2261 réponses à ce sujet

[Killjoy Cutter]

dreman9999 wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

They owe us the truth when asked a direct question.   Simple as that.  No more marketing BS, no more corporate doublespeak, no more evasion and lies of omission... 

 
Welcome to business and marketing....Also, they owe us nothing outside the gratitude of having people buy they game....Which the miss information they told before did not effect since they did finally told the truth way before shipping. Would you rather find out it had mp after you started up the game.

Well, I guess you're OK with being lied to. 

I'm not. 

I don't do business with companies that lie to me. 

[Killjoy Cutter]

iakus wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

iakus wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
But then it won't be a mp mode yourplaying.

That's kinda the point.

But at least we wouldn't be penalized for not doing MP

But your not. Time and Time again It's been stated that what ever you get in the mp you can get in the spfor GR. You not being penalized for not doing the mp.

Bioware has always emphasized that the Mass Effect trilogy would be "Shepard's story" and single player focused

Mass Effect 3 is about the galactic war against the Reapers

One of the factors in this war is a "Galactic Readiness" meter

We are told that you can gain enough Galactic Readiness to get the "optimal ending" if you do really well in the single player campaign and do most/all of the quests

You can also gain Galactic Readiness by doing multiplayer.

Therefore:  doing muiltiplayer means you can not not as well in the single player mode, not get optimal results in quests or perhaps skip some entirely, and still max out your readiness level for the "optimal ending"

Single player ME3 players are being penalized.  The only question is how much.

Indeed.  There is an alternate path that is only available if you play MP, with all the associated problems of any MP gameplay.  At best, we're going to be able to grind through it alone, in missions designed for four. 

There is also content, from what we've seen, that is only going to be available to the MP players.  It sounds like sections of various worlds, etc, that the SP-only player will never see other than on Youtube. 

[dreman9999]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

They owe us the truth when asked a direct question.   Simple as that.  No more marketing BS, no more corporate doublespeak, no more evasion and lies of omission... 

 
Welcome to business and marketing....Also, they owe us nothing outside the gratitude of having people buy they game....Which the miss information they told before did not effect since they did finally told the truth way before shipping. Would you rather find out it had mp after you started up the game.

Well, I guess you're OK with being lied to. 

I'm not. 

I don't do business with companies that lie to me. 

But being lie tohas nothing to do with dismissing the details about mp. That's my point.You can pout about being lie to all you want, but it's no grounds to ignore facts.

[dreman9999]

iakus wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

iakus wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
But then it won't be a mp mode yourplaying.

That's kinda the point.

But at least we wouldn't be penalized for not doing MP

But your not. Time and Time again It's been stated that what ever you get in the mp you can get in the spfor GR. You not being penalized for not doing the mp.

Bioware has always emphasized that the Mass Effect trilogy would be "Shepard's story" and single player focused

Mass Effect 3 is about the galactic war against the Reapers

One of the factors in this war is a "Galactic Readiness" meter

We are told that you can gain enough Galactic Readiness to get the "optimal ending" if you do really well in the single player campaign and do most/all of the quests

You can also gain Galactic Readiness by doing multiplayer.

Therefore:  doing muiltiplayer means you can do not as well in the single player mode, not get optimal results in quests or perhaps skip some entirely, and still max out your readiness level for the "optimal ending"

Single player ME3 players are being penalized.  The only question is how much.

If your not forced to play the mp, then the people who don't want to play sp only are not be penilized at all. Not doing the mp does not equal  you can't do as well as in the sp because, as time and time again been stated,  you can get the GR point in the sp side mission. Is that not clear? If you did think you have to raise an army to fight the reapers based on what you seen in the last game, then you haven benn paying attention....

[Killjoy Cutter]

dreman9999 wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

They owe us the truth when asked a direct question.   Simple as that.  No more marketing BS, no more corporate doublespeak, no more evasion and lies of omission... 

 
Welcome to business and marketing....Also, they owe us nothing outside the gratitude of having people buy they game....Which the miss information they told before did not effect since they did finally told the truth way before shipping. Would you rather find out it had mp after you started up the game.

Well, I guess you're OK with being lied to. 

I'm not. 

I don't do business with companies that lie to me. 

