2261 réponses à ce sujet

[CroGamer002]

Darkeus wrote...

We all think one thing or another on this matter, just like he thinks his opinion is correct. We can only wait and see if we have a disaster on our hands or not.

Squee913 thinks his opinion is correct?

That's a blatant lie.

I am more worried about the effect of being able to gain resources in co-op will have on the difficulty and length of the game. If you can gain these resources in co-op, it may be able to ignore some Single Player content.

There are 5 Bioware Studios.

BioWare Edmonton is doing Mass Effect 3 SP and Dragon Age.
BioWare Austin is doing The Old Republic MMO.
BioWare Mythic is doing Warhammer Online.
BioWare Montreal is doing Mass Effect 3 MP.
BioWare Ireland which will do secret projects I presume( it's newest Studio that was created this year in June).

[didymos1120]

Darkeus wrote...

And different teams have to sync things and integrate them. That adds a whole new dimension, unintentional bugs and programming issues that take away from teh Single player because of poor implementation.

Yes, game development is complicated and imperfect.  The sky is also blue.

[Robuthad]

Hey! The ocean is blue too!

[Daryst]

Taciter wrote...

Daryst wrote...
Hudson also said that you can get the optimum ending in ME3 without the use of MP at all. It is another means of getting the same result.

You might want to read Quanta's post again Daryst.. I think you must have missed it.

If you check the same pulse episode at 2:26 you will hear hudson say that "if you wanna do a realy complete singleplayer playthrough. Then you can absolutely get to the highest level of success in the endgame" it is an alternative way in getting the same result

[QuantaStarfire]

didymos1120 wrote...

QuantaStarfire wrote...

Daryst wrote...

I dont get how many people think that the multiplayer aspect of the game is going to affect the duration or content of the singpleplayer campaign.

It says in the opening paragraph that it'll affect singleplayer, and Casey Hudson himself says in the video (@2:18) that your multiplayer performance yields a better singleplayer ending. Gee, I wonder why people think this'll affect singleplayer?

Re-read the post you're replying to:  "affect the duration or content."  You're both talking about two different things: the effect MP had on the development of the single-player game (i.e. the notion that MP means there will be less single-player content than there would have been without MP) vs its effects in gameplay (i.e., the fact that you get war assets from completing co-op mission).

The ending is content, though, and Mr. Hudson's lack of distinction in the video that, yes, multiplayer is an alternative to the better endings, damn near gave me a heart attack when the thought crossed my mind that I was going to be deprived of my happy ending because of gimmicky multiplayer, and I imagine that many other people felt the same. Of course, I then went and read his Twitter feed and calmed down a bit, though I'm remaining skeptical until I hear more information.

Still, I have to wonder what the hell they were thinking when they put all this information together. It's not like people haven't been saying for the last several months "Man, I hope they don't come out with multiplayer," or anything. It's like they had no idea how people would react.

[CroGamer002]

Taciter wrote...

I know for some people, that's a concern. I personally see that as a side issue and completely irrelevant. What comes out of Bioware Montreal is just more welcome content, what I object to is the fact that this content will be exclusive to multiplayers. That also wouldn't be the end of the world if Bioware had implemented an optional AI squad member function as that would essentially have allowed reluctant multiplayers to experience the game just as it would have been had it been single player but that facility is conspicuously absent therefore I feel as though I'm being punished for not liking/wanting to participate in multiplayer.

Montreal Studio was created on March 2nd, 2009 with sole purpose to assist projects if necessary.

And if I'm not wrong, they did ME2 Overlord, LotSB and Arrival DLC's.


So yeah, entire point of that studio is to do projects that other studio can't for whatever reason.



As for A.I. squadmates?
Well, there's still 4 months for Co-Op to be done.

[Taciter]

Darkeus wrote...

And different teams have to sync things and integrate them. That adds a whole new dimension, unintentional bugs and programming issues that take away from teh Single player because of poor implementation.

