245 réponses à ce sujet

[Teredan]

IsaacShep wrote...

Teredan wrote...

Srsly? It's about money of course. You remember that statement about how every game needs a multiplayer to be successfull? That's pretty much the origin of it. EA thinks that ME3 will do better with Multiplayer.
Now if it does fine, but as for me I won't support this idiotic direction. I'll get ME3 used because I give a **** about the online pass. Even if I doubt it, maybe more people think like me resulting in ME3 not doing as well as EA hopes for and maybe mending it's stupid MP philosophy.

That's not what I asked about. Why do people think EA would hire more devs to singleplayer if multiplayer didn't exist? Why do they think they would spend the extra money on hiring devs for singleplayer if they know the number of singleplayer ME3 devs is big enough already to produce a hit game?

Ah ok I get it now. But that's some messed up could be scenario question you're asking.
Ok now you're probably right that EA wouldn't put more money into the SP if they canned the MP.
But the thing is from a consumers perspective we see that they are willing to put more money into the game.
The thing the few of us are wondering about is, if you're willing to put more money into the game why put it in a feature that probably won't add a whole lot to the experience(of course this part is an assumption because who knows I'm human maybe the Mp will be a revelation, but I judge from the given experience from games like dead space2) ? Why not use it instead to make other features?

Our whole argument is made from the consumers perspective which is logical, right?
Of course if I would argue from a publishers perspective given sufficient data I would probably be in favor of the MP who knows?

Modifié par Teredan, 11 octobre 2011 - 03:58 .

[shepskisaac]

tez19 wrote...

Funnily enough i remeber reading that they didn't hire anybody it is another studio already in existence. If MP was free to make please let me know and i will admit i was wrong.

Funnily enough, it's time you actually start checking your facts.

What is this? A job ad for multiplayer programmers at BioWare Montreal:


BioWare Montreal was only created in the past 2 years from scratch. They've been expanding ever since with the goal to become a fully-suficient BioWare studio one day (like Austin is), but until then they're asissting ME3 team with co-op developement.

[rapscallioness]

The Only thing that worries me about multiplayer is that a game dev stops making Single Player and puts all their time and money towards the multiplayer. I woulda loved to have played SWTOR. Never played a Star Wars vid game b4, but SWTOR looked really good. Then I checked it out and found it was only for MP. Disappointing.

I use to luv Final Fantasy, but then it was like they just stopped making games for a Single Player. The one they did FF13...just wasn't.....It seems like they focused so much on MP, they've ditched the Single Player.

I don't care if they add MP to ME3. What worries me is what they may do in the future. Will any kind of ME4 (or wateva they call it) be strictly for the multiplayers?

[whywhywhywhy]

Teredan wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...

Hey look, another "old school" gamer is mad about multiplayer. Same sh—er, stuff, different day.

Hey look, another worthless commentator that doesn't know the definition of sceptic.

Tell you what, we have absolutely every right to be sceptic because you know, even if MP is great do I really wnat it in my game trilogy that has been for 2 parts a Singleplayer experience?

I mean HDTV are great so are refrigerators do I want both of same combined? I don't know since I'm a sceptic I'll think probably no.

LOL, well said I wish they had a clap emote I was about to post until I read your comment.

[Beerfish]

The longer a developer puts out product the more likely they are to have games that not everyone likes. Everyone has an idea of how a company they are a fan of should go, invariably as time goes on people will get bent out of shape when they change.

[Teredan]

rapscallioness wrote...

The Only thing that worries me about multiplayer is that a game dev stops making Single Player and puts all their time and money towards the multiplayer. I woulda loved to have played SWTOR. Never played a Star Wars vid game b4, but SWTOR looked really good. Then I checked it out and found it was only for MP. Disappointing.

I use to luv Final Fantasy, but then it was like they just stopped making games for a Single Player. The one they did FF13...just wasn't.....It seems like they focused so much on MP, they've ditched the Single Player.

I don't care if they add MP to ME3. What worries me is what they may do in the future. Will any kind of ME4 (or wateva they call it) be strictly for the multiplayers?

