3794 réponses à ce sujet

[Lard]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Lard wrote...

Lots of people bought the Spice Girls, lots of people buy Justin Bieber too.

There are plenty of examples of people buying crap.

But you see, Portal 2 wasn't crap.

It was meh at best.

[Il Divo]

Darth Vengeant wrote...

Lard wrote...

BatmanPWNS wrote...

I am pretty sure you don't even know 1% of the fans opinion about MP and reduce it? It didn't stop Assassin's Creed from selling, it didn't stop Portal, it sure as hell didn't stop Uncharted 2. Yes they may have DLC maps released but ME has useless stuff like appearence pack and DLC weapons released just to get money as well.

Lots of people bought the Spice Girls, lots of people buy Justin Bieber too.

There are plenty of examples of people buying crap.

+1000000000000000.

So I assume we can apply this argument to Mass Effect 1 as well? Popularity is always acceptable as long as you enjoy whats popular.

[Ancient Metal]

Multiplayer Effects Single Player. Copy/paste into your url.

http://www.neoseeker...-single-player/

[BeefoTheBold]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Lard wrote...

The reactions from gaming sites has not been positive.

Citation needed.

The general reaction, except for a vocal minority on here, has not been positive.

Unless you count all the individual users that are excited/okay with/indifferent about MP and then count all the people mildly to ragingly negative about it, I'm going to call bullsh*t.

I can't speak for the entire internet, but Gamespot's take wasn't exactly positive.

http://www.gamespot....shnell-on-games

[JigPig]

JigPig wrote...
Let's say $500,000 was spent on the MP component.

If that $500,000 was spent on the SP portion of the game. It would improve it.

Fact.

Waiting for a retort.

[rolson00]

Lard wrote...

BatmanPWNS wrote...

I am pretty sure you don't even know 1% of the fans opinion about MP and reduce it? It didn't stop Assassin's Creed from selling, it didn't stop Portal, it sure as hell didn't stop Uncharted 2. Yes they may have DLC maps released but ME has useless stuff like appearence pack and DLC weapons released just to get money as well.

Lots of people bought the Spice Girls, lots of people buy Justin Bieber too.

There are plenty of examples of people buying crap.

careful you'll have no brains left

[Melchiah109]

DarkRiku7 wrote...

I like how the MP is merely only an alternate way of getting the desired ending, because I rarely get the chance to use Xbox Live.

Is it just me failing to notice it or have people actually calmed down quite impressively about this?

All I see are the same folks trying to twist words into a hammer and beat anyone who doesn't think that MP is the devil with it. The same people as yesterday. But they are clearly the vocal majority and are the heralds of our salvation.

[bigheadzach]

Lard wrote...

Oh well, it's still another game where MP was added just to put a bullet point on a box and  to attract the dudebro shooter crowd.

I'm a multiplayer supporter and I HATE the dudebro shooter crowd. How dare you generalize my viewpoint on an anonymous internet forum.

[GreenSoda]

Someone With Mass wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...
Most of the audience is not alienated.

Shockingly enough, the BSN does not accurately represent everyone who plays Mass Effect.

Yeah. There are millions of players and fans out there, and BSN has what...just about ten thousand members?

5 million members -and that was 2 years ago...yeah

Modifié par GreenSoda, 11 octobre 2011 - 09:55 .

[Cainne Chapel]

Lard wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

Why are people against Bioware expanding ME3's audience?

Not everyone that bought ME1 and ME2 will buy ME3, so Bioware has an obligation to itself and its shareholders to at the very least make up this deficit.

No, they have an obligation to the audience, not the shareholders. Do the shareholders make the game? No. Screw them.

That's the problem with the situation. People who only care about making money see what's popular and say "Do that", not caring whether it adds to the game or not.

I'm not against them expanding their audience, but not at the expense of the SP game.

No company has an obligation to the audience that buys its entertainment product anymore than actually selling the product and servicing it if something goes wrong.

Otherwise adding features more consumers can use is NOT a bad thing.  And yes Shareholders DO make the game, not directly mind you, but indirectly by adding money to the companies coffers.  Just as the company has an obligation to pay its employees, it has an obligation to do well for the shareholders who are often times customers as well.  

