3794 réponses à ce sujet

[Arsenal0602]

DaringMoosejaw wrote...

Arsenal0602 wrote...

DaringMoosejaw wrote...

So most of the doomsaying going on here has nothing to do with whether or not the game will be more fun, since you can just ignore the MP and have it not effect you at all, but because people are upset that Bioware cares about other people, too, and not just them.

How incredibly vain.

I know my girlfriend got so mad when I started to set up some multi player action with this girl at work, she is so full of herself thinking that since I spent all that time only with her that is how it is going to be forever and that there is no way I would spend time and money on something new.

How full of herself and vain is that? 

If you were trying to turn my logic around on me, you lost the plot somewhere in the middle. Unless you're comparing the relationship between Bioware and purists as a monogamous relationship, which is taking things off the deep end of crazy. Or you're just screwing around.

I could have done a better analogy.   But yes you're logic is flawed as the basic thing is that pandering to a new crowd is going to upset the original fans if they are adding features that do not intrest them, and if adding the new features to draw in a different group takes away from what the intrest is of the older fans. 

It isn't vain of the fans to explect the status quo to stay the same, it is poor customer services to add a feature that is going to change how the game is played at the end of development. 

[Il Divo]

Arsenal0602 wrote...

I also don't need to eat steak for dinner tonight, but I want to so I am going to.

The whole thing is opinions, some people want to get all the achievements and are worried that the MP may cause them to not be able to, perhaps because of skill, lack of people to play with, no internet hooked up to their system.

Do they need to get 100% on this game? No

Do they want to? Yes.

Do they find it unfair that there is a chance they may not? Yes

A better question is, why does their complaints bother you? A simple concern about the addition on multiplayer should not effect your life, yet it is, why is that?

I would find an argument due to lack of internet more acceptable, but that also results in any number of resources which you won't simply have access to. For xbox players, how many really have no means to hook up to the internet? But that's not what the poster was arguing, but rather from the position that they have to engage in multiplayer for a 100% completion, which they don't like. The flaw in this argument is assuming that you have any leeway in deciding what achievements to get or ignore.

You chose to pursue a 100% completion, with the full knowledge that it can result in any number of gameplay styles which you may not enjoy (Ex: being forced to romance Kaidan). Multiplayer is just another to file under the list.

[Melchiah109]

Lard wrote...

DaringMoosejaw wrote...

Lard wrote...

The anti-MP crowd has more merit in their argument than the pro-MP crowd.

The 'merit' seems to be that Bioware is daring to cater to people that aren't them and they're throwing a temper tantrum.

MP is only added to appeal to a crowd that wouldn't normally care about the game.
MP is only added to sell more DLC like map packs.
MP is only added to put a bullet point on a box.

These are all indisuptable facts.

Doug4130 wrote...

does it matter who has more merit?  The game will have multiplayer regardless

Of course it matters. There's still time to get Bioware to admit they're wrong and pull the MP mode.

Those are opinions. You do not know wheter they are facts or not.

What it's boiling down to is that you don't like an option that is being tacked on, and rather than just not play the optional bits, you want them completely removed so that anyone who actually is somewhat interested in it doesn't even have that option anymore. To me it doesn't seem you have more merit, just more arrogance.

Modifié par Melchiah109, 11 octobre 2011 - 09:38 .

[JigPig]

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

Fact.

[stysiaq]

 So... am I the one of the few, who actually craved for the option to create your custom character, choose race and kill a few husks with a real-life friend by my side?

Multiplayer is great news for me.

The arguments that Bio could put all the resources into "more weapons", or <cough> longer Tali adventure <cough> are laughable, because all those people don't know squat about game developement and the expenses.

Adding multi is just overloading the amount of Awesome in the series.

cheers.

[Lard]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Lard wrote...

Fact: Alienating your audience is going to reduce your profit.

Most of the audience is not alienated.

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

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

[Someone With Mass]

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?

[NOD-INFORMER37]

whitey2525 wrote...

NOD-INFORMER37 wrote...

So aside from a few ppl insulting each other for no reason, who's anxious to see what Bioware has planned for Wednesday?(or whenever they release morr info this week)

I'll try to keep positive, maybe this will be a great thing, but I'm still a tad worried (:]

I am so excited

Same, I hope it turns out to be a good thing.

Btw we're reaching the 100th page of this forum

[Doug4130]

Lard wrote...

Doug4130 wrote...

They aren't wrong, and it's not gonna get pulled.  Would you rather they released a ME3 single player edition and a ME3 single player+multiplayer coop edition for the same price?

A) They are wrong. It was poor judgment on Bioware's part to include MP in this game.