Not to argue that FF13 was quite the disappointment but what? There is absolutely no MP element in FF13.
The reason that FF13 didn't deliver stems from the problems the japanese gaming industry share as whole.
Like having no sense on what western audiences want and being content to cater to the homeland audience which denies any chance of learning how to make games that appeal to everyone.

I mean I love JRPGs (well except maybe the recent spawn of games that want to appeal with little cartoon girls instead of interesting stories or gameplay). But even I scratch my head that there has been absolutely now refinements to formulas like grinding, characters casts and what not. I mean I recently began to play Dragon Quest Monster Joker 2 and even though I like it, I have to sigh at some really dumb design decision in that game.

Modifié par Teredan, 11 octobre 2011 - 04:07 .

[Doug4130]

whywhywhywhy wrote...

Teredan wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...

Hey look, another "old school" gamer is mad about multiplayer. Same sh—er, stuff, different day.

Hey look, another worthless commentator that doesn't know the definition of sceptic.

Tell you what, we have absolutely every right to be sceptic because you know, even if MP is great do I really wnat it in my game trilogy that has been for 2 parts a Singleplayer experience?

I mean HDTV are great so are refrigerators do I want both of same combined? I don't know since I'm a sceptic I'll think probably no.

LOL, well said I wish they had a clap emote I was about to post until I read your comment.

That's a pretty crappy analogy.  You took 2 random things that have nothing to do with each other.  Playing a video and playing a video game with friends goes hand in hand.  They'll never make a HDTV/refrigerator, but they do make HDTV and DVD players combined for that same reason

[Blooddrunk1004]

rapscallioness wrote...

The Only thing that worries me about multiplayer is that a game dev stops making Single Player and puts all their time and money towards the multiplayer. I woulda loved to have played SWTOR. Never played a Star Wars vid game b4, but SWTOR looked really good. Then I checked it out and found it was only for MP. Disappointing.

I use to luv Final Fantasy, but then it was like they just stopped making games for a Single Player. The one they did FF13...just wasn't.....It seems like they focused so much on MP, they've ditched the Single Player.

I don't care if they add MP to ME3. What worries me is what they may do in the future. Will any kind of ME4 (or wateva they call it) be strictly for the multiplayers?

Dude you seriously must play KOTOR, Battlefront, Empire at War and Republic Commando.

[shepskisaac]

Teredan wrote...

Ah ok I get it now. But that's some messed up could be scenario question you're asking.
Ok now you're probably right that EA wouldn't put more money into the SP if they canned the MP.
But the thing is from a consumers perspective we see that they are willing to put more money into the game.
The thing the few of us are wondering about is, if you're willing to put more money into the game why put it in a feature that probably won't add a whole lot to the experience(of course this part is an assumption because who knows I'm human maybe the Mp will be a revelation, but I judge from the given experience from games like dead space2) ? Why not use it instead to make other features?

Our whole argument is made from the consumers perspective which is logical, right?
Of course if I would argue from a publishers perspective given sufficient data I would probably be in favor of the MP who knows?

Sorry, but this consumer perspective is your perspective, not everyone's. In your opinon it won't add alot, there are TONS of other gamers who love co-op and think it adds hella lot value to their games. Not to mention, BioWare actually integrates the co-op into the main game/story/system (optionally of course) to add even more to the experience. The fact publishers think gamers love & want co-op/multiplayer didn't came out of nowhere. If the consumer base didn't give them enough resons to think it's worth investing in co-op instead of, let's say, customize your Shepard's ears feature, they wouldn't invest in it. EA was willing to pour more money into ME3 project because they believe it is possible to get better sales. But not via single-player, which didn't increase the sales significantly between ME2 & ME1 despite obviously larger budget, but via co-op.

In the end, what is a feature worth investing in for you may not be what is worth investing in and what I would want (I may want Shepard ears customization feature and think that it would add alot etc). And then it also may be different for EA because they take sales into consideration.

[happy_daiz]

Doug4130 wrote...

