Ce sujet est fermé
111987 wrote...
There are two studios, one working on singleplayer and one multiplayer. ME3 is said to be the same length of ME2. All indications suggest the singleplayer experience is not being harmed by multiplayer.
111987 wrote...
As I'm sure everyone on these forums knows, Mass Effect 3 has been confirmed to have multiplayer. Though there are many people who support and embrace this addition to the game, on gaming websites such as BSN and IGN, the response to multiplayer has been negative in the majority of posts. While there are reasons to be skeptical (will multiplayer detract from the singleplayer experience, will DLC only be for multiplayer, etc...), I strongly encourage everyone, even the diehard multiplayer haters to at least give multiplayer a chance.
Throughout gaming history, there have been several examples of a game recieving negative press, or being told it will be a failure before the game was released or seen its in entirety. In several cases though, these critics ended up eating their words BIG TIME once they actually played the game. Here are three examples of games that were heavily blasted before release but ended up being some of the greatest games of all time.
Example 1 (Change of genre). Metroid Prime
Example 2 (Change in style). The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker
Example 3 (Addition of multiplayer). Portal 2
Ultimately though, the co-op campaign was universally lauded and Portal 2 was both commercially and critically superior to the original. While Portal 2 wasn't as heavily scrutinized as the other games I've mentioned, I feel it illustrates the point I am trying to make here.
Perhaps Mass Effect 3 will turn out to be a disappointment. But for all the haters and naysayers, why don't you at least give it a chance? Because if history is in any indication, you might miss out on one hell of a game.
Modifié par Scimal, 11 octobre 2011 - 08:01 .
Scimal wrote...
I'm not questioning whether or not the SP campaign will be better or worse off because of MP, mostly.
Mostly, I'm asking myself... why?
Why now? Why do it for a series that specifically billed itself as a SP RPG experience?
Why add co-op or MP so far into the series? We've already had two very good games without, and nobody was complaining.
It just seems so anti-thetical to personalizing your character so you can journey through a story crafted specifically for your character, and with the express purpose of creating your own canon history.
Everything... Everything about Mass Effect is encapsulated in this unparalleled SP experience. Now, for whatever reason, you can go shooting up with your buddy Jake... which seems to be the antithesis of ME's existence. Not only because it feels very weird to bring in another person into what's ultimately an intimate narrative... but also because it's really freaking boring being the "other" person in a game that wasn't built for MP.
Modifié par CrimsonNephilim, 11 octobre 2011 - 08:12 .
111987 wrote...
BeefoTheBold wrote...
111987 wrote...
We don't know yet if there are multiplayer achievements. This goes back to my main point; people have blasted games in the past for features they really knew very little about.
As for cost, that's not a great argument. What if i don't want romance options in my game? Should I get a discount? In my opinion romance has no place in a war story like this. Besides, was Mass Effect 2 not a 60$ game when it first came out, just like ME3? I don't believe they've jacked up the price.
Yes, and they did beef up the RPG features. Even in co-op, there are significant RPG features. This shows they DO care about their existing fans, but also want to bring in new ones.
My point being is that even labelling it as "optional" is not likely to be correct. Adding multiplayer to singleplayer games almost always results in SOME reduction in the singleplayer experience. How BIG of a reduction can vary and yes, there are examples of games successfully managing to make the singleplayer feel complete while still doing a quality multiplayer.
But in all honesty, those games are few and far between. The multiplayer is not optional because it is directly taking resources away from the features that I DO plan on using.
The romance option is a bad example on your part because that IS something that is completely optional. It is a choice mechanic in an RPG. You choose if you want to play a stoic Shepard that chooses not to get sidetracked by romantic entanglements or a more human Shepard that reaches out for companionship (or even just a good ****ing) for comfort in a war. Either way, it is a part of YOU crafting the story of YOUR Shepard. To exclude it would be utterly unrealistic. Romance is a part of the human experience and taking out at least the option would make the game phony.
There are two studios, one working on singleplayer and one multiplayer. ME3 is said to be the same length of ME2. All indications suggest the singleplayer experience is not being harmed by multiplayer.
How is my example a bad one? in order to get all the achievements, I HAVE to have a romance. And guess what, your point that it is "completley optional'? So is multiplayer.
I would argue it's just as phony to only have Shepard and his squad be the sole reason for the salvation of an entire galaxy as it would be to exclude romance.
Well they way it has been implemented makes sense to me. IMO it sounds like a cool idea.CrimsonNephilim wrote...
Scimal wrote...
I'm not questioning whether or not the SP campaign will be better or worse off because of MP, mostly.
Mostly, I'm asking myself... why?
Why now? Why do it for a series that specifically billed itself as a SP RPG experience?
Why add co-op or MP so far into the series? We've already had two very good games without, and nobody was complaining.
