2368 réponses à ce sujet

[In Exile]

Dragoonlordz wrote...
They actually said they would have liked to make all DLC free on 360 version too but due to M$ policy over it's XBL, M$ won't allow it.

Why do you think free DLC is putting consumers first? Their business model is based on goodwill. If you're Canadian, it's exactly what TD Bank does vs. BMO or RBC. Good customer service encourages brand loyalty which gives you a steady stream of income, and then you can focus on incremental growth.

[Chewgumma]

I was someone who was venemously opposed to multiplayer in Mass Effect. I absolutely detested the idea. This however, I'm not sure either way.

I enjoyed the spec-ops missions in Modern Warfare 2, in fact that's about all I enjoyed about the game. So long as the additional players aren't neccesary to be able to play, and so long as there is split screen support then I have no problem with these co-op missions.

If it's really thought through then they can be a fun little companion to the main campaign designed to expand upon the war against the Reapers in greater detail.

Modifié par Chewgumma, 10 octobre 2011 - 11:16 .

[didymos1120]

makenzieshepard wrote...

I saw your links,  Maybe you didn't because one of the direct quote used in the links was "Mass Effect is a single player game."

Coincidentally enough, we stopped seeing them say that shortly after ME3 was officially announced.  Never paid much attention to that at the time, myself.  Hindsight, though...

[Ghost Lightning]

1136342t54 wrote...

That was a question. Also if you heard it before then why act like its news to you?

oic, sorry about that. And I was just expressing my disdain at the fact. But you cleared it up by telling me it was a question so now I see. 

But still...**** multiplayer

[RamirezWolfen]

83 pages in one day? Holy sh*t.....

[Sylvianus]

didymos1120 wrote...

Ahglock wrote...

They not to long ago expressly said there wasn'r multiplayer in ME3, so yeah they lied.

Where and when?  Because I've never seen an explicit denial, just evasions.  That was one of the major factors in keeping the rumors going, in fact.

I can swear I saw an explicit text recently, and on my native forum, everybody who were ****ing about multiplayer were even reassured at the time, now they are furious because finally, they were right to worry about this. Now maybe I misread it, but i'm not the only one, so I doubt but maybe. And I agree with what you are saying. We need facts. If someone could find the proof, it would be cool.

But in principle, one that says a company has the right to lie to its consumers worried or yes they lied us, so what, is a fool. And I remember that I am for the multiplayer, but let's stay decent and not saying anything please...

Modifié par Sylvianus, 10 octobre 2011 - 11:17 .

[GuardianAngel470]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

In Exile wrote...

Captain_Obvious wrote...
I'll bite.  Name three (you wrote developers, not developer) who are the ones who consistently put fans first and profits second.  I'll allow the people who made the Witcher 1 &2, that's CD Projekt (I think).  So give me two more.  I'd like to check them out. 

CD Projeckt totally puts cash first. They're just not stupid enough to set their goodwill on fire. It's why TW2 was made with the gamepad in mind - to make it easy to port to consoles. 

They actually said they would have liked to make all DLC free on 360 version too but due to M$ policy over it's XBL, M$ won't allow it.

Last night I downloaded a free DLC for Portal 2 on my Xbox. It's possible, but I'm not really sure what lengths Valve went to to do it.

They may have had to pay MS, who knows.

[DaringMoosejaw]

RamirezWolfen wrote...

83 pages in one day? Holy sh*t.....

Didn't the Ashley thread hit over 200 pages in a night?

[Edge 7]

b09boy wrote...

Edge 7 wrote...

2) The playthrough you're describing sounds like soldier on casual. Everything you just discribed contributed to the game being tactical and challenging. Visit the ME2 build forum if you doubt me.

4) That still assumes co-op would use the exact class structure as the singleplayer campaign. Is it not reasonable to assume that players will have less powers to compensate for the presence of four of them?

2) The game is a repetitive cover-based shooting callery no matter your class build, and on that is quite easy.