So dont screw the shareholders, or else you wouldnt have a game with a nice budget   Granted without consumers they wouldnt either, but this is a move to draw more consumers so... to Bioware/EA its a win/win.

and how does adding more features to a game thats already the length of the past games cause an expense to it? Wouldnt we then be getting more bang for the buck?

and as a company that produces entertianment...well they have to make sure the game is at least as entertaining as the two that came before it don't they?

[Lard]

bigheadzach wrote...
 what right does the old crowd have to insist the new crowd can't have their features?

What right does the new crowd have to insist that we play through features that we don't want?

[Darkeus]

DaringMoosejaw wrote...

Darkeus wrote...

I love all this blind faith that the pro-MP people have.

I was AGAINST multiplayer before Chris's posting of this thread. I thought it would be random, tacked on and have nothing to do with the story. I thought it'd sap away from the single player. But after reading through the details and actually being informed on the matter, I've changed my tune. It's being developed by a seperate team and actually looks kind of cool. I look forward to playing through it with my buddies. The effect it was on SP is entirely optional and just as attainable through SP, so my worries are gone.

Could it be an unmitigated disaster? Rushed? Anything's possible, but that I won't know until I get the game.

Like I said, I am on the opposite side.  A horrible disaster is what I am seeing and 80 bucks for a Collectors Edition for a game that may have just been ruined is a big deal for my wallet.

And my worries are not gone because of the faq.  It was a PR Faq that was rushed out to quell the outrage.  They could say anything and that is where blind faith comes in.

You really believe everything you read?  Especially coming from a company that was feeling MAJOR heat?

[NOD-INFORMER37]

DarkRiku7 wrote...

I like how the MP is merely only an alternate way of getting the desired ending, because I rarely get the chance to use Xbox Live.

Is it just me failing to notice it or have people actually calmed down quite impressively about this?

I think ppl are more in the grey zone(some more optimistic/pessimistic than others, which is fine) but when Bioware releases more info and the actual game comes out then we'll see if it really is a good thing or not.  

[Melchiah109]

Lard wrote...

bigheadzach wrote...
 what right does the old crowd have to insist the new crowd can't have their features?

What right does the new crowd have to insist that we play through features that we don't want?

lol.

[Any_ILL]

Wow! I was not really for the MP in the first place but I'm impressed by what I'm reading. I may even try it out.
I will be furious though if the single player is botched.
2.25 years since ME2 is a little short, but with the same engine and compared to DA2 I'm still hopeful.

[BlaCKRodjj]

Lard wrote...

DaringMoosejaw wrote...

Lard wrote...

Oh you mean the game that just had paid DLC released for it? Your point?

That DLC was free.

Oh well, it's still another game where MP was added just to put a bullet point on a box and  to attract the dudebro shooter crowd.

Yeah, because Portal 2 is all about bullet holes and explotions.
Not everyone can play an RPG because it's much more time consuming than playing... say... a round of CoD. People play games because they're interactive, fun and create a distraction from stressful things. If that time is spent playing MP or FPS is their option. Now, if you want to spent your time playing the SP part of ME3, do it, no one is forcing down your throat the MP. There's just no statement as of yet on what part will the MP component help to "fill" the "bar" of "Galactic Readiness". But it is stated that you can achieve everything on the SP without the MP because it's OPTIONAL, so there's no excuse to b*tch but to do it just for the sake of b*tch. Of course, you'll do it anyways since you don't want that "horrible MP corrupting my pure SP DVD"

Edit: MP OPTIONAL

Modifié par BlaCKRodjj, 11 octobre 2011 - 09:58 .

[We Tigers]

Darkeus wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Darkeus wrote...

I love all this blind faith that the pro-MP people have.

Blind faith?

Because I'm more like, "Wow, this sounds pretty cool.  I wonder if Bioware can pull it off?"

What you should be asking is, "What was cut from the game or what problems and bugs will arise from them trying to shoehorn Multiplayer in the game?"

Asking the wrong questions my friend.  Yes, it is blind faith.