It just seems so anti-thetical to personalizing your character so you can journey through a story crafted specifically for your character, and with the express purpose of creating your own canon history.
Everything... Everything about Mass Effect is encapsulated in this unparalleled SP experience. Now, for whatever reason, you can go shooting up with your buddy Jake... which seems to be the antithesis of ME's existence. Not only because it feels very weird to bring in another person into what's ultimately an intimate narrative... but also because it's really freaking boring being the "other" person in a game that wasn't built for MP.
This is exactly what I was thinking when I heard that MP was added on
While I'm not against coop/MP games, I was a little upset that MP was being added onto ME3.
It just doesn't seem like a logical thing to do with a game that held a SP base since ME was first released. If Bioware wanted to do MP with Mass Effect, why wait until now to do it?
I do see some positives about it like having a friend play with you instead of having to deal with the AI that controled your squad members ( that was a headache), but again why wait until the last game involving Shepard's storyline to input this feature?
Mass Effect was doing fine with a SP experience. It became a highly praised game as a SP so why switch it up now? Not to mention that putting MP into the game now will have its bugs that will annoy players even more.
MP should have been added in probably in 2 if thats how Bioware wanted to take this game. That way the MP system woulld have something to be improved on based on feedback from the fanbase. If Bioware decides to go down a new branch with ME, then yes they can make improvements on a MP system from there, but it doesn't do any good to the current ME series with it being implemented into ME3 since its the end of Shepard's storyline.
I do still intend to keep my pre-order on the CE for ME3. I do hope that Bioware is taking a good step with the MP feature and that it doesn't take away from the SP experience. I just think that the MP call should have been decided back ealier in the series so they could have had the chance to improve on a MP system ahead of time.
Is it so hard to believe that someone
for whom the 'Mass Effect' franchise has been so rewarding might not
relish the prospect of a multiplayer 'optional extra'? If so, let me try
to articulate some of the misapprehensions these people have expressed.
1)
There are precious few single-player 'only' RPG's being released these
days, as a result, those who don't see the appeal of multiplayer gaming
have designated the 'Mass Effect' franchise their welcome refuge and
digital home from home - the place they go to escape from reality and
mute the incessant drone of social interaction. The intrusion of
multiplayer into our beloved fantasy undermines the core ideology to
which we subscribe.
2) Perhaps naively, many of us believed that
the 'Mass Effect' franchise would stay true its origins and retain the
identity for which it has become so renowned and to which it owes much
of its success. Mass Effect has served as a galvanising influence for
all those discerning gamers for whom the words 'multiplayer' and
'shooter' invoke nausea and disdain. This move, no matter how subtle,
feels like an imposition, not an invitation.
3) Anyone who
suggests that simply 'not playing' this 'optional' chapter in the 'Mass
Effect' saga will in no way detract from the overall game is clearly not
thinking rationally. No matter how inconsequential the outcome, there's
still content in them there files, content pertaining to 'Mass Effect'
lore. It doesn't matter what kind of content, be it new characters, new
maps, new dialogue, new plot revelations or just new skins and weapons -
it's STILL content. By specifically targeting multiplayer supporters as
the worthy beneficiaries of this content, you have inadvertently
precluded and thereby alienated anyone who doesn't share your passion
for multiplayer gaming.
4) Instead of foisting this 'take it or
leave it' approach on to loyal subscribers as some sort of punitive
ultimatum, how about simply providing the player with the choice of
using 'bots'. I know I go on about AI squaddies but surely, it makes
sense. The transition in gameplay, especially seeing as the MP element
is apparently co-op based, would be practically seamless. For solo
players it would be virtually indistinguishable from the rest of the
game (except that it might require an internet connection) and for
multiplayers, it would be irrelevant.
Anyway, said my piece. If
Bioware did take it upon themselves to incorporate an AI squad feature, I
would be happy to withdraw my hesitations.
Modifié par Lunatic LK47, 11 octobre 2011 - 08:17 .
Scimal wrote...
Well, actually, the co-op was easily the most criticised (and still is). While the SP campaign was excellent (though the puzzles weren't quite as good as the first), the MP campaign was lauded for its addition, but not its execution. Once you complete the co-op campaign, it's... well... useless. There's zero replay value.
If P2 was simply SP, I bet it would've garnered higher praise because then you wouldn't be thinking about all of the nothing there is left to do. You'd be over with the game and done.
Many felt that the MP was an unnecessary "expansion" of the core gameplay, and that it was the cause of the price raise to $60 at release.
To sum up: Portal 2's co-op isn't that great, and while it was a fresh move for the series, it's not a good addition.
111987 wrote...
at least give multiplayer a chance.
Jorina Leto wrote...
2. Multiplayer means modding is not possible. Which means it is not possible to mod the idiotic thermal clips away. Which means I will not play this game.
Il Divo wrote...
