2368 réponses à ce sujet

[Pani Mauser]

cachx wrote...

iakus wrote...

Babe Mause wrote...

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.

Very much this.

You have admitted lots of times not playing as a femshep. Do you complain about all that money you wasted because Bioware spend money on her, I wonder? :innocent:

Sorry, you must be confusing me with someone else. I'm a femShep player, and I also have couple of mShep saves too.

[Iakus]

CDRSkyShepard wrote...


There's a bit of a problem with your logic, there. He plays m!shep instead of femshep. If there is a multiplayer option that some people don't use, it's not like we have some other feature we can use instead. Everyone's gonna play the single player, that's a given. The multiplayer is just an extra, an extra I and others feel needed to be addressed in DLC, not the big, epic conclusion of Shepard's story.

You actually defended me better than I did myself 

[Rip504]

SavesTheDay wrote...

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.

EA  Madden gives you a 3 month pass. If bought new. Then you pay again. MP should be part of the 60 dollar game price. Not extra.

Is this MP on disc? If so,there is space being taken away from SP.
Dlc will now be divided.
ME3 Bioware/EA have a budget. To assume they added to that budget for mp,is nothing more then an assumption.

We need more details,but I assume mp has already affected sp,and will continue to do so.Through dlc and money spent within their budget. Maybe they are straining their budget by adding as much as possible to further profits. Adding to your budget,could be seen as taking away from your profits. I doubt they added anything. I assume otherwise.

Yes divide funds between 2 teams. 1 MP team,and 1 SP team. Is Casey concered with a certain element in MP, and misses something in SP.?.

There are many ways MP could effect SP, It is not a stretch to belive this could happen.
On the other hand there are very few ways MP could help ME or SP.
1 way it could help is by adding MP in your current budget to add to your profit margin.
And on that bombshell...

Modifié par Rip504, 10 octobre 2011 - 10:51 .

[marshalleck]

Jonzz wrote...

This is madness

This is BSN

[jake112296]

KOS-MOS56 wrote...

See.... I have real life friends so this will probably be fun for me!

Don't be mean to all the bums on this cite:D

[Vanni127]

Operation_141 wrote...

Looking forward to calling a Reaper in as my 25th killstreak:D

I wish I could hate you to death. 

[Edge 7]

b09boy wrote...

1) There are plenty of online shooters released.  Not all of them do well.  A certain amount of quality and hype needs to be built up around it.  If the hype surrounding ME's multiplayer is that it isn't good, then it will be quickly forgotten.

2)ME2 didn't have good gameplay.  As a pure shooter it was average compared to what else is available.  The mechanics were just not balanced well enough to be called good.  The game was based on being a shooting gallery where you constantly turtle under a single piece of cover against enemies with universally more health than the player.

3) There's plenty of evidence if you're willing to read between the lines that the game was delayed for multiplayer.  There's plenty of evidence of Bioware being poor gameplay developers.  There's plenty of evidence that simply having a crappy multiplayer doesn't automaticaly tap into the pool of multiplayer shooter fans.  Finally, there's plenty of evidence that games don't sell as well directly after the holiday season.

4) Doesn't really matter how good the multiplayer is.  It won't be much anything like the SP (lets face it, the powers of ME would not work for even co-op.  Time dilation would get annoying fast, as would pausing) barring extreme changes to the SP (in which case, all the more reason to complain - changing the SP for multiplayer?).  So they're basically creating a seperate game not many fans of the actual series wants during the grand finale of their epic trilogy, using up resources which could have gone into making it the best SP game they could come up with.  What a waste.

2) Completely disagreed. Why would you compare Mass Effect as a "pure shooter"? Removing the powers removes the gameplay and isn't a basis on which to judge it. I have no idea which Mass Effect 2 you played but my experience with it was more tactical than shooting gallery.

4) You named one power that wouldn't work in co-op which could be removed. Pausing could be removed for the simplicity real time keys. Single player would not have to be changed for this. The campaign is as long as ME2, they still tweet about running through it, its as good as it could be.

Modifié par Edge 7, 10 octobre 2011 - 10:50 .

[didymos1120]

Fenderbaum wrote...

Surely ME3 deserved a 60/70/80+ hour game to truly and dynamically finish off the series?

That was never going to happen, MP or no, and you really ought to know it.

[Darkeus]

Edge 7 wrote...

Darkeus wrote...

There are so many examples that I can give of it being an epic fail too.

And also the main point..  Mass Effect does not need Multiplayer.  It takes away from a single player experience and in my opinion wastes resources on an unneeded and unwanted feature.

It is like when the NCAA guys at EA add Mascot Showdown.  No one wants to play football with the damn mascots.

Well, no one wants to play co-op when there is one of the greatest video game stories told going on.

It is like Dead Space 2's multiplayer, unwanted and destined to be unplayed.

