 - 10:25 .

[didymos1120]

gammameggon wrote...

In the original Game Informer article it said no multiplayer....so BioWare LIED. 

Actually, what was said in that article was that they had nothing to announce at that time. 

[Edge 7]

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.

Really? You're going to slam wikipedia's credibility when it cites the information from other sources?

And it is really, really saddening to see that you can't name a good co-op game, let alone a good multiplayer game.

[Pani Mauser]

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 it was some future DLC which people had to buy separately, it indeed would be optional. But if it comes with the main game, it means people who don't want it (like me) will have to pay for it anyways, because its price is already included in the price of the game.

Also, how you can be so sure about mp not having impact on the singleplayer experience? 

Maybe there were additional missions or side-quests that were cut because of this. Maybe some companions became cameos just because BW didn't have enough resources for bigger squad and multiplayer, and they decided to cut the team down. 

We'll never know how exactly mp influenced the main game.

Modifié par Babe Mause, 10 octobre 2011 - 10:29 .

[Terror_K]

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.

The details aren't the point. The point is no matter what the multiplayer entails, it's resources, time and money that could have been better spent improving the single-player aspect of the game. Simple as that. And I can see no reason to add multiplayer to the third game in a thus-far purely single player, story-driven series aside from pandering and introducing the feature for the sake of sales and bringing more of the multiplayer shooter crowd in. That's not making the game better, that's just derailing it to broaden appeal and nothing more. If you really want that then save it for a spin-off where it suits it and makes sense.

Seriously, how much time, effort and resources are being spent on coming up with this, integrating it into the gameplay properly, testing to make sure it doesn't break things compared to the standard single-player gameplay, etc. that could have been focused instead on more customisation, deeper choices and consequences with more varied results rather than a bunch of emails or substitutions that are otherwise the same, and just more story content or even new locations to explore, etc.?

[1136342t54_]

Darkeus wrote...

didymos1120 wrote...

Darkeus wrote...

You can't have MP in your game without diverting resources from other things.

And those other things may or may not be the other aspects of ME3.  Maybe they got diverted from some other project.  Do you know any actual details of the budgeting process for this game? 

That is a lot of "if" there.  Point is, odds say that this took away from resources that could have been better used beside adding a feature no one really wants.

Your assumptions are no different. You have no conclusive evidence at all nor proof. It is quite possible that withou multiplayer ME3 would have been released earlier. 

[Xeranx]

First post was 5 hours ago and we've got 70 pages.  Did talk of Ashley's armor or the whole FemShep redesign blow up this fast?

Chris Priestly wrote...

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.

Seriously?  Weren't you the one talking about how it was all a rumor and how you'd come back to say, "told you so"?  You also seemed to hint at the kinect thing being a rumor before it was confirmed.  

Due to those two clear examples I and others should have no reason to believe that you didn't think us mindless idiots who would eat up anything and everything you've said or will say.  

People have been calling Bioware out on statements made since ME2 released last year.  At least a number of people called Hudson out on his double speak and some made statements alluding to how he would make a good politician.  Now you want us to have "cautious optimism" and "wary negativity" until you tell us anything...from the same company that decided to make a clear statement on multiplayer for months to the point that you looked dishonest?  You've sold your credibility.

If a group of people (people you claim to care about) have misgivings about an aspect that you're going with it's up to you to assuage any and all dissention as best you can and not stoke it with "maybe..we're not sure" while the rumors keep coming.  You get out in front of it and...wow sounds like I'm talking to some politician who needs to get in front of a scandal to do damage control.

In short: You saw the comments on these boards.  There are others all over the net with people sharing the same views.  If the game turns out to not work out in your favor you guys have no one but yourselves to blame.  As my father has always told me: "A man is the architect of his future.  The way you make your bed is the way you'll lie on it."

[IronSabbath88]

cachx wrote...

Thompson family wrote...

BIG FALLACY AT WORK HERE, which is:

Time and resources spent on multiplayer is taken away from Single player

That is simply not true.

THIS, oh god, this.

It's a given by now that Co-Op will be named the sole culprit of whatever people don't like about ME3

"There's this glitch in one part of the campaign.."

"I BLAME IT ON CO-OP!"

[Silver]

didymos1120 wrote...

Rip504 wrote...

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

We don't know.  We'll just have to see.

who wants to bet they'll pull a CoD or a BF and charge you 15 Dollars for some re-used Multiplayer Maps ?

[Arcadian Legend]

The only thing we can truly do at this point is to wait and see.

[didymos1120]

cachx wrote...

THIS, oh god, this.

It's a given by now that Co-Op will be named the sole culprit of whatever people don't like about ME3

I actually see that as kinda useful: anyone who uses that argument can just be filtered out into the category of "Not really interested in actual discussion.  Wants to grind axe instead."

[Iakus]

cachx wrote...

THIS, oh god, this.

It's a given by now that Co-Op will be named the sole culprit of whatever people don't like about ME3

"Mass Effect 3 must be better than the rest, if only to avoid suspicion" 

Bioware brought it on themselves doing this.

[gamer_girl]

b09boy wrote...

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 gaemplay 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. 

You forget the people that are obsessed with online shooters. I think it'll boost sales since those people make up the vast majority of the gaming population. As far as gameplay goes, ME2 had great gameplay. And there's no way to predict how the gameplay will be either unless you were one of the people that played the demo at E3, PAX, gamescom, etc. (consider the difference in gameplay between DA:O and DA2 or between ME and ME2). All that you present here are assumptions based on less than compelling "evidence". Nobody knows how the multiplayer will be so there's no point in complaining or saying it'll ruin their sales until the game is actually released and we have sufficient info to conclude that what you say is true.

[Lordgleen]

I realy do not want MP for ME3,but if we must have do not make any achivments for it. The reason for this is that there are many like my self that do not have xbox live or internet at home. It would be a shame to make achiments like that so that we can not get 100% achivments for all three games.
Infact the lone games I have 100% is for ME1 and ME2.