Jorina Leto wrote...
2. Multiplayer means modding is not possible. Which means it is not possible to mod the idiotic thermal clips away. Which means I will not play this game.
I don't know much about modding. How does # 2 work exactly?
Now, stop whining.We have always maintained that we would only add multiplayer into the Mass Effect series if it made sense and did not compromise the power of the single player campaign. Fighting together against a common threat was the multiplayer experience that made the most sense for Mass Effect 3. The way we have designed co-op as a wayto take control of key conflict zones in the galaxy is a natural extension of the premise of Mass Effect 3.
Mr Massakka wrote...
They told in a recent interview that the multiplayer will effect the outcome of the singleplayer campaign.
I am disappointed. I thought of getting all possible endings just with my experience in singleplayer alone
diamondedge wrote...
Now, stop whining.We have always maintained that we would only add multiplayer into the Mass Effect series if it made sense and did not compromise the power of the single player campaign. Fighting together against a common threat was the multiplayer experience that made the most sense for Mass Effect 3. The way we have designed co-op as a wayto take control of key conflict zones in the galaxy is a natural extension of the premise of Mass Effect 3.
Yes, the optimal ending. Everyone lives, Reapers failed. That is just one ending from many different.Il Divo wrote...
Mr Massakka wrote...
They told in a recent interview that the multiplayer will effect the outcome of the singleplayer campaign.
I am disappointed. I thought of getting all possible endings just with my experience in singleplayer alone
it is still possible to achieve the optimal, complete ending of the game in Mass Effect 3 through single-player alone.
Jorina Leto wrote...
111987 wrote...
at least give multiplayer a chance.
No, I won't even buy the game.
There are two very simple reasons:
1. There multiplayer couldn't work with a pause function.
2. Multiplayer means modding is not possible. Which means it is not possible to mod the idiotic thermal clips away. Which means I will not play this game.
Mr Massakka wrote...
I know in my first playthrough I won't achieve the optimal ending, and if one of my squadmembers dies because I don't want to play co-op I am pissed.
Yes, Uncharted is an awesome experience, the gamplay is excellent and ME2 could improve and judging by the ME3 demo it looks like it has by leaps and bounds. The game looks alot better than ME2 and it has multiplayer now. What is so bad about that? People say ME has been a great influence on games, I would say Uncharted has been an even greater influence. You don't see games using the dialogue wheel, but you do see games beefing up their action scences, adding multiplayer, working harder on graphics. It's the golden standard. It's polished.Notlikeyoucare wrote...
Amen! One of the best games ever in my book. And they are now improving upon the base they built to deliver a great and amazingly fleshed out multiplayer and singleplayer game. I really think Naughty Dog could teach Bioware a lesson or two in creating a) a good storyan extremely fluid third person combat system. After playing Uncharted 2, I found Mass Effect 2 almost unplayable with the stiff and unresponsive movements.
Modifié par YouthCultureForever, 11 octobre 2011 - 10:24 .
Savber100 wrote...
What's this?
Reason, moderation, and logic in my BSN forum? Get out.
That said, I think you're right.
Look at Uncharted 2, Portal 2, Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood, Dead Space 2, and even Bioshock 2.
They weren't terrible games because of MP. In some cases, they even enhanced the game.
...yes, I liked Bioshock 2 and Dead Space 2.... <_<
Modifié par Nashiktal, 11 octobre 2011 - 10:28 .
Il Divo wrote...
it is still possible to achieve the optimal, complete ending of the game in Mass Effect 3 through single-player alone.
aj2070 wrote...
I will be blunt; my skeptcism comes from EA having one trick and needing to cram it into everything with absolutely no concern about context. When did "Shepard's story" suddenly need to be "improved" by Multiplayer? Where is the context? The rabid promotion of this "hot feature" as an aid to Shepard's story feels hackneyed. Sure, there are those horde mode fans who will feel Bioware is now the second coming and should be praised.
I am not against multiplayer; heck I even liked Homefront's limited multiplayer. I just feel it has no real place in Mass Effect and/ or Dragon Age - its coming to 3, I'm calling that now. Further in my opinion, it should not affect "Shepard's story" at all.
Nashiktal wrote...
Savber100 wrote...
What's this?
Reason, moderation, and logic in my BSN forum? Get out.
That said, I think you're right.
Look at Uncharted 2, Portal 2, Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood, Dead Space 2, and even Bioshock 2.
They weren't terrible games because of MP. In some cases, they even enhanced the game.
...yes, I liked Bioshock 2 and Dead Space 2.... <_<
I enjoyed bioshock 2 as well, doesnt mean it wasn't an incomplete game.
I should also point out that Brotherhood had MULTIPLE studios working on it at once, plus a monstrous budget. There were more people working on brotherhood than all of bioware put together, not comparable really.
Retour en haut