3794 réponses à ce sujet

[RyuGuitarFreak]

ddman12 wrote...

RyuGuitarFreak wrote...

sedrikhcain wrote...

"Success in multi-player will have a direct impact on the outcome of the single player campaign"


NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO...

I have now moved from concerned, to worried, to panic mode.

Christ's sake...it's OPTIONAL.

And completely UNNECESSARY. Honestly, I want someone to explain to me why coop play is important to the series?
If you're playing for mindless combat you're already playing the wrong game.

It isn't "important", I agree with that. Never has been. It's something they came out with now.
The point is: they're gonna make it. You can play it, or you can ignore it. It's optional, they've given us this. There, done. Deal with it. Don't wanna play it, don't play it, you can achieve everything in the story even if you completely ignore this thread or any information on the mp to begin with. Don't wanna play anything of the game, don't buy it. It's that simple.

[Dragoonlordz]

1136342t54 wrote...


"it is still possible to achieve the optimal, complete ending of the game in Mass Effect 3 through single-player alone."

Had to do this.

Don't make yourself look more stupid than you already have. Reapeating the same flawed PR statement over and over without a clue as to why it is flawed just shows your stupidity.

[Bekkael]

Cancer Puppet wrote...

Very interested to see how MP impacts SP...

If it's an option to replace planet scanning, I'm all for it.

[Mercuron]

Sounds great to me and nice to see it's not completely divorced from the SP campaign - while at the same time being optional.

The naysayers will never be convinced MP is a good idea in any form, but that's fine, as trying to persuade them otherwise is a waste of resources that could be spent on singlep-, I mean, commenting on reasonable posts.

[didymos1120]

Ghost-621 wrote...

 Bioware has taken the Mass Effect series (a character-driven story and narrative, individuality-based and something that shines on its own for simply having one of the greatest campaigns), turned it on its side, and sliced its throat.

Now there's some quality drama. The rhetoric is ramping up nicely.  I wonder when we'll get a "and herded it into the gas chamber" post? 

[Rafficus III]

I'm a little lost at words right now. People are actually cancelling their pre-orders because a game they have been waiting on for years instituted a co-op multiplayer mode? By the looks of it, a majority of the chief complaints are those from posters who did not read everything Priestly, an actual Bioware employee, posted. This isn't COD, this is optional, you will not be playing with or against swarms of Shepard/Garrus/Wrex/Tali, it's used to provide alternatives and in no way or shape prevents the player from achieving all outcomes that are possible in single player mode.
I can understand if you have different opinions but at least read what the company actually says in it's entirety. Unless you work for Bioware do not jump to conclusions of a game that has not yet been released and please, just please, read before posting. I know it must be hard to read several paragraphs in a sitting, but read before you go off on the "Bioware/EA ruined ME3 and made it a COD" tirade. Just please. That's all I want for Christmas lol.

[1136342t54_]

sedrikhcain wrote...

RyuGuitarFreak wrote...

sedrikhcain wrote...

"Success in multi-player will have a direct impact on the outcome of the single player campaign"


NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO...

I have now moved from concerned, to worried, to panic mode.

Christ's sake...it's OPTIONAL.

Doesn't matter. It means if I want to explore every aspect of the single-player campaign, then I must engage in multiplayer, otherwise I miss out. EPIC FAIL TO END EPIC FAILS!

And Christ has nothing to do with this.

"it is still possible to achieve the optimal, complete ending of the game in Mass Effect 3 through single-player alone."

[shepskisaac]

jeweledleah wrote...

is it uncompromiced really.  with resources devoted to developing and entirely DIFFERENT campaign that CAN nulify some bad decisions, that is if you play multiplayer of course and thus rendering someof the choices nuland void.  not to mention - resources.  they are not unlimited. and this sounds like a major understaking.

meh, I'mdone raging.  I have stated my opinion, bioware, if they read it(and mynotes onmy canceled order)  will know exactly what made me give up on them.  I'm done.

Resources go to 1 thing mainly - paying the devs. If you think EA would've hired all the extra devs to SP if MP didn't exist, you're deluding yourself.

Modifié par IsaacShep, 11 octobre 2011 - 02:40 .

[Dionkey]

1136342t54 wrote...

Dionkey wrote...

didymos1120 wrote...
So. What.  That doesn't mean they WOULD HAVE been.  How hard is this to grasp?

Holy mother of god....
OKAY, LISTEN TO ME: I am saying if Bioware did not sell out to EA or if they did sell out to EA and they were actually a sensible publisher, it WOULD have been invested in better features. Instead, Bioware chose a big publisher with open arms and thus completely sent their company down the drain. Understand me?