That's a pretty crappy analogy.  You took 2 random things that have nothing to do with each other.  Playing a video and playing a video game with friends goes hand in hand.  They'll never make a HDTV/refrigerator, but they do make HDTV and DVD players combined for that same reason

Actually, they already make refrigerators with HDTVs. Meet the LG LSC27990TT.



Did that just blow your mind?

[whywhywhywhy]

Teredan wrote...

IsaacShep wrote...

tez19 wrote...

and money MUST have been diverted from the SP. If not diverted then the money garnered for MP still could of been used to improve SP to give the trilogy the best send off it possibly could. I do not believe it is an assumption because unless creating the multiplayer aspect is free then resources (money) has been used which could have improved singleplayer campaign.

Ok, let's get some facts straight. Where does great majority of money go to in game developement? TO pay the developers who work 2/3 years on the game. Why do modern games are so expensive? HD assets, VOs & music are only small part of the reason. The biggest is that the size of AAA teams went from 20+ devs to 150+ on avarage in just 2 generations. If you think EA would've assigned extra 50 devs to work on SP if there wasn't MP, you're wrong simple. They would never do it, why would they if they know the existing team is big enough to create an amazing game?

That's a ****ty scarecrow argument. Think about it this way. From the money that goes into MP they could have hired 4-5 (or more) programmers/3d artists/voice actor to do, oh gosh surprise, more singleplayer content.

Like having more minigames/characters and what not.

Also forgot to comment on the thread topic. I think it's idiotic to assume that Bioware is in decline.
I mean even if DA 2 wasn't universally well received from the Bioware community it did quite well I think from a financial standpoint. ME 3 isn't out yet so we have to see how that pans out. We can talk about Bioware declining if ME3 will become as controversial as DA2 and DA3 being announced with nonsensical features (like motion controls).

I said something similiar in the now locked killer feature thread.  From the ground up MP is horribly expensive this late in the series. I'm sure they plugged in some of the TOR code to make the process cheaper but they'd still need a couple of good network programmers to tidy it all up for ME3.  I feel strongly that the delay was mainly for multiplayer...they may have gotten around to a few things in the single campaign.  

Oh, you have a point if ME3 is a big hit and this is their new direction the decline won't be apparent immediately.  It'll seem like they're flying high but that's only if the core fans stck with them.  If the core fans abandon them or most of them then they'll be forced to make hit titles or titles they are sure will sell a certain quota.  All it would take is a good flop or two and how far they've fallen will be immediately apparent.  If not already made Commander Shepard will be make a 4th appearance, that's the sign.
l

Modifié par whywhywhywhy, 11 octobre 2011 - 04:12 .

[rapscallioness]

Teredan wrote...

rapscallioness wrote...

The Only thing that worries me about multiplayer is that a game dev stops making Single Player and puts all their time and money towards the multiplayer. I woulda loved to have played SWTOR. Never played a Star Wars vid game b4, but SWTOR looked really good. Then I checked it out and found it was only for MP. Disappointing.

I use to luv Final Fantasy, but then it was like they just stopped making games for a Single Player. The one they did FF13...just wasn't.....It seems like they focused so much on MP, they've ditched the Single Player.

I don't care if they add MP to ME3. What worries me is what they may do in the future. Will any kind of ME4 (or wateva they call it) be strictly for the multiplayers?

Not to argue that FF13 was quite the disappointment but what? There is absolutely no MP element in FF13.
The reason that FF13 didn't deliver stems from the problems the japanese gaming industry share as whole.
Like having no sense on what western audiences want and being content to cater to the homeland audience which denies any chance of learning how to make games that appeal to everyone.

I didn't say there were MP elements in FF13. At all. Perhaps I wasn't clear. I don't care why FF13 sucked, or was meh. It had potential, but didn't deliver. That's not my point in this post.

My point is that I worry about game devs ditching Single Player and focusing their time and money to strictly MP games---like SWTOR.

What I'm saying is that I've seen them shift from good Single Player games to putting most of their time and money into MP's. I don't care if there's an MP version of a game. What sux to me is when they don't make a Single Player campaign anymore.

