Killjoy Cutter wrote...
It wouldn't be perfect, but it would address some of my concerns sufficiently if implimented well. If played with an AI squad, the content would need to be available offline and without the game pass.
(Of course, one suspects that this is exactly why we WON'T see an AI squad version of the MP missions.)
dreman9999 wrote...
1. It's not in your computer. It just linked to the game your playing. Like how dragon age links to the ea servers and ME2 with the cerberus news network.
2. Valve can look into any game you are playing. They a can also lock any game your playing,too. Even if you bought it.
3. So you don't think that's an issue with mp games.
What do you think about this?billy the squid wrote...
The problem is
not that Origin can look at internet history, identify hardware set up
or software installed on the machine, I certainly don't like it as a
privacy issue, but as far as things go it's not awful, a friend has
taken a look at Origin, he's far more tech savy than I am, but it was
unclear what the program was actually up to, which is the main point, it
hasn't been explained particularly well by EA.
I won't go into
huge detail a clutter everything up, but appart from accessing EA and
sytem related items, it also accessed all folders and I think a lot of
files from the Program Datafolder
Origin also opened Xfire.ini as well as xfire_games.ini
File
and registry logs showed that Origin did not access any values
containing the word "browser", "Internet Explorer", "Steam", "Valve" or
"Firefox" (my default browser) except for a couple of registry entries
that indicated the default browser for the system. It also queried the
registry entries Internet ExplorerSecuritySafety Warning Level and
Internet ExplorerSecurity which seem to indicate what security level IE
is running on.
There was also apparant communication with the EA
servers with encrypted information sent to EA, but I don't know what it
was. In addition the memory utilized increased to 2GB, which he was
shocked by.
From a legal stand point the terms are very broad and
largely undefined, which makes me apprehensive, my issues with Origin
have always been the privacy and the vague way things have been
presented. But, from a tech stand point it appears to be less excessive,
than initally thought.
But I still have lingering questions and
suspicions as to, why it attempts to scan all programdata folders, the
huge memory utilisation, encrypted data sent to EA etc. I don't mind EA
setting up their own digital distribution system, I rather it wasn't an
artificially created market, but explaining what the Origin's system
actually does has been badly handled, and they could have done
themselves a favour by explaining clearly what Origins actually does.
Modifié par Azbeszt, 14 octobre 2011 - 07:24 .
1. But the detail are what is important with resources. You may have an endless amount of resources, but if you don't plan on what your making, how would you know how to make it. You issuse is with the teams not getting the resources to make the game right...That is a management issues.Killjoy Cutter wrote...
dreman9999 wrote...
1.Your statement is an oxymoron....The ones who make the decisions are the on whether the money goes to mp and sp are retentive because they control how the team is manage and plan the game in general. (AKA...the games lead designer).Killjoy Cutter wrote...
dreman9999 wrote...
Killjoy Cutter wrote...
1) The resources spent are the resources spent, who makes the decision is entirely irrelevent.
2) I don't know anyone else who plays bioware games, and frankly needed to schedule my gaming time is part of the MP thing that I want to avoid entirely.
3) No one is claiming that MP is going to "override your choice to kill the rachni". Your response has nothing to do with my actual concern. Go back and re-read it, if you want. I'm getting enough flak as it is for repeated attempts to make people understand my actual point instead of whatever they think I'm saying.
4) Again, you're not actually addressing the actual point. If The Mission to Planet X is in MP, then it's not in SP. Simply as that. No matter how much content you create, the MP content is not in the SP gameplay.
5) That's why I don't have any Steam/Valve games. Because you're forced to use Steam. And Steam is a steaming pile of bloated crapware, never mind the privacy and security issues.
6) I hope you're right, but I won't hold my breath (about modding still being possible).
7) I have no problem with Bioware wanting to make, or making, or selling, MP games. I just have concerns about the introduction of MP into what has been a strictly SP series right as we get to the payoff.
1. Who make the desision on how money in a project is spent is very relevent. Why? Because bad management of resource and finances make a progect fall apart. With great management, planning, organisation, and conspet, get works can be made.
When ever you talk about money, people need to make the product, time and organisation..You are taking about management.
2.So you can just make a topic on bsn asking people to join up in a match?
3.That's the issue with balance. Ifyour complaining about balance to the final out come, then you complaining that you choice won't be as big of a fact. The thing is even with the mp, yourchoices in the sp is still a factor.