This angle confuses me a bit.  If ME3 were coming out in December, would you be saying "Already?  What was cut from the game, or what problems and bugs will arise from them not taking extra time on it?"   There are all sorts of content and expenditure decisions that get made everywhere along the way.  Would you apply this standard to any feature in the game you don't care for, whether it's gay romances, certain characters returning, types of weapons, etc.? 

If so, okay.  If not, I wouldn't sweat it so much.  Stuff getting cut from the game or not finished or whatever could happen at any number of junctures/decision points.

[stysiaq]

JigPig wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

JigPig wrote...

If the money + time that was devoted into adding an MP component was used on the SP portion, SP would be longer.

Fact.

Let me give you another little fact. The multiplayer part was made by another studio.

Does the addition of co-op multiplayer missions impact the scope or quality of the single-player experience?

No. A dedicated team from our recently formed BioWare Montreal studio has been focused on creating the multiplayer game features while the main game continued to be developed by the team in BioWare Edmonton. Both teams are integrated under the same leadership group that produced Mass Effect 1 and 2, led by Casey Hudson. BioWare remains dedicated to delivering one of the most amazing single-player campaigns gamers have ever experienced.

Let's say $500,000 was spent on the MP component.

If that $500,000 was spent on the SP portion of the game. It would improve it.

Fact.

1. it fits the game, because the fights are everywhere
2. it allows you to play for a moment as someone other than Shepard, which is awesome
3. It allows you to enjoy the universe even more
4. you didn't play it, you don't judge it
5. you don't have to play it
6. longer SP is not always the best choice, because SP isn't the peak of gameplay.
7. you can play a gazzilion other games and stop whining "OMG MY ME3 SP IS TOO SHORT D: "
8. whining about the obvious fact, that AAA titles are made to make as much money as possible is stupid
9. I'd rather fight along 3 other people for a while rather than spend the same amount of time mining dem minerals
10. ME gameplay is awesome, and ME3 will consist of shooting things 90% of the time, so I don't see a reason why not include more shooting

Facts.

Also
11. If Bio would spend another 2 million dollars on SP it would improve it
12. If Bio would spend 4 million dollars more it would improve it
13. If Canadian government would spend 2% of their GDP on ME3's SP it would improve it

[DravenShep]

For all the people complaining, I honestly hate the idea of adding a MP that can have an affect on my game. MP in it's own right "MIGHT" be interesting, but it should NOT have anything to do with Shep's Story. Leave MP on it's own disk and let it be it's own thing. I and millions others have enjoyed the Single Player only aspect of the game, why try and fix something that is NOT broke? If it does have it setup where I am forced into MP either because of acheivments, or story progression, then I never finish the trilogy.

Just had to rant, whether you agree or not.

[Maeshone]

JigPig wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

JigPig wrote...

If the money + time that was devoted into adding an MP component was used on the SP portion, SP would be longer.

Fact.

Let me give you another little fact. The multiplayer part was made by another studio.

Does the addition of co-op multiplayer missions impact the scope or quality of the single-player experience?

No. A dedicated team from our recently formed BioWare Montreal studio has been focused on creating the multiplayer game features while the main game continued to be developed by the team in BioWare Edmonton. Both teams are integrated under the same leadership group that produced Mass Effect 1 and 2, led by Casey Hudson. BioWare remains dedicated to delivering one of the most amazing single-player campaigns gamers have ever experienced.

Let's say $500,000 was spent on the MP component.

If that $500,000 was spent on the SP portion of the game. It would improve it.

Fact.

It is also extremely likely that Bioware only got those 500.000 BECAUSE they were adding multiplayer. Unless you can PROVE otherwise, this is the most likely circumstance. Because no matter what you may think about EA, they are not morons and know how to run a business. (hint: it's not by making one of your most succesful developers dig for spare change in the office couch)

[Cainne Chapel]

Darth Vengeant wrote...

Lard wrote...

BatmanPWNS wrote...

I am pretty sure you don't even know 1% of the fans opinion about MP and reduce it? It didn't stop Assassin's Creed from selling, it didn't stop Portal, it sure as hell didn't stop Uncharted 2. Yes they may have DLC maps released but ME has useless stuff like appearence pack and DLC weapons released just to get money as well.

Lots of people bought the Spice Girls, lots of people buy Justin Bieber too.

There are plenty of examples of people buying crap.