[nitefyre410]

happy_daiz wrote...

Doug4130 wrote...

That's a pretty crappy analogy.  You took 2 random things that have nothing to do with each other.  Playing a video and playing a video game with friends goes hand in hand.  They'll never make a HDTV/refrigerator, but they do make HDTV and DVD players combined for that same reason

Actually, they already make refrigerators with HDTVs. Meet the LG LSC27990TT.



Did that just blow your mind?

 


yes my mind  is blow   

[Captain_Obvious]

Teredan wrote...

I mean HDTV are great so are refrigerators do I want both of same combined? I don't know since I'm a sceptic I'll think probably no.

You're making a false analogy here.  It would be more appropriate to say, "I already have a refrigerator, why do I need a freezer attached to it?"  Both units can function independently, and some people will use one or the other, but not both.  The freezer also takes up some space that could have been used for the refrigerator, similar to the arguments that multiplayer will push out the space for single player. 

However, you have to recognize the benefits of the freezer at the same time; it keeps food usable longer, it provides more alternatives for shopping, and allows one to purchase items in bulk to save money.  If we use this analogy for multiplayer, this means that multiplayer will be used to complement the single player experience by allowing the game to be played longer, allowing more alternatives in ME gameplay, and saving money by not buying more games.  These are all valid arguments made by analogy.  You may not consider them necessary arguments, but they are valid nonetheless. 

The question of "I already have single-player, why do I need multi-player attached to it" makes more sense when you provide an analogy that is, well, analagous. 

[Teredan]

Doug4130 wrote...

That's a pretty crappy analogy.  You took 2 random things that have nothing to do with each other.  Playing a video and playing a video game with friends goes hand in hand.  They'll never make a HDTV/refrigerator, but they do make HDTV and DVD players combined for that same reason

The reason why you think my analogy is crappy is probably because of your tastes.
I'm a pretty diverse gamer. I play pretty much everything that looks interesting from tetris multiplayer to dark souls to layton games to Battflefield and what not.

Now for me the experience that MP games and SP games deliver differ greatly. So much that they seem to me as incompatible as a refrigerator tv.
Now from my perspective I could apply your perspective and explain why a refrigerator tv would be great.
I mean both are things that raise your quality of life to some extent. why not have them in the same place?
I mean what if you have a small kitchen and the refrig. is facing your kitchen table? wouldn't that be great? Or watching cooking programs while cooking? So things "can" go hand in hand but that doesn't make the tv in the refrig. any more unnecessary.

Like the MP in my SP experience focused games. I hope you can relate to me now.

Modifié par Teredan, 11 octobre 2011 - 04:16 .

[rapscallioness]

Blooddrunk1004 wrote...

rapscallioness wrote...

The Only thing that worries me about multiplayer is that a game dev stops making Single Player and puts all their time and money towards the multiplayer. I woulda loved to have played SWTOR. Never played a Star Wars vid game b4, but SWTOR looked really good. Then I checked it out and found it was only for MP. Disappointing.

I use to luv Final Fantasy, but then it was like they just stopped making games for a Single Player. The one they did FF13...just wasn't.....It seems like they focused so much on MP, they've ditched the Single Player.

I don't care if they add MP to ME3. What worries me is what they may do in the future. Will any kind of ME4 (or wateva they call it) be strictly for the multiplayers?

Dude you seriously must play KOTOR, Battlefront, Empire at War and Republic Commando.

Yeah?  How are the graphics, tho? Aren't they older now. (I've got xbox). I'm looking for some new games to enjoy

[whywhywhywhy]

happy_daiz wrote...

Doug4130 wrote...

That's a pretty crappy analogy.  You took 2 random things that have nothing to do with each other.  Playing a video and playing a video game with friends goes hand in hand.  They'll never make a HDTV/refrigerator, but they do make HDTV and DVD players combined for that same reason

Actually, they already make refrigerators with HDTVs. Meet the LG LSC27990TT.



Did that just blow your mind?

ROFL that deserves a Beer emote!