4.But that only an issue if they had to split the main team to make the mp team. If the main team need help, they can add more people. Also, that's a time issuse.....And they still have plenty of tiem left.
5.Sure, a game system that provide community and fairness with is players is bad.
6.Many people felt ME2 was not modable at first....Then wa got this...
7. It really doesn't matter when they add mp. All that matter is if the sp is uneffected.
1. Who made the decisions is irrelvent to whether the resources could have been dedicated to SP instead MP. I'm not saying they definately would have been spent on SP instead if they had not been spent on MP, just sticking a needle in the baloon of those who make the assertion that they simply, certainly would not have been.
2. No.
3. No. My concern is that the specific issues of MP players regarding issues like class vs class balance will come to affect the SP game in negative ways. This would not be the first game in which that has happened, I've watched it happen in every online MP game I've tried. Please respond to my actual point.
4. Again, you're not responding to my actual concern. You can have two entirely seperate teams, with two entirely seperate budgets, and it won't matter one whit to my point. Again, if Mission to Planet X is MP content, then it's not SP content. How is that not clear?
5. A game system that requires extra software to be running for the game to function, that constantly snoops around on the user's computer, and generally treats the user as a suspected thief and "cheat" unless they routinely prove otherwise, is increadibly bad.
6. ME2 doesn't have the some of the anti-modding features that MP games often have. And there's no risk of having my account locked or my ME2 install frozen because I modded the ammo capacity of the Carnifex to see how it changed gameplay.
7. IMO, it does matter when and to what game and in what manner they add it, as with any significant change to a game franchise.
And while I'm less concerned now than I was at the start, as people have made good points about the MP setup and more information has been revealed by Bioware, I'm not yet entirely convinced that MP is going to be entirely benign towards SP gameplay.
2.Your clearly a very social person...
3.What are you say that you think the way the mp plays in combat will effect how the combat plays in the sp......That a huge leap of logic their. We already seen the combat for ME3, and we have a huge list of specs for the powers and skills in ME3. It's clear sp and mp balance would be an issue because the the mp gameplay is separate from the sp.The mp is just a horde mode. You don't even play the same characters in the single player.
4.Yes, it matters. Why? Because the game focus would not be divided on one team. Game that have mp and sp have problems of quality because the dev team are dealing with two issues at once...SP and MP. Most times only one out of the 2 are done well. This is not the case with ME3. The same team that did everything in ME2 FOR SP is still working on the sp in ME3 with their attention only focused on the sp. Anything that is not worked on is based on time issues only. Not lack of finances or people.
5.That constant awareness of this is an non-issue if your not doing anything wrong.
6.But if you do that in the mp...that would be an issue. We don't know if we can't do that in the sp yet.
7.Nothing is shown that mp is taking away from the sp. In fact, because of MP we gained more to the sp. This just adds more to the game and how you can play it. I doesn't even change the sp. How is it an issue.
1. Resources are resources. You're getting caught up in the details and missing the basic point. If it was spent on MP, then none of us are in a position to say that it could not and would not have been spent on SP instead.
2. Not as such.
3. Unless the classes and powers in MP are divorced from their "settings and values" in SP, there's always a risk of MP player complaints causing changes to SP.
4. If The Mission to Planet X is in MP, it's content that's not in SP. So far, nothing you've said in any way addresses that point.
5. "What are you afraid of if you have nothing to hide", in other words? That only demonstrates that you fundamentally misundertand the importance and nature of the basic right to privacy.
6. I don't plan on modding to "cheat" in MP, I plan on modding to increase the replay value of SP. I want nothing to do with MP in any way. And yet the inclusion of MP in the SP game increases the odds of SP replayability via modding being compromised. Thus, my concern about bundling the MP into the SP game, and how it can fundamentally change things when compared to the previous ME games.
7. Take away, add, change, affect, whatever. If it leaks into SP in any way at all, it's too much IMO.
Modifié par Killjoy Cutter, 14 octobre 2011 - 07:29 .
Why wouldyu...It's co-op.Killjoy Cutter wrote...
iakus wrote...
Taciter wrote...
It also means we have several months left to try and convince Bioware of the necessity for an AI squad implentation to augment the forthcoming MP release. If done properly, the AI controlled squad members should be practically indistinguishable from the Shepard's SP counterparts - in effect, we solo players would get a whole bunch of new and interesting single player missions to complement the main storyline - you could think of it as a free DLC.