+1000000000000000.

Lots of people buy Michael Jackson, The Beetles and Aerosmith too....

just because something is popular, doesn't automagically make it bad.

[rolson00]

JigPig wrote...
Let's say $500,000 was spent on the MP component.

If that $500,000 was spent on the SP portion of the game. It would improve it.

Fact.

oh sorry i had no idea you were an expert

[Ruud333]

101 pages in 21 hours!

[BeefoTheBold]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

Why are people against Bioware expanding ME3's audience?

Not everyone that bought ME1 and ME2 will buy ME3, so Bioware has an obligation to itself and its shareholders to at the very least make up this deficit. Now, presumably the same reasons people had for not buying ME1 or ME2 will still stand with regards to ME3 so Bioware has to try a new approach to expand ME3's audience - for example by adding new functionalities, like Kinect, or new modes, such as co-op.

I think the co-op will be fun, and I'm sure there will be many other ME fans that think so, but I don't doubt that it was added to increase the game's market appeal. It may very well have the added bonus of adding to the experience, but I don't think that's Bioware's primary aim with MP. And I'm okay with that, because I know that at the end of the day Bioware is a company and needs to make money. They've made plenty of games that I've enjoyed, and the ME universe is one of my all-time favourites in gaming and so anything that makes more people interested in this game is fine with me.

To quote myself from another site...

"Nonetheless, I will give BioWare an opportunity despite my dislike of their decision. Multiplayer could end up being good for all we know. What I do find confusing is who precisely are they appealing to? FPS gamers will continue to have no interest in ME regardless of this addition.

Why would they toss aside Black Ops, Resistance 3, Gears of War 3 or the whole slew of new games coming out that are specifically designed with their interests in mind, just to play a tacked on mode from BioWare, a company who is essentially a novice at this field? Their number one complaint with this series is the abundance of dialogue and cut-scenes that take away hours from the shooting extravaganza. Ever notice why the majority of multiplayer games have quick stories, often told through the gameplay and are relatively short?"

Well said.

If you chase two rabbits, you will lose them both.
-Old Native American saying

[Redefined]

Ancient Metal wrote...

What I have noticed is that lost in translation in all of this....guess who? 

Commander Shepard.

ME3 is about Shepard and finding a way to defeat the Reapers....or stop them....anything....to save organic life. Now Shepard has been swept under the rug and at the very least there are corresponding characters.

Sure....I'm sure the common response will be don't use it, but just knowing it exists....and that it effects single player....is despicable. And resources used on MP could have been directly used on other aspects...any other aspect...of ME3 and made the game better. But its not, and we know now why there was a delay.

People should be ashamed....instead of the focus being soley on Commander Shepard as a PC....a character many people poured dozens and dozens of hours into and two games with transferring choices....they sold out for.....oh Lookie, I can be a Turian!!!!!!!!!! In reality, ME3 isn't Shepard's story, and the focus is now off of it and into a jumbled mess.

This is horrendous news, and I am frustrated and disgusted beyond words at this decision. I know my girlfriend is, too. Multiplayer diminishes everything I was looking forward to in this game....now I know full effort wasn't given to the game and we were basically misled into believing it wouldn't be in Mass Effect 3.

I was a fan who thought there were some good things in DA2, but overall felt it was a much inferior product to what I came to expect from BioWare and overall a fairly "shoddy" game. I'm not happy at all with the direction BioWare is going, and making choices that are directly opposite of my likes and dislikes as an avid fan of rpgs. 

So much so, along with my girlfriend, that we have both cancelled our preorders of Mass Effect 3.

Hahaha, are you serious?! You've got to be kidding me. FOR THE LOVE OF GOD.... you don't have to  play Co-op. It's totally optional. IT DOES NOT EFFECT YOUR SP experience, unless you want it to. The mass effect team is now twice the size so that they can make the same high quality SP experience they're known for... as well as the Co-op. ME3's SP will be of the same quality as all the others, even more so. Co-op is just extra, optional.
O-P-T-I-O-N-A-L. just figured I'd spell it out for you.

Oh, and I got news for you. the series is not called "Shepard Effect" it's Mass Effect.
Eventually you wont be playing as shepard anymore.... might as well start now.