Your assuming that Bioware would have as much money as it has with EA then without EA.

So Bioware is greedy? I've seen amazing games created by small studios, you don't need a marketing campaign to make a product good.

[Complistic]

sedrikhcain wrote...

RyuGuitarFreak wrote...

sedrikhcain wrote...

"Success in multi-player will have a direct impact on the outcome of the single player campaign"


NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO...

I have now moved from concerned, to worried, to panic mode.

Christ's sake...it's OPTIONAL.

Doesn't matter. It means if I want to explore every aspect of the single-player campaign, then I must engage in multiplayer, otherwise I miss out. EPIC FAIL TO END EPIC FAILS!

And Christ has nothing to do with this.

uhh no, you don't.

[Whatever42]

Digifi wrote...


Huh?  The co-op probably has very little dialog.  There may be some cut-scenes...if it follows a story narrative at all.  I'm seeing more like a bunch of different maps and you form a group and go.

Why would you assume that? This isn't the first time Bioware has added multiplayer to an RPG. They didn't pull all the dialogue options out of those games. 

SWTOR uses the exact same dialogue wheel and darkside/lightside options. This is what we'll see in ME3. That is my bold prediction. I WILL be back to tell everyone that I told you so when its confirmed. Thanks. 

[Kmead15]

sedrikhcain wrote...

It means if I want to explore every aspect of the single-player campaign, then I must engage in multiplayer, otherwise I miss out.

Where'd it say that?

[Ruthac_Arus]

Thanks for the update, Chris! I'd never seriously considered buying a XBox Live Gold account, but after seeing this I believe I'll be getting one before the year's out. At least one of my Mass Effect-loving mates, my bro, and I will most definitely be checking this out. But the question is, how do I divide my time between the two modes? @_@

[AdmiralCheez]

sedrikhcain wrote...

Doesn't matter. It means if I want to explore every aspect of the single-player campaign, then I must engage in multiplayer, otherwise I miss out. EPIC FAIL TO END EPIC FAILS!

No you won't.  Read the OP a little more carefully this time.

And Christ has nothing to do with this.

Actually, Christ has everything to do with this, because people who don't read the OP before throwing a ragefit make Baby Jesus cry.

[sedrikhcain]

ddman12 wrote...

RyuGuitarFreak wrote...

sedrikhcain wrote...

"Success in multi-player will have a direct impact on the outcome of the single player campaign"


NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO...

I have now moved from concerned, to worried, to panic mode.

Christ's sake...it's OPTIONAL.

And completely UNNECESSARY. Honestly, I want someone to explain to me why coop play is important to the series?
If you're playing for mindless combat you're already playing the wrong game.

Too. ****. right.

[AlphaJarmel]

JeffZero wrote...

ratzerman wrote...

AlphaJarmel wrote...

The biggest problem I have with this is that horrible sounding Galactic Readiness level crap.  So essentially all our choices boil down to a bar and how far filled up it is?

Yeah, that sounds pretty damn bad.

And that so-called bar can get filled up more or less based on decisions in the first two games too, chances are.

I mean I know the story was heading in to the recruiting armies section but it sounds like they're reducing all the previous choices to points.  It also implies that there won't be that many multiple endings.  If the bar is filled you get the best ending.  2/3rds filled you get a good ending.  1/2 filled you get generic okay ending and anything less is bad ending.  Why can't we have multiple good endings and variations on the other levels?  Why would they do this?

[Walker White]

TheKingBoar wrote...

If you do a iOS app, do an Android/Blackberry too for those of us who refuse to have Apple products in our houses

Android apps don't make money unless it is established IP (e.g. launched first on the iPhone). Plus have you ever tried to write a game on the Android?  Hardware fragmentation is completely killing that platform.  It is like the dark days of PC gaming, where trying to get an application to run on your machine was a total crap shoot.

[DaringMoosejaw]

sedrikhcain wrote...

Doesn't matter. It means if I want to explore every aspect of the single-player campaign, then I must engage in multiplayer, otherwise I miss out. EPIC FAIL TO END EPIC FAILS!

And Christ has nothing to do with this.

Actually if you, you know, read the whole thing, you'd have learned that MP is simply an alternative method of raising your 'Readiness'. You can do stuff in the single player gave to max it out exactly as much as you could in MP and get the exact same result.

[slimgrin]

DCopeland wrote...