If such a compromise WAS implemented, multiplayers would have their much lauded co-op facility and we would have our SP missions... surely that's a reasonable suggestion?
Such a suggestion is probably as good a compromise as we have a hope of getting. I still wouldn't be happy, but it would be... acceptable.
But given that Bioware waited so long before springing this on us, I have to wonder just how much is locked in and unchangeable at this point.
It wouldn't be perfect, but it would address some of my concerns sufficiently if implimented well. If played with an AI squad, the content would need to be available offline and without the game pass.
(Of course, one suspects that this is exactly why we WON'T see an AI squad version of the MP missions.)
Modifié par dreman9999, 14 octobre 2011 - 07:30 .
Killjoy Cutter wrote...
Oh yeah, nothing to worry about, Origin's just using 2GB of RAM, exchanging encrypted data, and scanning all over your hard drive, that's all.
ArkkAngel007 wrote...
Instead of arguing over there being multiplayer in the game (it's here to stay, deal with it), how about we work on making sure the Bioware team knows what we as a community want with it? :innocent: Want split screen? Voice it on here and twitter. Feel like it shouldn't include important story elements (it won't) not included in the campaign? Let it be heard...
Modifié par Taciter, 14 octobre 2011 - 07:51 .
dreman9999 wrote...
Killjoy Cutter wrote...
1. Resources are resources. You're getting caught up in the details and missing the basic point. If it was spent on MP, then none of us are in a position to say that it could not and would not have been spent on SP instead.
2. Not as such.
3. Unless the classes and powers in MP are divorced from their "settings and values" in SP, there's always a risk of MP player complaints causing changes to SP.
4. If The Mission to Planet X is in MP, it's content that's not in SP. So far, nothing you've said in any way addresses that point.
5. "What are you afraid of if you have nothing to hide", in other words? That only demonstrates that you fundamentally misundertand the importance and nature of the basic right to privacy.
6. I don't plan on modding to "cheat" in MP, I plan on modding to increase the replay value of SP. I want nothing to do with MP in any way. And yet the inclusion of MP in the SP game increases the odds of SP replayability via modding being compromised. Thus, my concern about bundling the MP into the SP game, and how it can fundamentally change things when compared to the previous ME games.
7. Take away, add, change, affect, whatever. If it leaks into SP in any way at all, it's too much IMO.
1. But the detail are what is important with resources. You may have an endless amount of resources, but if you don't plan on what your making, how would you know how to make it. You issuse is with the teams not getting the resources to make the game right...That is a management issues.
2.Understanding sacasum is not another strong suit ether.
3.But it is. They are differnet modes. The devs alrealy stated things that are in the sp are not in the mp like the time duriation effects with infiltators sniper scope and Adrinalin rush. And they stated the specsare different from the sp. This is a non-issue. How the mp is built is not going to effect the sp, especially it the mp is co-op only.
4.Your not getting it. That's an issue with time. AKA, the lack of time to make the game would cause that. Making a second team would not do that if it the 2nd team does not take people away from the main team.
5.If you don't want them snooping around. Don't play online.
6.Than howis that an issue. We don't know if the sp will have problems in Modding yet.
7.It's an alternate...You don't have to play it. You don't lose anything for not playing it.
Modifié par Killjoy Cutter, 14 octobre 2011 - 07:56 .
dreman9999 wrote...
Why wouldyu...It's co-op.Killjoy Cutter wrote...
iakus wrote...
Taciter wrote...
It also means we have several months left to try and convince Bioware of the necessity for an AI squad implentation to augment the forthcoming MP release. If done properly, the AI controlled squad members should be practically indistinguishable from the Shepard's SP counterparts - in effect, we solo players would get a whole bunch of new and interesting single player missions to complement the main storyline - you could think of it as a free DLC.
If such a compromise WAS implemented, multiplayers would have their much lauded co-op facility and we would have our SP missions... surely that's a reasonable suggestion?
Such a suggestion is probably as good a compromise as we have a hope of getting. I still wouldn't be happy, but it would be... acceptable.
But given that Bioware waited so long before springing this on us, I have to wonder just how much is locked in and unchangeable at this point.
It wouldn't be perfect, but it would address some of my concerns sufficiently if implimented well. If played with an AI squad, the content would need to be available offline and without the game pass.