4) So, again, it won't play anything like the actual game.  So what's the point?

Here, I'll give you the link: http://social.biowar...1/index/2749272
Please check that out.

If you think that Mass Effect 2 is repitive, I'd love to know what you thought of the first one. Or any other game, for that matter.

How does limiting the number of powers a player has make it not "play anything like the actual game"? You've baffled me.

[Dragoonlordz]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

Last night I downloaded a free DLC for Portal 2 on my Xbox. It's possible, but I'm not really sure what lengths Valve went to to do it.

They may have had to pay MS, who knows.

I think Valve had to pay out of their own pocket, M$ are very rigid about DLC over XBL. (A guess).

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 10 octobre 2011 - 11:20 .

[Darkeus]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...



So I'll ask again: If Bioware is satisfied with singleplayer and they are satisfied with gameplay, AI, and all that, why not make a coop option if EA asks them to? If fixing what isn't broken ends up breaking it, are you or I better or worse off?

I believe I made my point.  Just because thery are satisfied means nothing if the game is crap because of wasted time on MP..  Point, blank, simple.

And my saying it is unwanted is seeing the reaction from a multitude of sites, not just here.

It is an uneeded feature that odds are has taken away from the single player experience with time and resources.  That is my opinion, and opinion I believe is correct.

It will be a wasted feature and only a handful will play it.  This will not bring in new players.

Again, waste of time.  There can be resources used to improve the game and squash bugs.  Hell, like one person said, how about making sure FILE TRANSFERS work 99% of the time?

Modifié par Darkeus, 10 octobre 2011 - 11:19 .

[TheShogunOfHarlem]

1136342t54 wrote...

TheShogunOfHarlem wrote...

hhh89 wrote...

TheShogunOfHarlem wrote...

For some reason I am still skeptical. Plus Why do I think that all vehicle segment will be strictly on rails.

They've already confirmed on Twitter that the vehicle segments will be more or less like ME2. No vehicle exploration in ME3.

AND... You proved my point for me. ME2 didn't provide a fix for the problematic ME1 vehicle exploration. Using that mechanic to me means more linear gameplay.

It isn't fixing Vehicle exploration since there will be no vehicle exploration during a Galaxy wide war.

Geez. That has always been the most weak sauce argument for not having exploration. In a war you need: rescourses to keep fighting that war, Intelligence to try to learn as much about you enemy as possible,  Clandstine Star systems and Worlds for providing a save haven for non-combatants and staging areas for assaults. All of these material needs can only be found through EXPLORATION! Without them the War is hopeless.

[didymos1120]

Ghost Lightning wrote...

hhh89 wrote...



twitter.com/#!/gtez/status/123532790192021504
"So the same amount of content that was in #ME2 Singleplayer campaign is in #ME3? If so, that's good to hear =D"

"WRT
MB cost per asset ME2>ME3 due to engine improvements - So ME3s a
much bigger game. We were worried about fitting on 2 Discs!"

twitter.com/#!/gtez/status/123532947646193664
"I'm speaking specifically about Single Player cost :)"

same amount as ME2....wtf

I hate this

Read the actual tweets: the "same amount" is not from gtez.  It's from the person responding to his earlier response.

Modifié par didymos1120, 10 octobre 2011 - 11:21 .

[NPH11]

Well, this is it everybody. May as well get it out of the way.

[1136342t54_]

Ghost Lightning wrote...

1136342t54 wrote...

That was a question. Also if you heard it before then why act like its news to you?

oic, sorry about that. And I was just expressing my disdain at the fact. But you cleared it up by telling me it was a question so now I see. 

But still...**** multiplayer

Well the question mark at the end kind of gave it away 

If the multiplayer is basidcally some co op  that is unrelated to the main story then I'm fine. I was mostly assuming its something that is related to the invasion but not Shepard.

[RamirezWolfen]

DaringMoosejaw wrote...

RamirezWolfen wrote...

