2261 réponses à ce sujet

[Someone With Mass]

Lard wrote...

Twistedfaith wrote... Well, what is there -NOT- to like. You don't -LOSE- any of your lone-wolf playing, nor get any less than what you would anyway. --

But you lose part of the single player experience because it is consigned to MP.

How, exactly?

[Melchiah109]

Someone With Mass wrote...

How, exactly?

Don't get him started. He'll start flooding the thread with the same things repeatedly without you talking to him anyway.

[MGIII]

Lard wrote...

Twistedfaith wrote... Well, what is there -NOT- to like. You don't -LOSE- any of your lone-wolf playing, nor get any less than what you would anyway. --

But you lose part of the single player experience because it is consigned to MP.

This doesn't make any sense. In any capacity.

[didymos1120]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Lard wrote...

Twistedfaith wrote... Well, what is there -NOT- to like. You don't -LOSE- any of your lone-wolf playing, nor get any less than what you would anyway. --

But you lose part of the single player experience because it is consigned to MP.

How, exactly?

Look, it just does, OK.  Why can't you just be satisfied with that?  WHY?!?!?!?!?

[jeweledleah]

ability to play this thing solo, offline is the only reason I'm willing to "live with it" while still considering paying full price. need more information on mechanics including wither you'll be able to pause during solo play of MP missions. depending on which details they reveal I'll either pre-order again, or stick to my current strategy of "wait until the game goes on sale". including exactly what does Casey Hudson means by complete playthrough - since he compared it to suicide mission and suicide mission could be done without casualties, without doing a single side mission or getting every single loyalty, but the way they are making it sound right now is that you either do every single side mission in a game, and/or play MP, or you don't get the best possible ending. - not challenging as much as just tedious.

[Someone With Mass]

didymos1120 wrote...

Look, it just does, OK.  Why can't you just be satisfied with that?  WHY?!?!?!?!?

I'm stubborn.

[JeffZero]

To me, doing all side missions is not at all tedious. Not remotely so.

[Someone With Mass]

JeffZero wrote...

To me, doing all side missions is not at all tedious. Not remotely so.

A higher reward wouldn't hurt, though.

[Zakatak757]

Alocormin wrote...

Cross-platform? Mebbe? :/

"Xbox has better games!"
"PS3 hardware is superior!"
"Keyboard and mouse is the only way to play!"

I think I will pass.

[didymos1120]

Someone With Mass wrote...

JeffZero wrote...

To me, doing all side missions is not at all tedious. Not remotely so.

A higher reward wouldn't hurt, though.

Well, how about this from the OXM article:

"If you're a completist," says Hudson "and you do pretty much everything in the single-player game really well, then your total War Assets will be so high that you actually don't have to do anything in terms of fighting this 'galactic war' [in context, he's referring to the MP mode there]."

Or are you thinking more in terms of tangibles like weapons and the like?

[Someone With Mass]

didymos1120 wrote...
Or are you thinking more in terms of tangibles like weapons and the like?

More on weapons and armor stuff, yeah.

I know that the missions are contributing to the cause, but what do I personally get out of it?

[DeltaPhoenix08]

First time posting here.

I was super psyched for ME3 and pre-ordered ages ago. Then I heard about MP and I flipped out (before I knew any details). Then I read the FAQ and continued to flip out and cancelled my pre-order. Then I watched the video and read the "somewhat" updated FAQ and still flipped out.

I have finally calmed down enough now to be rational (well a little at least)

I have not preordered the game again.

I am not interested at all in the MP. I understand that the ability to affect the SP by MP is optional, however I think that even the inclusion of that is a mistake. The existence of the MP makes me not want to play it at all (ok thats not very rational), so I won't.

Maybe some time in the future when I stop nerd raging and being so butthurt I'll play it, but for now, no thanks.

To me, Shepherd defeated the Collectors and then flew to some tropical planet to live with Miranda and Liara happily ever after.

[bigheadzach]

Lard wrote...