Darkeus mate, I know we're basically of the same mind but I think we both have to accept that the following statements are likely true and will not change:

1) Bioware Montreal has been commissioned to undertake the task of developing a co-op 'addition' to the ME3 SP game proper. It has commenced and no amount of dissent will halt their progress.

2) The Funds for each department have been allocated and commited. These funds will not be withdrawn or reallocated.

Once, we've accepted the futility of attempting to coerce the inevitability of those facts, we can shift on to more pressing concerns. Given that the MP is a reality, we need to provide suggestions for ways to make the MP more appealing to the significant number of anti-MP players for whom we presume to speak. Things like:

1) Given that the ME3 release date has been postponed until this new addon is completed, there should be ample time to implement an AI option for those who don't wish to particpate in co-op missions with other human players. Since the single player storyline consists entirely of AI squad member support, this should be realitively easy to implement AND to avid single players, should be virtually indistinguishable from a conventional single player scenario.

2) If for whatever reason, an AI squad 'option' isn't feasable, then how about providing an alternative method of completing objectives that require concurrent actions for solo play. e.g. instead of requiring a human companion to 'hack a terminal' while you defend said companion, you could have a terminal hacking device a la LotSB that auto-decrypts over a period of time as you attempt to fend off waves of attackers.

Either of those suggestions, I suspect would be a welcome compromise for any dissallusioned single player wanting to experience the content that unfolds in the multiplayer missions... in essence, every one gets a cake and we can all eat them.

[Merci357]

Mesina2 wrote...

Montreal Studio was created on March 2nd, 2009 with sole purpose to assist projects if necessary.

And if I'm not wrong, they did ME2 Overlord, LotSB and Arrival DLC's.


So yeah, entire point of that studio is to do projects that other studio can't for whatever reason.

Afaik only Arrival. Which would explain the drop in quality compared to LotSB. But I don't have any quotes to back this up, it's just what I recall.

[Taciter]

Mesina2 wrote...
Montreal Studio was created on March 2nd, 2009 with sole purpose to assist projects if necessary.

And if I'm not wrong, they did ME2 Overlord, LotSB and Arrival DLC's.


So yeah, entire point of that studio is to do projects that other studio can't for whatever reason.

All good points and...

Mesina2 wrote...
As for A.I. squadmates?
Well, there's still 4 months for Co-Op to be done.

THIS is what I'm holding on to for hope... I still have faith... *chants Bioware Hymn* in candlelight

[CroGamer002]

Merci357 wrote...

Afaik only Arrival. Which would explain the drop in quality compared to LotSB. But I don't have any quotes to back this up, it's just what I recall.

What quality drop?

It's pretty much the same in quality of gameplay, only without standard boss fight.
Instead we can fight 5 waves of enemy which is way more fun then fight with Vasir who has too big Barrier and Armor bar and way more challenging then fight with Shadow Broker.

[Taciter]

Mesina2 wrote...

Merci357 wrote...

Afaik only Arrival. Which would explain the drop in quality compared to LotSB. But I don't have any quotes to back this up, it's just what I recall.

What quality drop?

It's pretty much the same in quality of gameplay, only without standard boss fight.
Instead we can fight 5 waves of enemy which is way more fun then fight with Vasir who has too big Barrier and Armor bar and way more challenging then fight with Shadow Broker.

I have to admit, I'm with Merci on this one. LotSB felt a lot more polished. Better cut scenes, better dialogue, better props... better... just better! =P

[Robuthad]

Arrival was just really damn cool there at the end with the "I'm really in space" feeling

[Taciter]

Robuthad wrote...

Arrival was just really damn cool there at the end with the "I'm really in space" feeling

That's true.. looking up at the approaching relay you mean yeah! No where near as cool as the opening scene of SR-1's destruction when Shepard walks into the CRC and above you, through the gaping hole in Normandy's hull you can see the planet's surface. That sort of creativite vision is what defines Bioware's commitment to 'Mass Effect' for me.

Modifié par Taciter, 14 octobre 2011 - 07:31 .

[Robuthad]

Here's to those moments and hopefully many more in ME3! They all have their shining moments

[QuantaStarfire]

Taciter wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...