But being lie tohas nothing to do with dismissing the details about mp. That's my point.You can pout about being lie to all you want, but it's no grounds to ignore facts.

What facts?  Why on earth should we take "Bioware said this" as fact, when they've already lied to us? 

[Killjoy Cutter]

dreman9999 wrote...

iakus wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

iakus wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
But then it won't be a mp mode yourplaying.

That's kinda the point.

But at least we wouldn't be penalized for not doing MP

But your not. Time and Time again It's been stated that what ever you get in the mp you can get in the spfor GR. You not being penalized for not doing the mp.

Bioware has always emphasized that the Mass Effect trilogy would be "Shepard's story" and single player focused

Mass Effect 3 is about the galactic war against the Reapers

One of the factors in this war is a "Galactic Readiness" meter

We are told that you can gain enough Galactic Readiness to get the "optimal ending" if you do really well in the single player campaign and do most/all of the quests

You can also gain Galactic Readiness by doing multiplayer.

Therefore:  doing muiltiplayer means you can do not as well in the single player mode, not get optimal results in quests or perhaps skip some entirely, and still max out your readiness level for the "optimal ending"

Single player ME3 players are being penalized.  The only question is how much.

If your not forced to play the mp, then the people who don't want to play sp only are not be penilized at all. Not doing the mp does not equal  you can't do as well as in the sp because, as time and time again been stated,  you can get the GR point in the sp side mission. Is that not clear? If you did think you have to raise an army to fight the reapers based on what you seen in the last game, then you haven benn paying attention....

Your response is barely even relevent to what Iakus said. 

[dreman9999]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

iakus wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

iakus wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
But then it won't be a mp mode yourplaying.

That's kinda the point.

But at least we wouldn't be penalized for not doing MP

But your not. Time and Time again It's been stated that what ever you get in the mp you can get in the spfor GR. You not being penalized for not doing the mp.

Bioware has always emphasized that the Mass Effect trilogy would be "Shepard's story" and single player focused

Mass Effect 3 is about the galactic war against the Reapers

One of the factors in this war is a "Galactic Readiness" meter

We are told that you can gain enough Galactic Readiness to get the "optimal ending" if you do really well in the single player campaign and do most/all of the quests

You can also gain Galactic Readiness by doing multiplayer.

Therefore:  doing muiltiplayer means you can not not as well in the single player mode, not get optimal results in quests or perhaps skip some entirely, and still max out your readiness level for the "optimal ending"

Single player ME3 players are being penalized.  The only question is how much.

Indeed.  There is an alternate path that is only available if you play MP, with all the associated problems of any MP gameplay.  At best, we're going to be able to grind through it alone, in missions designed for four. 

There is also content, from what we've seen, that is only going to be available to the MP players.  It sounds like sections of various worlds, etc, that the SP-only player will never see other than on Youtube. 

No, their is no mp only content you'll be gaining for it coming to sp or Mp content your missing out side ofa horde mode and a character creation system. Your not missing much.

[Taciter]

dreman9999 wrote...
No, that goal is just story based. You just holding that area  and killing things. It's much like a horde mode.

You STILL don't get it do you Dre... you just sit in this forum 24 hours a day, copy and paste at the ready! Don't you have something better to do than undermine people's suggestions?

Actually, 'undermine' presupposes that you actually have a valid argument in the first place - that's something you appear to misplaced some time ago.

Okay, I recognise there is a language barrier issue and whilst your English is far better than my French, that's the only explanation I can derive from your consistent miscomprehension, I refuse to believe that anyone could be so self-centred.

I'll state some SUPER simple facts... feel free to correct me if any of these are wrong:

1) The MP missions will have DIFFERENT objectives to SP side missions
2) The MP missions can be undertaken 'in addition' to the SP side missions - thus providing MORE missions
3) The MP missions will affect the 'Galaxy at War' readiness level - thus providing SUPERIOR readiness
4) The MP missions will yield resources - thus providing MORE resources
5) The main MP protagonist is NOT Shepard
6) The MP squad members are NOT members of Shepard's Squad
7) The MP missions have an official premise (read 'explanation for existence') and are therefore canon.
8) Incorporating an AI squad OPTION would not stop human players from playing with each other
9) You don't like the idea of Solo players having as much fun as you

There we go... now I suggest you go away for a month or two and seriously scrutinise those facts! Pick them apart, digest them, reflect on them... compose a sonnet about them and demand that they be inscribed as the opening paragraph of your epitaph. When you finally experience enlightenment, come back and share the moment.