1) If you've got examples, name them
2) The coop in Portal 2 sure wasn't a waste of resources, was it? And they've confirmed ME3 is the same length as ME2.
3) It is completely unlike Dead Space 2's multiplayer. Dead Space had enormous potential for co-op but squandered it going with the vs multiplayer route. Mass Effect is doing co-op.

I think that DS 2 MP and ME3 co-op will both be listed under "unnecessary".

As for examples, well

Homefront, bad...

Medal of Honor, bad

Shadowrun 360 game, the worst example yet.  Nothing like making a RPG a arena based MP shooter....

Resident Evil 5.  Hell, you can see in Chapter 3 when they decided to make teh switch.  That was not good.

Catherine.  Really?  MP block puzzles?

Should I keep going, there are many more bad MP games.  Only a certain number of games do well like that because of hype. 

[Kasai666]

Jonzz wrote...

This is madness

Nope, too easy. 

[marshalleck]

didymos1120 wrote...

Taritu wrote...

They chose to put resources into MP.  By definition those resources could have been used on something else in the game.

Yes, and they could also have been used on some other game entirely.  

So we're not getting a new IP because EA forced Bioware to add multiplayer to a single-player RPG?

[Spartanburger]

Jonzz wrote...

This is madness

Madness?


THIS IS BSN!!!!!!!!!!!

[Someone With Mass]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Edge 7 wrote...

And they've confirmed ME3 is the same length as ME2.

http://social.biowar...5946/75#8480089

https://twitter.com/...522910693507072

"jeffoconnor Jeff Zero O'Connor
@
@gtez Forums have gone crazy, unsurprisingly. Quick question: will ME3 be about ME2's length not counting co-op? I hope so..."

"@gtez
Jesse 'GTez' Houston
@jeffoconnor Yeah if not longer - I'm at 30+ hours in my play through"

[NOD-INFORMER37]

Darkeus wrote...

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

Darkeus wrote...

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.

Why not Darkeus? Bioware just signed with one of the biggest publishers in gaming. This is coop, not competitive multiplayer. You cannot compare this to CoD, Dead Space 2, or any of those games because it is not the same system and it is not the same challenges.

At best you can only compare it to CoD Spec Ops modes, Halo and Gear's system, and a few others.

You say that resources spent are limited exactly to the initial budget. That if you want to do something, you have to take from somewhere else.

That is completely and utterly wrong. Has the term "overbudget" never passed through your ears? Bioware could easily say "Hey EA, we want to do multiplayer, care to give us more money?" or EA could say "Hey Bioware, we want a multiplayer component in your game, here's more money. Oh, you need more time? Sure, delay the game."

Your system of diverting resources is not real life. These people don't work with a perfectly balanced budget. They go over, they come under, they delay games to do things right.

ME3 has been delayed. We find out that coop has been added. It really is not that hard to decide that maybe, just maybe, it was done to do mulitplayer.

The only two components necessary to do something in video games are time and money. They got extra time, they got extra money. Why is it so freaking hard to admit that this might work?

Also, I want to elaborate on a previous point. If the single player is finished, what exactly do you expect bioware to put those resources towards? Do you want them to incorporate half written script that was tossed at the beginning of development? Do you expect them to code in another meaningless sidequest? Do you expect them to rewrite all the design decisions at the beginning of development because suddenly they have more time and money?

Everyone I've seen vehemently oppose coop has either aluded to this justification or outright stated it. "We want them to spend those resources on singleplayer!" without actually providing any examples as to what they want the devs to do with those resources. How do you want them to be spent? What aspect of singleplayer do you think needs work that these resources could be spent on?

In short, what's wrong that needs fixing?

Because if nothing is wrong and nothing needs fixing, why not make coop? 

One, I had to laugh when you said Bioware went to EA to do multiplayer.

I doubt it went that way at all.  More like EA "telling" Bioware that it needs to be in the game.

Multiplayer is UNNEEDED.  Got that?  Okay, so why not release the game early since so one gives a damn about co-op except a few of you or make the game better.  We have seen Dragon Age 2 and this stinks of rush job and taking away from something great (The single player) to create a turd (Co-op)

They could have shored up the gameplay, added more quest, tweaked AI, worked on responses and smoothing out bugs so that we don;t have another Conrad Verner.  I could go on?

But I made my point.  Anything thing would be better to work on than wasting time with co-op that no one really wants.  The gameplay has never been perfect, perfect it.  Tweak levels, find bugs....

I mean come on, you can't think of anything else they could be working on other than this?

Agreed, M.E3 doesnt need multiplayer AT ALL. Even though Bioware was going to continue the Mass Effect series past the third game anyways and maybe make an MMO, EA just couldnt keep their multiplayer obsession in check and now we all have to pay for it. x|

Hell, I bet they'd tac on a subscription based multiplayer to Solitare if they could lol 

[Stanley Woo]

Darkeus, please tone it down to a dull roar. You're beginning to get hysterical, and repetitive. Thank you.

