3794 réponses à ce sujet

[didymos1120]

LGTX wrote...

 MP is not an advantage, it's an alternative.

Well, to be fair, it is conceivable that the co-op could be advantageous in terms of time spent playing or something along those lines (though I imagine they're trying to equalize things like that as much as they can), but yeah: definitely not in terms of simply being able to see any of the endings.

[rolson00]

onelifecrisis wrote...

rolson00 wrote...

to stop a war with the batarians shepard is still loyal to the alliance
shepards knows that earth cant go to war with the batarians and fight off a reaper invasion

Yeah, I can see how stopping a batarian war is much more important than stopping the reapers /sarcasm

...both races will weaken each other then will be unable to fight the reapers

[armass]

I don't see the batarian war happening in any case.

What kind of idiot race attacks another one druing a war where there's an even more powerful threat around trying to wipe us all out?

[onelifecrisis]

Nohvarr wrote...

onelifecrisis wrote...

Nohvarr wrote...

With the 'Old Machines' on our doorstep we can't be bogged down fighting amongst ourselves. Which is exactly what will happen if Shepard dosen't stand trial.

So Shepard's master plan for stopping the reapers is to go to jail and let the Batarians fight them. Genius.

Shepard can't let let the Batarians go to war against the Humans over this because it will take personel and resources away from the real fight to come. By standing trial he prevents the Batarians from picking a fight which will onl decrease humanities readiness.

Yeah... is it me or is that just a repetition of what you said in your previous reply to me?

[rolson00]

Comsky159 wrote...

rolson00 wrote...

masterkajo wrote...

Don't know if it has been answered or is even know yet but:

Will the multiplayer have spoilers? I mean if I just played the single player for like half an hour and then decide to go multiplayer won't I be spoiled about key battles ahead in the single player? And if I wait until I finish the single player the multiplayer part won#t help my galaxie...

That is what worries me.

the only thing i can suggest is...

Such wit and originality in your argument! <_<
So sick of that damn meme.

heh me too but had to use it once

[rolson00]

Nyoka wrote...

Good OP (although the third FAQ question received a non-answer, but let's try to be positive). There are also people on twitter assuring the single player campaign alone is as long if not longer than ME2, so that part is covered too. No PvP and playing as a Krogan. Alright, my mind = changed.

im going to be turian

[LGTX]

didymos1120 wrote...

LGTX wrote...

 MP is not an advantage, it's an alternative.

Well, to be fair, it is conceivable that the co-op could be advantageous in terms of time spent playing or something along those lines (though I imagine they're trying to equalize things like that as much as they can), but yeah: definitely not in terms of simply being able to see any of the endings.

Time spent playing? You mean like, achieving useful-for-SP stuff via co-op might be faster/slower than in SP itself?

[didymos1120]

armass wrote...

I don't see the batarian war happening in any case.

What kind of idiot race attacks another one druing a war where there's an even more powerful threat around trying to wipe us all out?

That's sort of irrelevant to the trial though, because not everyone (probably more like "hardly anyone") in the Alliance buys the Reaper stuff.  They'd see only the immediate threat.  I also highly doubt the batarians are clued in either.

[Nohvarr]

rolson00 wrote...

Nyoka wrote...

Good OP (although the third FAQ question received a non-answer, but let's try to be positive). There are also people on twitter assuring the single player campaign alone is as long if not longer than ME2, so that part is covered too. No PvP and playing as a Krogan. Alright, my mind = changed.

im going to be turian

I'm going Turian Engineer. I'll keep the Turrets and drones attacking if someone else keeps the Old Machines off my back.

[didymos1120]

LGTX wrote...

Time spent playing? You mean like, achieving useful-for-SP stuff via co-op might be faster/slower than in SP itself?

Yeah. I don't really expect there to be a big disparity, but it's at least possible.

[Wulfram]

didymos1120 wrote...

Well, to be fair, it is conceivable that the co-op could be advantageous in terms of time spent playing or something along those lines (though I imagine they're trying to equalize things like that as much as they can), but yeah: definitely not in terms of simply being able to see any of the endings.

It'll presumably mean that you're more free to make "wrong" decisions without getting a crappy ending.

[Wannabe_Overlord]

Lets see if this game ends up shorter than ME2 or not due to MP eating up dev time.

[Nohvarr]

I don't see the batarian war happening in any case.

What kind of idiot race attacks another one druing a war where there's an even more powerful threat around trying to wipe us all out?

We are talking about the Batarians right? The race of people so ticked off at Humanity that they are spoiling for revenge? To borrow from the Animation "Superman All Stars"

Clark Kent: "....but even though you've infected Superman you'll still die in the electric chair?"

Lex Luthor: "Ah but he'll die first."

Modifié par Nohvarr, 11 octobre 2011 - 09:59 .

[DarthSliver]

I will wait to reserve full judgement on the time I have seen how this truly affects the main game.

But as it stands with the way it sounds, I think I will be giving it a try. I have always wanted to play as an Asari, and I wonder if this elemental is sorta suppose to help you with making the next Mass Effect because we choose race. But choosing race is the real eye catcher for me with Co-Op

[rolson00]

Nohvarr wrote...

rolson00 wrote...