Modifié par Taciter, 21 octobre 2011 - 09:02 .

[dreman9999]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

iakus wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

iakus wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
But then it won't be a mp mode yourplaying.

That's kinda the point.

But at least we wouldn't be penalized for not doing MP

But your not. Time and Time again It's been stated that what ever you get in the mp you can get in the spfor GR. You not being penalized for not doing the mp.

Bioware has always emphasized that the Mass Effect trilogy would be "Shepard's story" and single player focused

Mass Effect 3 is about the galactic war against the Reapers

One of the factors in this war is a "Galactic Readiness" meter

We are told that you can gain enough Galactic Readiness to get the "optimal ending" if you do really well in the single player campaign and do most/all of the quests

You can also gain Galactic Readiness by doing multiplayer.

Therefore:  doing muiltiplayer means you can do not as well in the single player mode, not get optimal results in quests or perhaps skip some entirely, and still max out your readiness level for the "optimal ending"

Single player ME3 players are being penalized.  The only question is how much.

If your not forced to play the mp, then the people who don't want to play sp only are not be penilized at all. Not doing the mp does not equal  you can't do as well as in the sp because, as time and time again been stated,  you can get the GR point in the sp side mission. Is that not clear? If you did think you have to raise an army to fight the reapers based on what you seen in the last game, then you haven benn paying attention....

Your response is barely even relevent to what Iakus said. 

Yes it is.....You guy just keep warpig what has beenstated.
We are told the getting the maximum ending we also need GR point....We can get it in the sp and the mp.
What that means is that we are have a goal to reach, and we have 2 options to reach that goal... Path A (THE SP)
and path b(the mp).....Both path A and path B be get us to the same goal, not path a and path b get use to different goals.
If path a and path b let use get to the same goal.... what on earth is the problem?

[dreman9999]

Taciter wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
No, that goal is just story based. You just holding that area  and killing things. It's much like a horde mode.

You STILL don't get it do you Dre... you just sit in this forum 24 hours a day, copy and paste at the ready! Don't you have something better to do than undermine people's suggestions?

Actually, 'undermine' presupposes that you actually have a valid argument in the first place - that's something you appear to misplaced some time ago.

Okay, I recognise there is a language barrier issue and whilst your English is far better than my French, that's the only explanation I can derive from your consistent miscomprehension, I refuse to believe that anyone could be so self-centred.

I'll state some SUPER simple facts... feel free to correct me if any of these are wrong:

1) The MP missions will have DIFFERENT objectives to SP side missions
2) The MP missions can be undertaken 'in addition' to the SP side missions - thus providing MORE missions
3) The MP missions will affect the 'Galaxy at War' readiness level - thus providing SUPERIOR readiness
4) The MP missions will yeild resources - thus providing MORE resources
5) The main MP protagonist is NOT Shepard
6) The MP squad members are NOT members of Shepard's Squad
7) The MP missions have an official premise (read 'explanation for existence') and are therefore canon.
8) Incorporating an AI squad OPTION would not stop human players from playing with each other
9) You don't like the idea of Solo players having as much fun as you

There we go... now I suggest you go away for a month or two and seriously scrutinise those facts! Pick them apart, digest them, reflect on them... compose a sonnet about them and demand that they be inscribed as the opening paragraph of your epitaph. When you finally experience enlightenment, come back and share the moment.