(Of course, one suspects that this is exactly why we WON'T see an AI squad version of the MP missions.)
If you want that then just play the side mission in the sp.
That's the real crux of the problem... I don't mind epic solo'ing but these hard-coded restrictions designed to enforce co-operation won't allow solo play by design so for those who don't want to spoil the immersion of single play, there is only one logical alternative... AI squad members.Killjoy Cutter wrote...
They're side-missions designed for a 4-person team, not a solo op, and some reportedly will include objectives that cannot be accomplished by 1 character, such as 3 covering while the 4th accesses some data.
Modifié par Taciter, 14 octobre 2011 - 08:08 .
ArkkAngel007 wrote...
The mod community of Mass Effect is, to be honest, small in comparison to the game's total fan base. Yes, the same can be said for the inclusion of multiplayer as well. However, Bioware needs the anti-mod tools due to multiplayer. I doubt their engine has the...molding(?) capabilities of Steam's Source engine when it comes to multiplayer. I'm sure if the community wants it, Bioware will provide down the line. But right out the gate? Don't count on it.
1. But your still not understand that it's on in the same. If it a resource issue, how it's manage is a problem. Their is no way around it. You can still make a great game with little resources. And you can still make a bad game with alot of resources.Killjoy Cutter wrote...
dreman9999 wrote...
Killjoy Cutter wrote...
1. Resources are resources. You're getting caught up in the details and missing the basic point. If it was spent on MP, then none of us are in a position to say that it could not and would not have been spent on SP instead.
2. Not as such.
3. Unless the classes and powers in MP are divorced from their "settings and values" in SP, there's always a risk of MP player complaints causing changes to SP.
4. If The Mission to Planet X is in MP, it's content that's not in SP. So far, nothing you've said in any way addresses that point.
5. "What are you afraid of if you have nothing to hide", in other words? That only demonstrates that you fundamentally misundertand the importance and nature of the basic right to privacy.
6. I don't plan on modding to "cheat" in MP, I plan on modding to increase the replay value of SP. I want nothing to do with MP in any way. And yet the inclusion of MP in the SP game increases the odds of SP replayability via modding being compromised. Thus, my concern about bundling the MP into the SP game, and how it can fundamentally change things when compared to the previous ME games.
7. Take away, add, change, affect, whatever. If it leaks into SP in any way at all, it's too much IMO.
1. But the detail are what is important with resources. You may have an endless amount of resources, but if you don't plan on what your making, how would you know how to make it. You issuse is with the teams not getting the resources to make the game right...That is a management issues.
2.Understanding sacasum is not another strong suit ether.
3.But it is. They are differnet modes. The devs alrealy stated things that are in the sp are not in the mp like the time duriation effects with infiltators sniper scope and Adrinalin rush. And they stated the specsare different from the sp. This is a non-issue. How the mp is built is not going to effect the sp, especially it the mp is co-op only.
4.Your not getting it. That's an issue with time. AKA, the lack of time to make the game would cause that. Making a second team would not do that if it the 2nd team does not take people away from the main team.
5.If you don't want them snooping around. Don't play online.
6.Than howis that an issue. We don't know if the sp will have problems in Modding yet.
7.It's an alternate...You don't have to play it. You don't lose anything for not playing it.
1. Nevermind. I know what I'm saying, and I know you're not addressing it, and leave it at that.
2. Recognizing sarcasm and treating it as sarcasm are not the same thing. I'm not MP gaming, simple as that. MP gaming runs counter to what I get out of computer games. I mentioned the issue of the all-too-common bad behavior of online players as a general issue with MP, not as strictly a personal issue. Leave it at that.
3. Well, I hope that's the case and continues to be the case going forward. It's usually not the case with MP games. That said, you acted as if I simply opposed MP because it was new, because it was different, because it was change, and the concern noted as #3 was listed to refute that assertion, as were the others.
4. OK, last try. Infinite resources would not address the following basic fact: if Mission X is in the MP gameplay, it is content that is not in the SP campaign. Simple as that. You keep ignoring that basic fact to talk about time and teams and quality and whatnot. If you go to Planet X in the MP campaign, and not in the SP campaign, that's content in MP that was denied to SP. If you meet Character X in the MP campaign and not in the SP campaign, that's content in the MP that was denied to SP. If a place or conversation or mission or anything is in MP and therefore not in SP, then it's content in MP that was denied to SP. End of story.