Twistedfaith wrote... Well, what is there -NOT- to like. You don't -LOSE- any of your lone-wolf playing, nor get any less than what you would anyway. --

But you lose part of the single player experience because it is consigned to MP.

Modifié par bigheadzach, 13 octobre 2011 - 03:49 .

[jeweledleah]

JeffZero wrote...

To me, doing all side missions is not at all tedious. Not remotely so.

to me - it is, when it becomes a requirement (and I say that as a completionist - yes, I actualy gathered all the matriarch writings and turian insignias etc - on more then one playthrough).  in every single bioware game so far - side missions contributed to the epilogue, but they weren't required to get the best possible ending.  they just gave the game a certain flavor and depth, while remaining completely optional.

knowing that you don't have to do them, but can anyway if you so chose (kinda like engaging in multiplayer solo - you can if you want to) - makes them more fun.  plus getting sunshine and reinbows depending largely on how many mercs you killed on random planets is about as challenging as scanning for minerals.

[Gatt9]

didymos1120 wrote...

Well, how about this from the OXM article:

"If you're a completist," says Hudson "and you do pretty much everything in the single-player game really well, then your total War Assets will be so high that you actually don't have to do anything in terms of fighting this 'galactic war' [in context, he's referring to the MP mode there]."

Or are you thinking more in terms of tangibles like weapons and the like?

That's actually a pretty interesting quote with very far reaching consequences that illustrates my point.

If you do pretty much everything AND you do reall well

From those two statements we can start making key inferences.

-You will very likely have to complete every single side mission,  no matter how tedious,  to bypass the Online Pass DRM restriction*.
-The quantative portion of the statement tells us that resolving quests have degrees of success,  "If you do really well",  a statement that can only be said iff there's a sliding scale on quest resolution that includes optimal and sub-optimal solutions.
-Which then implies that you must achieve Optimal solutions for all side missions.
-And a corallary is that you now have to play "Guess what the Developer thinks is Optimal" or "You must kill at least X of the enemies to achieve Optimal",  or something similiar.

All of which concludes that for only the most persistent,  or for those who make sure to spoil themselves throughout the game,  can manage to bypass the Online Pass DRM to achieve the Optimal ending we shouldn't have to comprimise to achieve just so EA can sell Online Passes to used game buyers.

Which is what I've been saying,  this is not anywhere near as "Optional" as Bioware's stated,  and is as invasive as I expected,  so that EA can sell Online Passes to used game buyers.

This is not acceptable.  I should not be forced into Multiplayer just so EA can squeeze dollars out of the used game market by holding the optimal solution to a game series hostage!

*Call it what it is.  Online Pass is nothing more than DRM to attack Gamestop's used game sales.  Because Gamestop and the Game Industry are having a tiff,  Gamers suffer far,  far,  far,  worse than any and every other method of DRM devised.  Content is now held hostage,  completely unacceptable.  If I don't cancel my preorder,  this will be the last EA game I ever buy.

[NOD-INFORMER37]

Twistedfaith wrote...

@NOD-INFORMER37

Just remember, MP itself was wiped clean, shot down with people saying.. "Nawwh, not going to happen."..so, don't give up hope, just yet until it is set in stone!

Thats true, for all we know Quarians very well could be playable in co-op.

I guess we'll know for sure when the game comes out!

[Thompson family]

Re: Best Single-Player experience.

The argument that single players are ripped off somehow really makes no sense.

ME -- all of it, 1,2 and 3 -- is Shep's story. Shep isn't in the co-op missions. Therefore, your Shep can complete ME3 and the whole series and not "miss" anything. The game is "complete" because your Shep did all he/she can do.

If you could play your Shep in these co-op missions, then the Single Player purists would have a complaint. There would be some things Shep couldn't do without playing well with others. Your Shep would be forced into multiplayer.

All this is hair-splitting nonsense to me, but the arguments like "ARRRRGH. This is AWFUL. The game is RUINED!" can be fun sometimes. Futile, but fun.

I'll try multiplayer. If I get any good at it, I wouldn't mind helping out people who just want to complete the game -- every little bit -- without too much frustration.