Then your missinformed or you miss understand...
This is from the xbox magazine detail of  mp.

http://stickskills.c...tails-revealed/

• Mass Effect 3 multiplayer has been planned since the original Mass Effect.
• Mass Effect 3 represents the first time that Casey Hudson had felt comfortable implementing multiplayer into the series.
• The multiplayer experience boils down to a four player co-op
  survival  style mode that lets you fight increasingly difficult waves of
  Cerberus foes.
• The enemies you’ll encounter can range from your most basic foot
  soldier to “assassin-like Phantoms and even the hulking metal
  titan-esque Atlas mechs”.
• Each “stage” allows you to go up against eleven waves that must be
  finished in order to complete that section.  The mode reminds quite a
  few of Gears of War’s horde mode, allowing you to net experience points
  regardless if you finish the wave alive or not.
• The “Galaxy at War” mode gives you a reward system,
  character-progression suite, and a “stake in the larger battle that’s
  taking place in your single-player campaign.
• How you perform in the multiplayer missions has a result on your
  success in the main storyline as Shepard, but only if you want it to.
• Everything you do in the singleplayer campaign will earn you in-game
  currency called “War Assets”.  War Assets allow you to purchase things
  such as allies, friendly fleets, or even a facility such as a radar
  station.
• Successfully completing various side-missions, larger plot points,
  and destroying your enemies in the singleplayer will net you the War Assets needed to
  purchase the upgrades.
• “The more you play and build up your multiplayer characters to
  survive increasingly tough odds, the more power and influence your
  single-player Shepard will wield by the time the endgame comes based on
  the amount of War Assets earned.”
• If you’re one of those gamers that loves to complete every piece of a
  game, then you’re in luck.  By doing enough in the singleplayer
  campaign, you will be able to earn enough War Assets, you won’t have to
  participate in the “galactic war”.
• While you’re going through a variety of locations in singleplayer,
  you’ll see first-hand how the war has hit different colonies.  Galaxy at
  War mode follows suit, allowing your individual character and team to
  take up arms to defend these various locations.  Your squad is under the
  command of the Alliance Navy officer Admiral Hackett, making his return
  from each game.  Fighting in each various area will and successfully
  defending it will “win for interstellar freedom”.
• As you complete each area or defend newly freed areas, your progress
  will be detailed on a color-coded map that you’ll be able to view while
  you’re in the game or a few other platforms.  iOS devices, Facebook,
  and more will allow these to be viewable and have their own “unique
  hooks” into the Galaxy at War mode.
• In the build described in the magazine article, four character
  classes were mentioned: Soldier, Infiltrator, Engineer, and Sentinel.
   The final version of the game has been confirmed to have more classes
  than this to initially choose from, as well as unlockables.
• Each class that you select from will allow you to select from a
  variety of races.  Ranging from the likes of a Krogan to a Drell, you’ll
  have a good bit of variety to choose from.  Yes, a Drell, the same race
  as Thane from Mass Effect 2 (we’re excited).
• As you can probably figure, each class will allow you to possess
  “specific abilities” as well as the ability to upgrade a few.  Krogan
  soldiers were described as being able to use a charge attack to knock
  down enemies, along with Soldiers being able to use the Omni-blade for a
  few rather lethal attacks.  For those wondering, you’ll also be able to
  choose your gender when choosing any class.
• There’s a set level cap of 20.
• While you can stockpile characters, the experience you earn only
  records for that character’s specific class.  Once you level up, you’ll
  be able to assign those earned points to different abilities.
• Before heading into action, you can select your weapon & biotic-powers from the available options.
• Armor and weaponry can be upgraded to your individual tastes.
• Points can and will be earned for assists, kills, and other similar actions during multiplayer.
• When an ally goes down, you’ll have a limited amount of time to
  revive them.  The article mentioned “spamming the A button” while down
  to increase the amount of time before bleeding out.
• Along with killing your enemies, mission objectives will be
  sprinkled here and there.  Retrieving data packets around the map and
  protecting an ally while they hack a series of terminals were a few of
  the described mission objectives

Modifié par dreman9999, 21 octobre 2011 - 09:08 .

[dreman9999]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

They owe us the truth when asked a direct question.   Simple as that.  No more marketing BS, no more corporate doublespeak, no more evasion and lies of omission... 

 
Welcome to business and marketing....Also, they owe us nothing outside the gratitude of having people buy they game....Which the miss information they told before did not effect since they did finally told the truth way before shipping. Would you rather find out it had mp after you started up the game.

Well, I guess you're OK with being lied to. 

I'm not. 

I don't do business with companies that lie to me. 

But being lie tohas nothing to do with dismissing the details about mp. That's my point.You can pout about being lie to all you want, but it's no grounds to ignore facts.