[Someone With Mass]

marshalleck wrote...

Jonzz wrote...

This is madness

This is BSN

[Lt. Morke]

I don't want to read though 78 pages of "instant buy" or " canceling my pre-order", so is there any important information?

[didymos1120]

Babe Mause wrote...

cachx wrote...

iakus wrote...

Babe Mause wrote...

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.

Very much this.

You have admitted lots of times not playing as a femshep. Do you complain about all that money you wasted because Bioware spend money on her, I wonder? :innocent:

Sorry, you must be confusing me with someone else. I'm a femShep player, and I also have couple of mShep saves too.

No, you're confusing Iakus with yourself.  The clue is who cachx was quoting.

[Wonderllama4]

Yes.

Simply... yes.

[Darkeus]

jake112296 wrote...

Darkeus wrote...

Edge 7 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.

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.

I could care less about multiplayer so I don't care about Multiplayer games.

Call of Duty is not good.  I don;t care how many people buy it.  That is the definition of money grab casual game.

Battlefield is actually decent.

Dead Space multiplayer was BAD!

Homefront was a money grab trying to get in the multiplayer ring.

Diablo III will be multiplayer but it is MADE FOR THAT PURPOSE.

Portal 2 does co-op right, being seperate from the main story.

Same with Rage.  In fact, I appreciate RAGE for not having gun based competative MP.

I could go on but what does that have to do with the fact that time was wasted on a feature a small minority will use and actually care about?

Finally, some one who knows what they're talking about. Where do you think Me3 will fall on that scale?

I am worried.  I am worried about tacking on a co-op experience to a game that has never needed any sort of Mulitplayer to sell millions.  It just seems like EA is forcing this on Bioware and will just be a feature that was wasted because not many people are going to play it.

It is going to have to be something phenomnial to convince ME fans that it was worth the time and effort better spent on making a better Single Player game.

[IronSabbath88]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Edge 7 wrote...

And they've confirmed ME3 is the same length as ME2.

http://social.biowar...5946/75#8480089

https://twitter.com/...522910693507072

"jeffoconnor Jeff Zero O'Connor
@
@gtez Forums have gone crazy, unsurprisingly. Quick question: will ME3 be about ME2's length not counting co-op? I hope so..."

"@gtez
Jesse 'GTez' Houston
@jeffoconnor Yeah if not longer - I'm at 30+ hours in my play through"

Game. Set. Match.

Houston wins.

Fatality.

[Iakus]

Lt. Morke wrote...

I don't want to read though 78 pages of "instant buy" or " canceling my pre-order", so is there any important information?

Special Bioware Pulse damage control description  Wednesday of what this MP entails

Modifié par iakus, 10 octobre 2011 - 10:52 .

[didymos1120]

marshalleck wrote...

didymos1120 wrote...

Taritu wrote...

They chose to put resources into MP.  By definition those resources could have been used on something else in the game.

Yes, and they could also have been used on some other game entirely.  

So we're not getting a new IP because EA forced Bioware to add multiplayer to a single-player RPG?

Free lunch, blah, blah, platitudes, etc.

[Brockololly]

gammameggon wrote...

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?

Just look at the original Game Informer article that revealed DA2- there was plenty of stuff claimed there which never came to fruition as well.

The whole wishy washy politician type non comittal PR speak BioWare has started doing more heavily of late is completely off putting and comes across as incredibly disingenuous. Sure, they want to keep stuff like MP a secret until they can reveal it, but when you have a contentious feature like MP, why don't they just be up front about it instead of resorting to distortions and lies when they know that its actually going to be in the game?

It just makes you not trust anything BioWare says.


As for the actual MP, I really don't care as thats not why I'd be interested in a ME game, even if they tack some story elements on to it and claim its the most innovative story driven co-op ever. Its more likely a cheap way to keep DLC pumping out after release.

If I want to play multiplayer, I'll go to something built from the ground up for MP- like Battlefield or L4D.


And for all the talk of it not taking away from the single player, didn't Montreal help out on ME2 in some capacity? Its not so much a matter of the single player directly suffering but more likely what didn't they put into the game because they used their resources on MP? Could they have put in more full time companions? Maybe space combat? Or more fleshed out worlds to explore?

Wasn't very much interested in ME3 in any event, but this news just makes it easier to ignore, especially given how poorly BioWare has handled the reveal of MP.

Modifié par Brockololly, 10 octobre 2011 - 10:53 .

[Spartanburger]

Lt. Morke wrote...

I don't want to read though 78 pages of "instant buy" or " canceling my pre-order", so is there any important information?

Not really.
Just: 
It's CO-OP multiplayer, and the SP remains as long as the SP of ME2, if not longer.