[NOD-INFORMER37]

DeltaPhoenix08 wrote...

First time posting here.

I was super psyched for ME3 and pre-ordered ages ago. Then I heard about MP and I flipped out (before I knew any details). Then I read the FAQ and continued to flip out and cancelled my pre-order. Then I watched the video and read the "somewhat" updated FAQ and still flipped out.

I have finally calmed down enough now to be rational (well a little at least)

I have not preordered the game again.

I am not interested at all in the MP. I understand that the ability to affect the SP by MP is optional, however I think that even the inclusion of that is a mistake. The existence of the MP makes me not want to play it at all (ok thats not very rational), so I won't.

Maybe some time in the future when I stop nerd raging and being so butthurt I'll play it, but for now, no thanks.

To me, Shepherd defeated the Collectors and then flew to some tropical planet to live with Miranda and Liara happily ever after.

I understand why ppl are upset about this (I sure as hell was, still cautiously keeping hope) but dont you want to see how the rest of the story goes? Isnt it worse to ignore the last story of the trilogy completely than to deal with some multiplayer?  :S 

Not flaming, just wondering.

[JeffZero]

jeweledleah wrote...

JeffZero wrote...

To me, doing all side missions is not at all tedious. Not remotely so.

to me - it is, when it becomes a requirement (and I say that as a completionist - yes, I actualy gathered all the matriarch writings and turian insignias etc - on more then one playthrough).  in every single bioware game so far - side missions contributed to the epilogue, but they weren't required to get the best possible ending.  they just gave the game a certain flavor and depth, while remaining completely optional.

knowing that you don't have to do them, but can anyway if you so chose (kinda like engaging in multiplayer solo - you can if you want to) - makes them more fun.  plus getting sunshine and reinbows depending largely on how many mercs you killed on random planets is about as challenging as scanning for minerals.

You know, come to think of it, I'm in complete agreement with you. I find those side missions much more enjoyable knowing they're off the beaten path, not on a beaten path I pretty much have to travel down if I'm interested in seeing the best outcome sometimes.

Let's hope Casey's "it's hard to do" ends up about as genuine as what the development team said about ME2's "No One Left Behind" then, I suppose. I have a feeling that's how it will end up being -- that despite the 'if you're a completionist' lines, it will wind up being that you really don't need to literally do everything and/or play through the co-op engagements.

But that's all it is, a feeling. Right now the words don't echo my thoughts, admittedly.

[NOD-INFORMER37]

I'm listening to elevator music btw

[DeltaPhoenix08]

NOD-INFORMER37 wrote...

DeltaPhoenix08 wrote...

First time posting here.

I was super psyched for ME3 and pre-ordered ages ago. Then I heard about MP and I flipped out (before I knew any details). Then I read the FAQ and continued to flip out and cancelled my pre-order. Then I watched the video and read the "somewhat" updated FAQ and still flipped out.

I have finally calmed down enough now to be rational (well a little at least)

I have not preordered the game again.

I am not interested at all in the MP. I understand that the ability to affect the SP by MP is optional, however I think that even the inclusion of that is a mistake. The existence of the MP makes me not want to play it at all (ok thats not very rational), so I won't.

Maybe some time in the future when I stop nerd raging and being so butthurt I'll play it, but for now, no thanks.

To me, Shepherd defeated the Collectors and then flew to some tropical planet to live with Miranda and Liara happily ever after.

I understand why ppl are upset about this (I sure as hell was, still cautiously keeping hope) but dont you want to see how the rest of the story goes? Isnt it worse to ignore the last story of the trilogy completely than to deal with some multiplayer?  :S 

Not flaming, just wondering.

probably.
like i say i can recognize that I am not being rational, but its kind of the principle for me. They said no multiplayer. I dont think its in the spirit of the game to include MP.  And I'm still not 100% convinced that by avoiding MP I won't miss out on anything.

I will most likely play it, but not for a while after release. Once the price drops and after I've talked to buddies of mine who have played it and can let me know exactly what the MP does and doesn't do.