What facts?  Why on earth should we take "Bioware said this" as fact, when they've already lied to us? 

So what? Any proof they are lieing to us now?

[Taciter]

Okay, that's a very interesting article - I'll give you a thumbs up for that!

So my next question then is, Does the following still stand?

Taciter wrote...
2) The MP missions can be undertaken 'in addition' to the SP side missions - thus providing MORE missions

[Taciter]

p.s. I don't care who/what the source, this statement is hairy monkey scrotum...

dreman9999 wrote...
[*]Mass Effect 3 multiplayer has been planned since the original Mass Effect.

..but the rest is certainly reassuring...
And in the interests of fostering good will, I'll ammend my original facts list accordingly:

• 1) The MP missions will have DIFFERENT objectives to SP side missions
• 2) The MP missions can be undertaken 'in addition' to the SP side missions - thus providing MORE missions.
• 3) The MP missions will affect the 'Galaxy at War' readiness level - thus providing SUPERIOR readiness.
• 4) The MP missions will yeild resources - thus providing MORE resources.
• 5) The main MP protagonist is NOT Shepard.
• 6) The MP squad members are NOT members of Shepard's Squad.
• 7) The MP missions have an official premise (read 'explanation for existence') and are therefore canon.
• 8) Incorporating an AI squad OPTION would not stop human players from playing with each other.
• 9) You don't like the idea of Solo players having as much fun as you.

..and I'll add another one on the strength of your xbox article:

• 10) The MP missions are the only way you will experience what it is like to play as an alien.

So interesting to know.. I like the MP idea a lot more now.. I like it so much in fact that I'm even more commited to seeing an AI squad option.

Modifié par Taciter, 21 octobre 2011 - 11:14 .

[tetrisblock4x1]

Garrison2009 wrote...

tetrisblock4x1 wrote...

A good story is one where you don't have to spend hours killing things and doesn't always let you play god. So none of the Bioware games.

No, a good story is one where you care about the characters involved and their well-being throughtout the narrative. And there is no point at all where Shepard 'plays God.'  Is he/she given choices to make? Yes.  Do those choices change the way in which events turn out? Absolutely.  But that is based off real life. The choices we make alter the outcome of things around us... And if you cant see that as it is, then yeah, Whack-a-Mole might really be your best fall-back option here.

As for killing things, Shepard is a soldier... He/she was trained in the art of combat. Naturally that is how Shepard is going to deal with problems. And besides, how would you have the story unfold if not with action? Shepard and the council sit down and write a strongly worded letter to the Reapers?

I have different standards for interactive stories, standards that apply to the medium itsself and not whatever generic list of qualities you have in mind. And games like Alpha Protocol and The WItcher 2 did the choices and consequences bit a lot better than Mass Effect has so far.

Fallout and Deus Ex are examples of games that have alternative ways of dealing with enemy invasions so you don't have to play pop-a-mole behind a chest high wall and a regenerating shield.

Modifié par tetrisblock4x1, 21 octobre 2011 - 11:58 .

[Garrison2009]

tetrisblock4x1 wrote...

Garrison2009 wrote...

tetrisblock4x1 wrote...

A good story is one where you don't have to spend hours killing things and doesn't always let you play god. So none of the Bioware games.

No, a good story is one where you care about the characters involved and their well-being throughtout the narrative. And there is no point at all where Shepard 'plays God.'  Is he/she given choices to make? Yes.  Do those choices change the way in which events turn out? Absolutely.  But that is based off real life. The choices we make alter the outcome of things around us... And if you cant see that as it is, then yeah, Whack-a-Mole might really be your best fall-back option here.

As for killing things, Shepard is a soldier... He/she was trained in the art of combat. Naturally that is how Shepard is going to deal with problems. And besides, how would you have the story unfold if not with action? Shepard and the council sit down and write a strongly worded letter to the Reapers?

I have different standards for interactive stories, standards that apply to the medium itsself and not whatever generic list of qualities you have in mind. And games like Alpha Protocol and The WItcher 2 did the choices and consequences bit a lot better than Mass Effect has so far.

Fallout and Deus Ex are examples of games that have alternative ways of dealing with enemy invasions so you don't have to play pop-a-mole behind a chest high wall and a regenerating shield.