You have the intelligence of a chimp.

[ddman12]

slimgrin wrote...

sedrikhcain wrote...

I don't WANT multiplayer. I don't WANT my experience in multiplayer linked to single player in any way. I never even wanted that stuff in the game to begin with. It's bad enough it's in the game at all, now we find out that multiplayer will directly affect your single player experience. Yes, I get that they're telling us you'll be able to achieve the same ends in other ways but the content won't be the same and now if I want to experience as much as possible in the single player modes, I am forced to deal with multiplayer. NO! NO! NO! NO! NO!

This is TERRIBLE! I've been starving for this game for months and now this deeply troubling news. It's slipping away. It's all slipping away. Mass Effect addict that I am, I will buy this game, and I will play it. But that's it. I'm done. And I mean it. I love the Star Wars universe, and KOTOR, too, but they took that the MMO path and as a result I'm not buying it.

This is very, VERY disappointing news.

This is how popular publishers make money. Most people want muiltplayer because they need the instant stimulation and the connection to 'real' people. 

Then go out and have a beer with your friends, or go play an MMO.

[JeffZero]

"it is still possible to achieve the optimal, complete ending of the game in Mass Effect 3 through single-player alone."

[RocketManSR2]

sedrikhcain wrote...

I don't WANT multiplayer. I don't WANT my experience in multiplayer linked to single player in any way. I never even wanted that stuff in the game to begin with. It's bad enough it's in the game at all, now we find out that multiplayer will directly affect your single player experience. Yes, I get that they're telling us you'll be able to achieve the same ends in other ways but the content won't be the same and now if I want to experience as much as possible in the single player modes, I am forced to deal with multiplayer. NO! NO! NO! NO! NO!

This is TERRIBLE! I've been starving for this game for months and now this deeply troubling news. It's slipping away. It's all slipping away. Mass Effect addict that I am, I will buy this game, and I will play it. But that's it. I'm done. And I mean it. I love the Star Wars universe, and KOTOR, too, but they took that the MMO path and as a result I'm not buying it.

This is very, VERY disappointing news.

You know, now that I've taken a step back, overreaction posts like this are pretty damn funny. You will still be able to get the bestest, most optimal ending by your choices in the SP for 1,2, and 3. Relax before you hurt something.

[onelifecrisis]

1136342t54 wrote...

onelifecrisis wrote...

1136342t54 wrote...

onelifecrisis wrote...

1136342t54 wrote...

onelifecrisis wrote...

Yer... like, it'll make you cry when the ending sucks because you didn't play co-op.

Why do people post without reading the FAQ?

I could ask you the same question.

The methods by which a player can succeed without co-op have yet to be defined, but if past games are any indication then it's going to mean either exploring 100 copy-pasted warehouses or scanning 100 planets for minerals.

GaW is going to imbalance the game, no two ways about it.

Now I see you haven't even played attention to ME3 info. In ME2 many N7 missions on uncharted worlds could be avoided to complete the game you just scanned crap. In ME3 there is no scanning nor a lot of UNC or N7 missions.
 The decisions in the past game and actions in ME3 heavily affect the game. Playing the MP isn't necessary and the FAQ never stated how much it affects the game.

Read the FAQ and brush up on ME3 knowledge. Then come back to the thread.

I never said you had to do N7 missions in ME2, and I already knew everything else you just posted. Unfortunately I'm still missing the bit where I'm wrong and/or should give a rats ass wtf you think I should do.

Then why claim you would have to do 2 things in ME3 to win when you just stated you know it isn't true? Its starting to seem like you are intentionally lying .

The point, which I apparently didn't labor enough, is that the alternative to co-op will likely be laborious. Co-op gives a benefit in SP. We know that you don't need that benefit to win, but it will help. This implies that the same benefits (the same "optimal readiness level") can be achieved through SP alone, but we don't know how. Options are:
1) Extra SP missions for those who don't do co-op? Not likely IMO.
2) Some sort of laborious crap like planet scanning. Very likely IMO.

As I said in the edit that you missed, either co-op will make the game too easy or SP will be too laborious. You can't have it both ways.

[In Exile]

Il Divo wrote...
Contrary to my earlier opinion, this sounds halfway decent. If given the choice, I'd still prefer these resources go to a single player campaign. But as it stands, my interest is piqued.

I'm drafting you for MP if it turns out to be good and/or neccesary for a good SP playthrough. Just as an fyi. We can regale each other in tales of how the JE story structure was better. 

[Zanallen]

This thread is so freakin' hilarious.