[didymos1120]

jeweledleah wrote...

in every single bioware game so far - side missions contributed to the epilogue....

Well, except ME1 and ME2.

[Thompson family]

Gatt9 wrote...

That's actually a pretty interesting quote with very far reaching consequences that illustrates my point.

If you do pretty much everything AND you do reall well [etc.]

If you acheived the "optimal" playthrough on the first try in both ME1 and ME2, I'd be very impressed.

No, wait. That's impossible.

Why? because you have to unlock hardcore. Then you have to unlock insanity.

Therefore, it is impossible to acheive the "optimal result" -- if you, like me, think that anything less than beating the game on the highest difficulty is less than "optimal" --  in less than three playthroughs on either ME1 or ME2.

Since I always keep playing until there's an optimal result on the highest difficulty setting (and beyond), this simply is never a problem for me.

If it's a problem for people who just want to play once and then never play the game again, I have to question if they really like this game enough to care about the complaint you just raised.

[weremutt]

Even after reading everything and listening to Bioware Pulse I have no faith any longer in this game. Everything about the Co-op was a major play on words. I remember Casey Hudson saying during some showing of the game during a convention along the lines of this is Commander Shepard's Story and we will not have Multiplayer in the Trilogy because it can take away and alter the Commanders story that you have been developing. That has turned into a major lie. I have severe issues with this gaming company now and if I even do buy this game, it will be the last Bioware game I buy and I have bought many of them. I was under the impression that this was a single player experience and I feel that this has been robbed of me. If not playing Multiplayer is truly an option I will be extremely happy. I have no want or need to play my story of Shepard with anyone else. But if I need to play Multiplayer to unlock anything, Whether it be an Achievement, Stat, Armour, Weapon, Special Character, or anything at all, I will not be purchasing this game because my single player experience has be altered for co-op game play that should not have ever been introduced to the trilogy. Bioware should have waited until after the trilogy was completed to make a multiplayer version of any of it. Casey Hudson you sold out to EA and destroyed what was going to be an amazing experience and turned it into a linear step child of what the original Mass Effect once was.
By the way get rid of thermal clips they ruined a lot of the lore for the series.

[Gatt9]

Thompson family wrote...

Re: Best Single-Player experience.

The argument that single players are ripped off somehow really makes no sense.

ME -- all of it, 1,2 and 3 -- is Shep's story. Shep isn't in the co-op missions. Therefore, your Shep can complete ME3 and the whole series and not "miss" anything. The game is "complete" because your Shep did all he/she can do.

If you could play your Shep in these co-op missions, then the Single Player purists would have a complaint. There would be some things Shep couldn't do without playing well with others. Your Shep would be forced into multiplayer.

All this is hair-splitting nonsense to me, but the arguments like "ARRRRGH. This is AWFUL. The game is RUINED!" can be fun sometimes. Futile, but fun.

I'll try multiplayer. If I get any good at it, I wouldn't mind helping out people who just want to complete the game -- every little bit -- without too much frustration.

You're making the assumption that single players can achieve the optimal ending with a reasonable amount of effort,  which is highly unlikely.  Since the whole purpose of this is to extort payment from people who bought the game used,  it's very likely that single players cannot achieve the optimal ending they would've had sans MP. 

This whole racket only works is if the work to achieve Optimal without multiplayer is so difficult that most people would rather cough up the money to avoid it.  Such as a galaxy full of missions and artifacts randomly distributed through 50 different worlds that must be explored in some tedious manner.  Is it possible?  Sure.  Is it reasonable?  No.

The assumption that this is implemented in a fair and reasonable manner has yet to be proven,  and logically,  given the whole purpose of Multiplayer and Online Pass,  it's incredibly unlikely that the assumption will prove true.

People keep making the mistake of thinking Bioware added multiplayer because either "It's a fun feature" or "It's something people wanted".  Neither of those is the reason,  and EA's pretty much blatantly stated it.  The whole purpose behind it is to sell used game buyers Online Passes,  which means that it will not be reasonably avoidable.