Merci357 wrote...

Afaik only Arrival. Which would explain the drop in quality compared to LotSB. But I don't have any quotes to back this up, it's just what I recall.

What quality drop?

It's pretty much the same in quality of gameplay, only without standard boss fight.
Instead we can fight 5 waves of enemy which is way more fun then fight with Vasir who has too big Barrier and Armor bar and way more challenging then fight with Shadow Broker.

I have to admit, I'm with Merci on this one. LotSB felt a lot more polished. Better cut scenes, better dialogue, better props... better... just better! =P

LotSB built up towards an amazing conclusion that fell completely flat once you finally got to meet the guy. You barely have any conversation with one of the biggest Chessmasters in the galaxy, and then have a disappointingly easy boss fight. Arrival's entire plot falls apart once you reach Project Base, but is otherwise a fun mission.

[Taciter]

Robuthad wrote...

Here's to those moments and hopefully many more in ME3! They all have their shining moments

Hear hear!!! *Raises mead aloft

As an aside, I hope we finally get a chance to legitimise our consummated romance... My Paragon Shep is starting to feel a little awkward about his illegitimate relationship.

[Taciter]

QuantaStarfire wrote...
LotSB built up towards an amazing conclusion that fell completely flat once you finally got to meet the guy. You barely have any conversation with one of the biggest Chessmasters in the galaxy, and then have a disappointingly easy boss fight. Arrival's entire plot falls apart once you reach Project Base, but is otherwise a fun mission.

lol.... It was a bit easy sure.. but it was at least original! The idea of compromising his shields then resorting to Melee.. an inspired show of creativity I thought. At least Liara is now in charge.. can't wait to see what her new appointment will yield in ME3 - I suspect she'll become TIM's primary antagonist!

Modifié par Taciter, 14 octobre 2011 - 07:41 .

[Lumikki]

Biowares resources is used for creating MP content, it also means that time use for MP is taken away from time what could have been used making more single player content. Making anyting allways cost money, who's paying that development time? We players are, when we buy the game.

Because players we are paying the content, question is, do we players get what we want? I have personaly absolute zero use for co-op gameplay, so why I have to waste my money to pay for content what I have absolute no use at all. It's like my money is used to pay other players content and fun. I don't like it. I don¨'t even have internet connection in my game computer. I play offline single player games.

Last small issue is that to make co-op work nicely in game, they may have made compromises with single player design. Because they have to think how everyting works in design also from MP viewpoint. This means that singe player experience may suffer from it.

In my opinion single player games should be single player games and multiplayer games should be multiplayer games, not as everyting to be both. Because not every player want both content in same games.

Modifié par Lumikki, 14 octobre 2011 - 09:02 .

[whywhywhywhy]

ArkkAngel007 wrote...

Has anyone seen the crap being pulled on purchasers of the new Batman game? If Bioware pulled that, there would definitely be problems. For those who don't know, the Catwoman portion of the campaign is being pulled to be only accessible to those who purchase the game new and, I do believe, some sort of content pass.

Imagine if the vanguard class or the Mars mission was locked in the game to everyone with a used copy? Ugh...horrible thoughts to end a night with...

Edit: As the multiplayer debate has strayed into the argument of online passes and locking content out to used-game purchasers, I found this info to be relevent, though it deals with single-player elements rather than multiplayer. 

They did.  Or did you forget about the cerberus network ? 

• Normandy Crash Site
• Zaeed - The Price of Revenge
• Cerberus Weapon and Armor
• Arc Projector
• Firewalker Pack

:innocent:
Not to mention you have to buy Kasumi.

Modifié par whywhywhywhy, 14 octobre 2011 - 09:06 .

[TobyHasEyes]

Lumikki wrote...

Biowares resources is used for creating MP content, it also means that time use for MP is taken away from time what could have been used making more single player content. Making anyting allways cost money, who's paying that development time? We players are, when we buy the game.

Because players we are paying the content, question is, do we players get what we want? I have personaly absolute zero use for co-op gameplay, so why I have to waste my money to pay for content what I have absolute no use at all. It's like my money is used to pay other players content and fun. I don't like it.