83 pages in one day? Holy sh*t.....

Didn't the Ashley thread hit over 200 pages in a night?

It did? Damn.....

At least this thread seems to have slowed down.

[rapscallioness]

          *Incoming distress call from BSN*

BSN: "Plz BW.... We want it to be Single Player so badly...plz..... BIOWARE PLZ!"

BW: *Request Denied.
         Setting New Course for Multiplayer.* 
       
         "Many decisions lie ahead. None of them easy."
www.youtube.com/watch   (from the WoW kid and Mass Effect spoof)

[1136342t54_]

TheShogunOfHarlem wrote...
Geez. That has always been the most weak sauce argument for not having exploration. In a war you need: rescourses to keep fighting that war, Intelligence to try to learn as much about you enemy as possible,  Clandstine Star systems and Worlds for providing a save haven for non-combatants and staging areas for assaults. All of these material needs can only be found through EXPLORATION! Without them the War is hopeless.

The Council is a galaxy spanning government that has already gave the Normandy all the resources it needs. Seriously There is no time to mine **** for one frigate while the Galaxies military is getting so butt ****ed to the point where one of the enemies smallest ground vehicles can take ship weaponry!

Do you honestly believe that the Normandy is the only ship capable of gathering resources?

[gammameggon]

Chewgumma wrote...

I was someone who was venemously opposed to multiplayer in Mass Effect. I absolutely detested the idea. This however, I'm not sure either way.

I enjoyed the spec-ops missions in Modern Warfare 2, in fact that's about all I enjoyed about the game. So long as the additional players aren't neccesary to be able to play, and so long as there is split screen support then I have no problem with these co-op missions.

If it's really thought through then they can be a fun little companion to the main campaign designed to expand upon the war against the Reapers in greater detail.

I call DEV POST TO TRY AND CALM THE CROWD!

[gamer_girl]

rapscallioness wrote...


          *Incoming distress call from BSN*

BSN: "Plz BW.... We want it to be Single Player so badly...plz..... BIOWARE PLZ!"

BW: *Request Denied.
         Setting New Course for Multiplayer.* 
       
         "Many decisions lie ahead. None of them easy."
www.youtube.com/watch   (from the WoW kid and Mass Effect spoof)

Technically ME3 is still SP. It is now SP, or MP or both.

[Ghost Lightning]

1136342t54 wrote...

Ghost Lightning wrote...

1136342t54 wrote...

That was a question. Also if you heard it before then why act like its news to you?

oic, sorry about that. And I was just expressing my disdain at the fact. But you cleared it up by telling me it was a question so now I see. 

But still...**** multiplayer

Well the question mark at the end kind of gave it away 

If the multiplayer is basidcally some co op  that is unrelated to the main story then I'm fine. I was mostly assuming its something that is related to the invasion but not Shepard.

I really really, really, hope that the MP is like the co-op missions in RDR. That way they have pretty much nothing to do with the actual game (I refuse to call it the "campaign" because it's a single player game dammit!). And I also hope it isn't some big huge thing that can actually cause the game to have less in it. I know the resurce thing is mostly bull, but still, logic would have it seem that the game may suffer. 

[Cartims]

But......i always play with myself....

Modifié par Cartims, 10 octobre 2011 - 11:28 .

[Esquin]

If this multiplayer feature prevents me playing even 1 moment of the campaign on my own i'm boycotting bioware. They want to put in a set of multiplayer missions separate from the campaign, thats fine, hell it would be fun and I'll enjoy playing them. But if I miss out on even one bit of the main story for this then I will be one unhappy Australian.

[gamer_girl]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

saMOOrai182 wrote...

Another game? Last time I checked Mass Effect was a Story based game. If it adds to the story, then why not?

But I fear doing it now has detracted from the single player experience. It's a valid concern, is it not?

A concern that nobody can prove the validity of one way or another. We cannot compare the quality of single player with MP in the game to the quality of the SP without MP in the game. It's impossible.