[Cutlass Jack]

"I have long been a fan of Bioware and everything they put out in the last decade is among my favorite games of all time, providing me with hundreds of hours of enjoyment. Then they put out one game I didn't like as much, and then put in features in a game I haven't played yet, that I'm pretty sure I probably won't like either. Based on this I firmly believe that Bioware has sold out to the man and I will despise them forever.

I'll be over here in the corner despising them while replaying DAO again."

[stonbw1]

Isn't this thread (on BW's own community site) like going to someone's house for dinner and telling them their food sucks?

[Teredan]

rapscallioness wrote...
I didn't say there were MP elements in FF13. At all. Perhaps I wasn't clear. I don't care why FF13 sucked, or was meh. It had potential, but didn't deliver. That's not my point in this post.

Ah ok than I'm sorry the sentence that made me scratch my head was this one.

rapscallioness wrote...
The one they did FF13...just wasn't.....It seems like they focused so much on MP, they've ditched the Single Player.

Which doesn't make a lot of sense, I mean how could they have focused on MP when it isn't in the game?
But it seems you were referring to something different with the MP. My tip always beware of what the object in your sentence is.

[Captain_Obvious]

stonbw1 wrote...

Isn't this thread (on BW's own community site) like going to someone's house for dinner and telling them their food sucks?

No, it's like me going to someone's house and telling them that they used to serve incredible food before they decided to spoil the fracking recipe without asking me what was okay to change.  Screw whoever else was coming to dinner, if I don't like ham then the cook had better damn well not serve ham.  It's very presence on the table, even if I chose not to have any, would offend me to such an extent that I'd never eat dinner there again. 

[Teredan]

delete double post

Modifié par Teredan, 11 octobre 2011 - 04:21 .

[armass]

Since they were bought by EA some changes have occured, which ive noticed, that are not always for the best. This latest decision smells like it was deviced by EA not BW. Hopefully it pays off, im not intrested in MP personally.

Im also concerned what may happen should TOR fail, they have pumped huge sums into it. Yet the game copies WOW shamelessly as some reviewers who tested it have said and besides the story and voice acting doesn't bring anything new or innovative to the table.

I remain skeptical, but still hopeful. Theyre not Square-Enix, a great company that has fallen from it's grace, but the potential is always there.

Modifié par armass, 11 octobre 2011 - 04:33 .

[Teredan]

IsaacShep wrote...

Sorry, but this consumer perspective is your perspective, not everyone's. In your opinon it won't add alot, there are TONS of other gamers who love co-op and think it adds hella lot value to their games. Not to mention, BioWare actually integrates the co-op into the main game/story/system (optionally of course) to add even more to the experience. The fact publishers think gamers love & want co-op/multiplayer didn't came out of nowhere. If the consumer base didn't give them enough resons to think it's worth investing in co-op instead of, let's say, customize your Shepard's ears feature, they wouldn't invest in it. EA was willing to pour more money into ME3 project because they believe it is possible to get better sales. But not via single-player, which didn't increase the sales significantly between ME2 & ME1 despite obviously larger budget, but via co-op.

In the end, what is a feature worth investing in for you may not be what is worth investing in and what I would want (I may want Shepard ears customization feature and think that it would add alot etc). And then it also may be different for EA because they take sales into consideration.

It may be. But I mean again look at Dead Space 2 Multiplayer? I mean I don't wan't to take away from the maybe thousand or more people that enjoy this aspect of the game but the general expression that I got is that almost no one cared about its MP. And in retrospective I can easily say that the ressources spend on it could have been used to bring a better experience to the crowd that plays Dead Space for it's Sp experience which is undeniable massivley bigger than it's MP counterpart.

[Teredan]

Captain_Obvious wrote...

No, it's like me going to someone's house and telling them that they used to serve incredible food before they decided to spoil the fracking recipe without asking me what was okay to change.  Screw whoever else was coming to dinner, if I don't like ham then the cook had better damn well not serve ham.  It's very presence on the table, even if I chose not to have any, would offend me to such an extent that I'd never eat dinner there again. 

In your example you don't pay for the food. But you know what you would have to pay for? Right ME3...