Last small issue is that to make co-op work nicely in game, they may have made compromises with single player design. Because they have to think how everyting works in design also from MP viewpoint. This means that singe player experience may suffer from it.

 Although the likely possibility is that, as EA loves MP in their games, they might have given Bioware funding especially to produce that MP that they wouldn't otherwise have got. Which if true would mean that it hadn't financially impacted on the SP

 And if that is true, then you are not directly funding it. If they had not gotten that individual funding, the SP would have been the same and you would have paid the same for it. If they have got additional funding for MP then it is purely, from the consumers' standpoint, a bonus (allbeit in your case, an unwanted bonus)

 So the discussion in terms of what you are funding, or how much it is has detracted from SP funding all depends on us finally knowing how the funding was dealt with

 And your point for changing SP to suit MP.. there is a clear divide in terms of gameplay between SP and MP. If what you said was true, then in SP we would no longer have the radial menu, or time dilation powers, and yet in demos we have seen them still in use, even though they are not being used in MP

[whywhywhywhy]

Lumikki wrote...

Biowares resources is used for creating MP content, it also means that time use for MP is taken away from time what could have been used making more single player content. Making anyting allways cost money, who's paying that development time? We players are, when we buy the game.

Because players we are paying the content, question is, do we players get what we want? I have personaly absolute zero use for co-op gameplay, so why I have to waste my money to pay for content what I have absolute no use at all. It's like my money is used to pay other players content and fun. I don't like it. I don¨'t even have internet connection in my game computer. I play offline single player games.

Last small issue is that to make co-op work nicely in game, they may have made compromises with single player design. Because they have to think how everyting works in design also from MP viewpoint. This means that singe player experience may suffer from it.

In my opinion single player games should be single player games and multiplayer games should be multiplayer games, not as everyting to be both. Because not every player want both content in same games.

Nice post, I agree.

[Lumikki]

So, you are saying that increase amount of money to develoment does not affect the games end sales at all? Meaning EA did put money in the game and does't want to get it back?

Please, every money put in any product has to also be taken back by selling the product with profit.

Modifié par Lumikki, 14 octobre 2011 - 09:09 .

[whywhywhywhy]

1136342t54 wrote...
So your too lazy to actually attempt to post an explanation for your attempt to classify multiplayer in different classes of new school and old school (which don't work) instead you just cross out my post because I don't understand your non understandable point? Hell a lot of multiplayer games today aren't really solely online multiplayer. This new school that you seem to call doesn't really exist in many new mp games I play. Maybe BF3 but I only played the beta.

Your irrelevant, come back with a point and I'll respond.

[DeathDragon185]

Mesina2 wrote...

Darkeus wrote...

We all think one thing or another on this matter, just like he thinks his opinion is correct. We can only wait and see if we have a disaster on our hands or not.

Squee913 thinks his opinion is correct?

That's a blatant lie.

I am more worried about the effect of being able to gain resources in co-op will have on the difficulty and length of the game. If you can gain these resources in co-op, it may be able to ignore some Single Player content.

There are 5 Bioware Studios.

BioWare Edmonton is doing Mass Effect 3 SP and Dragon Age.
BioWare Austin is doing The Old Republic MMO.
BioWare Mythic is doing Warhammer Online.
BioWare Montreal is doing Mass Effect 3 MP.
BioWare Ireland which will do secret projects I presume( it's newest Studio that was created this year in June).

so people will finally stop ****ing?

[TobyHasEyes]

Lumikki wrote...

So, you are saying that increase amount of money to develoment does not affect the games end sales at all? Meaning EA did put money in the game and does't want to get it back?

Please, every money put in any product has to also be taken back by selling the product with profit.

 What I mean is that, if you were happy to pay £40 for the SP product, which had used up the limits of its funding, then I don't see why you object to paying the SAME amount for that SAME product (which has used up the limits of its funding) plus some MP content which came from funding that, whether MP had been included or not, would not have gone to the SP content