5. If I don't want it snooping around, I won't install it to begin with, or I'll use security software to cripple the living daylights out of it.
Tell me, would you be OK if buying a washer and drier from Kenmore required a clause that said that the washer and drier had to be connected to the internet, and could send back your usage habits, what kind of things you wash, what brands of clothes you have, what detergent you use, etc, to Kenmore, and that furthermore, you had to send Kenmore a key to your house so that a rep could come buy at any time and check to see whose kitchen appliances you have, what's under your bed, how many other people are living with you, etc?
6. The anti-modding features never distinguish between SP and MP, or care how someone is using the game, they just stop modding as much as they can.
7. "You don't lose anything for not playing it" ... that doesn't address the fact that any leakage is too much leakage
EDIT: typo
But the thing is. If you want ai squad mates in that fashion, you can just play the sp side missions.Taciter wrote...
That's the real crux of the problem... I don't mind epic solo'ing but these hard-coded restrictions designed to enforce co-operation won't allow solo play by design so for those who don't want to spoil the immersion of single play, there is only one logical alternative... AI squad members.Killjoy Cutter wrote...
They're side-missions designed for a 4-person team, not a solo op, and some reportedly will include objectives that cannot be accomplished by 1 character, such as 3 covering while the 4th accesses some data.
We're not asking for an overhaul, we're not asking for MP to driven into the sea, we're not even asking for any special treatment.. we're just asking for a fair share of the pie..!
Is the SP side mission identical to the co-op mission?dreman9999 wrote...
But the thing is. If you want ai squad mates in that fashion, you can just play the sp side missions.
The mp concept is the same as the sp concept. The difference is the combat system. You do missions to gain resources. The difference is that with co-op you have live people who are more intelligent then the AI. Also,the combat system is changed abit for the mp...No slow done of time or paused menus.Taciter wrote...
Is the SP side mission identical to the co-op mission?dreman9999 wrote...
But the thing is. If you want ai squad mates in that fashion, you can just play the sp side missions.
Taciter wrote...
Is the SP side mission identical to the co-op mission?dreman9999 wrote...
But the thing is. If you want ai squad mates in that fashion, you can just play the sp side missions.
dreman9999 wrote...
1. But your still not understand that it's on in the same. If it a resource issue, how it's manage is a problem. Their is no way around it. You can still make a great game with little resources. And you can still make a bad game with alot of resources.Killjoy Cutter wrote...
1. Nevermind. I know what I'm saying, and I know you're not addressing it, and leave it at that.
2. Recognizing sarcasm and treating it as sarcasm are not the same thing. I'm not MP gaming, simple as that. MP gaming runs counter to what I get out of computer games. I mentioned the issue of the all-too-common bad behavior of online players as a general issue with MP, not as strictly a personal issue. Leave it at that.
3. Well, I hope that's the case and continues to be the case going forward. It's usually not the case with MP games. That said, you acted as if I simply opposed MP because it was new, because it was different, because it was change, and the concern noted as #3 was listed to refute that assertion, as were the others.
4. OK, last try. Infinite resources would not address the following basic fact: if Mission X is in the MP gameplay, it is content that is not in the SP campaign. Simple as that. You keep ignoring that basic fact to talk about time and teams and quality and whatnot. If you go to Planet X in the MP campaign, and not in the SP campaign, that's content in MP that was denied to SP. If you meet Character X in the MP campaign and not in the SP campaign, that's content in the MP that was denied to SP. If a place or conversation or mission or anything is in MP and therefore not in SP, then it's content in MP that was denied to SP. End of story.
5. If I don't want it snooping around, I won't install it to begin with, or I'll use security software to cripple the living daylights out of it.
Tell me, would you be OK if buying a washer and drier from Kenmore required a clause that said that the washer and drier had to be connected to the internet, and could send back your usage habits, what kind of things you wash, what brands of clothes you have, what detergent you use, etc, to Kenmore, and that furthermore, you had to send Kenmore a key to your house so that a rep could come buy at any time and check to see whose kitchen appliances you have, what's under your bed, how many other people are living with you, etc?
6. The anti-modding features never distinguish between SP and MP, or care how someone is using the game, they just stop modding as much as they can.