Would I rather they released the game as a SP game, with the MP mode as DLC? Absolutely.

wrong to you, right to others.  different strokes for different folks, that's the way the world works.. abide by it man

[Iakus]

Il Divo wrote...

Lard wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

Lard wrote...

MP is only added to appeal to a crowd that wouldn't normally care about the game.
MP is only added to sell more DLC like map packs.
MP is only added to put a bullet point on a box.

These are all indisuptable facts. 

Fact: Games are only made to turn a profit. 

And that argument is a tired cliche. 

Fact: Alienating your audience is going to reduce your profit. 

No more cliche than arguing that MP is only added to sell dlc. Your generalizations are all rather weak. Portal 2 would also like to have a word with you.

Whatever DLC may or may not come from this, it's pretty clear that fans are being alienated by MP being added to what was a purely SP trilogy.

Modifié par iakus, 11 octobre 2011 - 09:42 .

[BeefoTheBold]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Lard wrote...

Fact: Alienating your audience is going to reduce your profit.

Most of the audience is not alienated.

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

And you know that the majority is not alienated how? If Bioware didn't have real concerns about the alienation factor, then Casey would not have said that coop wouldn't be what people are "afraid" of. For that matter, the first post in this thread wouldn't be aimed directly at addressing the concerns that a lot of people have that this is going to hurt the SP experience.

The BSN may not represent EVERYONE who plays Mass Effect, but it's a pretty decent representation of the most passionate of Bioware's fanbase.

[Eudaemonium]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Darth Vengeant wrote...

Games are an artform, the same as cinema...WAS. When corporations get ahold of them thats when they only care about profit and milk everything to death until the art is gone. We are getting near that point in gaming now. Cinema has already fallen off the cliff.

Clearly, you haven't seen The Fountain.

Clearly, they haven't seen anything other than Hollywood Summer Blockbusters, let alone The Fountain.

[DaringMoosejaw]

Lard wrote...

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

That DLC was free.

[Lard]

Melchiah109 wrote...

Those are opinions. You do not know wheter they are facts or not.

What it's boiling down to is that you don't like an option that is being tacked on, and rather than just not play the optional bits, you want them completely removed so that anyone who actually is somewhat interested in it doesn't even have that option anymore. To me it doesn't seem you have more merit, just more arrogance.

They are indisputable facts.
The MP is not optional because it directly affects the SP.

[legion999]

So let me get this straight.. in the co-op mode we'll be controlling one character out of the many species available. So are these missions we are doing spec ops of some kind? If so then I'd support that kind of multiplayer as:
1. We get to play as other species.
2. Shep isn't doing all the work in a galactic war which is as it should be.

[Il Divo]

Lard wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

Lard wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

Lard wrote...

MP is only added to appeal to a crowd that wouldn't normally care about the game.
MP is only added to sell more DLC like map packs.
MP is only added to put a bullet point on a box.

These are all indisuptable facts.

Fact: Games are only made to turn a profit.

And that argument is a tired cliche.

Fact: Alienating your audience is going to reduce your profit.

No more cliche than arguing that MP is only added to sell dlc. Your generalizations are all rather weak. Portal 2 would also like to have a word with you.

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

MP is only added to sell more DLC like map packs.
Portal 2 released free dlc.
If it is free, then it is not sold.
MP is not only added to seel more dlc, like map packs.

Your argument also ignores any number of other motivations people have for playing multiplayer, such as enjoyment. That is why anyone engages in a video game. Your position is akin to arguing that the only reason anyone makes a single player campaign is to sell it for money. See how easy that is? 

[DaringMoosejaw]

Lard wrote...

Melchiah109 wrote...

Those are opinions. You do not know wheter they are facts or not.

What it's boiling down to is that you don't like an option that is being tacked on, and rather than just not play the optional bits, you want them completely removed so that anyone who actually is somewhat interested in it doesn't even have that option anymore. To me it doesn't seem you have more merit, just more arrogance.

They are indisputable facts.
The MP is not optional because it directly affects the SP.

It CAN affect single-player in a specific way that is ALSO achievable without playing co-op at all.

[Someone With Mass]

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.

[Melchiah109]

Lard wrote...


They are indisputable facts.
The MP is not optional because it directly affects the SP.

The MP is optional since you can do exactly the same thing in the SP campaign, which is the part you and your kindred keep trying to pull out of context. It has been very clearly stated that MP just gives you an alternative way to do it.

And they are not facts until it is written down as such. YOU stating them as facts do not make them so anywhere other than your own mind.

Modifié par Melchiah109, 11 octobre 2011 - 09:42 .