Nyoka wrote...

Good OP (although the third FAQ question received a non-answer, but let's try to be positive). There are also people on twitter assuring the single player campaign alone is as long if not longer than ME2, so that part is covered too. No PvP and playing as a Krogan. Alright, my mind = changed.

im going to be turian

I'm going Turian Engineer. I'll keep the Turrets and drones attacking if someone else keeps the Old Machines off my back.

solder

[didymos1120]

Wulfram wrote...

It'll presumably mean that you're more free to make "wrong" decisions without getting a crappy ending.

The point at which that'd kick in would depend on what the total amount "readiness capital" available for acquisition in SP is.  Or alternately, how large the SP margin of error is. It may be an SM type of situation where you'd have to want to screw up.

[shonefob]

Honest question because I saw some people say it. Do people not want co-op just because they have no friends to play with? I would imagine if they had a friend who played ME they would be excited getting to somewhat share the experience.

[rolson00]

didymos1120 wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

It'll presumably mean that you're more free to make "wrong" decisions without getting a crappy ending.

The point at which that'd kick in would depend on what the total amount "readiness capital" available for acquisition in SP is.  Or alternately, how large the SP margin of error is. It may be an SM type of situation where you'd have to want to screw up.

i think it makes perfect sense for the single player story shepard won't be the only hero mp gives you the chance to play another stroy plus sheps cant win this war on his todd

[onelifecrisis]

Wulfram wrote...

didymos1120 wrote...

Well, to be fair, it is conceivable that the co-op could be advantageous in terms of time spent playing or something along those lines (though I imagine they're trying to equalize things like that as much as they can), but yeah: definitely not in terms of simply being able to see any of the endings.

It'll presumably mean that you're more free to make "wrong" decisions without getting a crappy ending.

Which equivalent to saying that not playing co-op is a "wrong" decision.

[ckolsen]

Fair enough Bioware.... I won't judge you on this... yet.

However, you need to create an extremely well made singleplayer experience to satisfy me - and to shut me and others up in the months after the release of ME3... If the singleplayer campaign is too short, too shallow, too weak in any way, I now know why. Lack of focus is my worst fear when it comes to any art form.

I truly hope you guys know what you are doing... :-)

Modifié par ckolsen, 11 octobre 2011 - 10:08 .

[Deputy Secretary of Awesome]

Multiplayer Co-Op and especially the Galaxy at War feature sounds like a lot of fun. Really looking forward to this alongside the main single player experience.

Asari Sniper here I come!

[Nohvarr]

shonefob wrote...

Honest question because I saw some people say it. Do people not want co-op just because they have no friends to play with? I would imagine if they had a friend who played ME they would be excited getting to somewhat share the experience.

That might be part of it, however some of it has to do with people being emotionally invested in heir opinion. Onelife admitted that nerdraging is his hobby and that's fairly true of some fans. I won't say that people never have legtimate gripes, but I have noticed in this fandom and others that once people decide to hate something they'll find a reason to keep on hating it.

It's partially why I don't come here very often. The whole place kept going through cycles of open war. During E3 people began to complain that there wasn't enough info given about customization and character building, the day before Bioware showed that off. Then there was the same sex "debate" and now this.

I think the proof to me that some people care more about arguing han the game came in another thread when someone 'Seboist" commented with a gloating tone that he couldn't wait to see the 'other side' argue for this one. So the game is unimportant, what matters is his side being 'right'.

If people are worried about having no friends to do Co-op, I'm going to start up a thread that will hopefully allow fans to connect. No sense waging this war alone if we don't have to.

[MarauderESP]

LGTX wrote...

Thessair wrote...

This has been said a lot, but I hope that we eventually get the option to play the co-op missions offline at some point. I really don't want to hear the XBL kids screaming at me because I'm not playing my character 'right'.

If it will be integrated with Origin, there might be a gazillion filter systems which will let you join your friends or specific groups and whatnot. Bots may work of course, but since the main game is SP-only, who'd migrate to multiplayer without the intention to play with others?

I mean, will playable races really be that much of a deal? Some stat changes, sure, but no new gameplay mechanics. Same TPS thing.

onelifecrisis wrote...

Wow. That's a pretty impressively epic logic fail even by internet standards. You managed to misunderstand an extremely simple question and use a cyclical argument all in one go.

Yeah, thanks for the contribution 

i´ll do it , why? , well to see the missions and see how it works and refflect on sp , and i dont need/want to play with "earullez99" to do that, if i´ll like to play with "BWisthebest33" or "icookmycat15" ill go to play BF or DS

[LGTX]

didymos1120 wrote...

LGTX wrote...

Time spent playing? You mean like, achieving useful-for-SP stuff via co-op might be faster/slower than in SP itself?

Yeah. I don't really expect there to be a big disparity, but it's at least possible.

Yep, it's possible, maybe even guaranteed to happen, but how can that me measured and equaled up, really? Length of co-op play is even more subjective and up to the players than SP runthroughs, and in the end of the day, who cares? They made the SP, and I'd rather they not chop stuff off or stitch unneeded junk in order to even SP and MP out.