7. "You don't lose anything for not playing it" ... that doesn't address the fact that any leakage is too much leakage
EDIT: typo
2.Go...then MP is not an issues for you then.
3. That the case for mp if it vs. Why? Because the focus of the game with mp game devs is the mp. ME3 focus is the sp. And it co-op. they don't have to deal with magor details of balance with co-op.
4.Then your still not getting it. I'm talking about time...T.I.ME....Time. Time is the issue, not resource.
5.Then don't buy it.....Plain as that.
6.Again , your jumping th gun.
7. Yes, it does. Why/ Because everything you can gain in the mp you can gain it the sp...You don't lose anything for not playing the mp.
Modifié par Killjoy Cutter, 14 octobre 2011 - 08:47 .
dreman9999 wrote...
The mp concept is the same as the sp concept. The difference is the combat system. You do missions to gain resources. The difference is that with co-op you have live people who are more intelligent then the AI. Also,the combat system is changed abit for the mp...No slow done of time or paused menus.Taciter wrote...
Is the SP side mission identical to the co-op mission?dreman9999 wrote...
But the thing is. If you want ai squad mates in that fashion, you can just play the sp side missions.
Modifié par Killjoy Cutter, 14 octobre 2011 - 08:52 .
ArkkAngel007 wrote...
No one knows yet. It can be assumed, as difficult as that is when you really know next to nothing, that the location and war asset to be obtained will be the same. However, the co-op will be styled as a horde-mode battle with mini-objectives on the side. Expect all the cutscenes, dialogue, and other important mumbo-jumbo to be solely in the campaign.
Modifié par Taciter, 14 octobre 2011 - 08:54 .
Killjoy Cutter wrote...
They're side-missions designed for a 4-person team, not a solo op, and some reportedly will include objectives that cannot be accomplished by 1 character, such as 3 covering while the 4th accesses some data.
That's an interesting contribution Chouan, thanks for the head's up. I'd almost be satisfied with that but I'm an obsessive 'completionist'. I'm one of those anal retentives that has to complete every mission in every game and find every hidden treasure chest and get every single perk. Anything less and I feel I've let myself down.Chouan wrote...
Killjoy Cutter wrote...
They're side-missions designed for a 4-person team, not a solo op, and some reportedly will include objectives that cannot be accomplished by 1 character, such as 3 covering while the 4th accesses some data.
Those objectives afaik are optional, not necessary to complete the co-op missions, you just get few extra credits if you do (like the GoW3 horde mode bonus objectives, you get more money if you do them but you can still complete the waves without ever paying attention to them).
Modifié par Taciter, 14 octobre 2011 - 09:01 .
Butthe mp does truely have it's own story. It does have a new angle of the war but it in itself is not a deep story at all. It's a horde mode, not Left 4 dead. I can understand you want the full experiace but just have the mp exsist does not mean the the sp will have anything taken away from it.Even if you have AI partners, it would be that same as haveing co-op but less intellegent partners. If it is an issues about experiance then play it or not. No matter what the most important thing, the sp, will not be effected.Taciter wrote...
Okay, I see what you're saying Dreman but I'm afraid that won't suffice.
You seem like an intelligent guy so I won't patronise you with banale details but can you see the logic in this paragraph?:
The MP side missions have a unique story. One that complements Shepard's story by giving the player a 'behind-the-scene's' look at a second squad of hero protagonists who's efforts contribute the galactic war effort. Although this story will not detract from the SP storyline, it will embellish it. For the fullest possible experience, you must take part in multiplayer and single player.
If so, then you'll realise why, as a Mass Effect fanatic, there is no question of me simply ignoring the existence of such content... it would be denying myself the fullest possible experience. However, for lots of reasons, my passion for Mass Effect is only equalled by my dislike for multiplayer game mechanics as a whole.
You can see my dilemma can't you. You can't deny that it would be unfair to preclude me from witnessing events unfold which have a bearing (if not an impact) on galactic developments during the most intense period in Mass Effect's history.
Anyone with even a semblence of empathy will see that there really is no justifiable reason to deny me the pleasure of experiencing these events simply on the basis that I refuse to subscribe to multiplayer mechanics especially given that there are perfectly equitable solutions that could be implemented which would allow me to do just that.
AI controlled squaddies would allow single player gamers to share in the experience without negatively impacting the human co-op functionality of the MP feature.
Retour en haut