[Lard]

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.

[bigheadzach]

Novate wrote...

I think what everyone is forgetting is that EVERYTHING that was spend to create this CO-OP, getting a second team and getting it ready for march of 2012 is exactly what they could have used to create a more compelling Single Player Experience.  You could have gotten more planets, more missions, every mission that was in Co-op could have been in the single player experience.

You could have gotten more interaction scenes with Tali, Garus , Wrex. ...etc

You could have gotten more maps for missions

You could have more weapons

You could have more armors

You could have a longer Tali adventure, or any adventure about your companions.

You could have gotten more of everything, those that was meant for DLC could have gotten included in the initial shippment , and those extras could have become DLC.

Anyone that says otherwise is just fooling themselves. In every game that we have played , something is always taken out to add another feature.

I am not against a Co-op , it sounds cool and everything but I didn't play Mass Effect 1 and 2 and waiting for 3 to play a CO-OP , I play those games so that I can continue Shepard's Story and more of his story. Mass Effect 1 and 2 both feel alittle short to me. Thats why I didn't want Co-op, I wanted a long , epic journey for Mass Effect 3.  I know that this Co-op will work, it will be a success, but what will not be a success is all the WHAT IF'S 

All of this is conjecture, which deserves a big wet sloppy [CITATION NEEDED]

Modifié par bigheadzach, 11 octobre 2011 - 09:42 .

[Darth Vengeant]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Darth Vengeant wrote...

Games are an artform, the same as cinema...WAS. When corporations get ahold of them thats when they only care about profit and milk everything to death until the art is gone. We are getting near that point in gaming now. Cinema has already fallen off the cliff.

Clearly, you haven't seen The Fountain.

Yes, he also did Black Swan.

And movies like that are a rarity now days partly because it was more of an Independant type of film. That is my point. Hollywood only cares about the cash, not the art. And so, we get 85% garbage in the Cinema because of it..

[Lard]

Melchiah109 wrote...

Lard wrote...


They are indisputable facts.
The MP is not optional because it directly affects the SP.

The MP is optional since you can do exactly the same thing in the SP campaign, which is the part you and your kindred keep trying to pull out of context. It has been very clearly stated that MP just gives you an alternative way to do it.

They also said a lot of things about DA 2 that weren't true. They're in full damage control mode now, of course they're going to say that.

[whywhywhywhy]

Dark_Caduceus wrote...

whywhywhywhy wrote...

bigheadzach wrote...

whywhywhywhy wrote...

Tasha vas Nar Rayya wrote...

If you don't like co-op, then don't play co-op.

I don't understand what the issue is here?

No issue.  People are voting with their wallet and that scares the multiplayer supporters.

No, it's just aggravating us because people are voting with their wallets out of entitlement-inspired butthurt.

Oh, I'm sorry.

At least someone is being civil in thread...

ROFL. Really ?  I can't believe you edited my post.  You MP guys are so crazy ahh crazy...no seriously your crazy

[PMC65]

Novate wrote...

I think what everyone is forgetting is that EVERYTHING that was spend to create this CO-OP, getting a second team and getting it ready for march of 2012 is exactly what they could have used to create a more compelling Single Player Experience.  You could have gotten more planets, more missions, every mission that was in Co-op could have been in the single player experience.

You could have gotten more interaction scenes with Tali, Garus , Wrex. ...etc

You could have gotten more maps for missions

You could have more weapons

You could have more armors

You could have a longer Tali adventure, or any adventure about your companions.

You could have gotten more of everything, those that was meant for DLC could have gotten included in the initial shippment , and those extras could have become DLC.

Anyone that says otherwise is just fooling themselves. In every game that we have played , something is always taken out to add another feature.

I am not against a Co-op , it sounds cool and everything but I didn't play Mass Effect 1 and 2 and waiting for 3 to play a CO-OP , I play those games so that I can continue Shepard's Story and more of his story. Mass Effect 1 and 2 both feel alittle short to me. Thats why I didn't want Co-op, I wanted a long , epic journey for Mass Effect 3.  I know that this Co-op will work, it will be a success, but what will not be a success is all the WHAT IF'S  

I would think that the additional $$$ were only given with the CoOp in mine ... When a budget is created you get additional funding for different things. Based on my own personal business experience in creating a budget, those $$$ would not have even been available to the main story at all but only approved for that feature. 

Each area (main story, CoOp, Kinect) would have received funding that otherwise would not have been there is more likely the case. No CoOp ... no additional monies. So it is an added bonus that didn't take away from the SP.

Now what the addition of CoOp probably did do to the main story was allow more time for the team to tweak the game. That is a good thing.