Once again begging the question: Why are you here, complaining on Bioware forums about Bioware games when you think that other developers out there craft better games with better plots? Go play their games and talk on their forums and let us enjoy Mass Effect in peace. Thank you.

[Iakus]

dreman9999 wrote...

Yes it is.....You guy just keep warpig what has beenstated.
We are told the getting the maximum ending we also need GR point....We can get it in the sp and the mp.
What that means is that we are have a goal to reach, and we have 2 options to reach that goal... Path A (THE SP)
and path b(the mp).....Both path A and path B be get us to the same goal, not path a and path b get use to different goals.
If path a and path b let use get to the same goal.... what on earth is the problem?

It's only an alternative if it's one or the other.  If you do both, it's not an alternative, it's an extra

If yoiu can gain x resources in SP, and y resources in mp, and you need z amount for the "optimal ending, then

SIngle player will need x +0 to equal z
sinlge+multiplayer folk will need x + y (which will be more than 0) to equal z  

There will be an advantage to doing mp.  SP only will be hampered.

Choosing to side with Morinth rather than Samara is an alternative.  Going after Vido or saving the refinery workers is an alternative.  You can take either path, but not both.

Did Bioware say that there will be SP versions of the multiplayer game?  WIll we be able to send Shepard and his/her squad to do SP-versions of the missions that xxxGarrus2.0xxx would otherwise be sent on?  With accepting one mission closing off the other?

[dreman9999]

Taciter wrote...

p.s. I don't care who/what the source, this statement is hairy monkey scrotum...

dreman9999 wrote...
[*]Mass Effect 3 multiplayer has been planned since the original Mass Effect.

..but the rest is certainly reassuring...
And in the interests of fostering good will, I'll ammend my original facts list accordingly:

• 1) The MP missions will have DIFFERENT objectives to SP side missions
• 2) The MP missions can be undertaken 'in addition' to the SP side missions - thus providing MORE missions.
• 3) The MP missions will affect the 'Galaxy at War' readiness level - thus providing SUPERIOR readiness.
• 4) The MP missions will yeild resources - thus providing MORE resources.
• 5) The main MP protagonist is NOT Shepard.
• 6) The MP squad members are NOT members of Shepard's Squad.
• 7) The MP missions have an official premise (read 'explanation for existence') and are therefore canon.
• 8) Incorporating an AI squad OPTION would not stop human players from playing with each other.
• 9) You don't like the idea of Solo players having as much fun as you.

..and I'll add another one on the strength of your xbox article:

10) The MP missions are the only way you will experience what it is like to play as an alien.So interesting to know.. I like the MP idea a lot more now.. I like it so much in fact that I'm even more commited to seeing an AI squad option.

Still not understanding.....

1. The difference between the mp mission and the sp is very little. The concept that drive the mp is story based but the missions themselves have no story in them.
2.Which is very true, but not playing the mp has no negative effect on the sp. If you want to play something like the mp with out playing the sp, then you should be asking for a survival mode, which the mp is any way.
3.ship
4.Ship.
5.If you don't like that fact then don't play the mp. It been clear that ME as a story series in not just Shepard alone(Look at the books and comics) and the trilogy is mostly his main stage only. If you don't like the fact that your playing someone else...Ask for a survival mode for the sp.
6.Look at 5.
7.Yes, the consent of drive of them is story based. But the missions themselves have no story. Read point 1.
8.True, but it would also be a hindrance since you can't control them and guessing on how smart the AI in ME1and 2are...playing with another person would be better.
9.It not the fact that it don't like having sp have as much as possible. It the fact that your not looking at what your asking for. A co-op pve mp played alone with bots is not a mp any more...It''s a survival mode. What I'm saying is,You guy need to ask for better. Ask fro a survival mode that has the same concept of the mp story wise but with the main game.
10.Well, I guess your forced in to playing the mp so you can paly as an alien then.

ps..These guys source is from bioware. Meaning it from the horses mouth. And the reason it coming fro xbox magazine is because it's clear that the made a deal to get the scoop from Bioware to be able to sell magazines and bioware to get payed to advertize.

Modifié par dreman9999, 22 octobre 2011 - 04:06 .

[dreman9999]

iakus wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Yes it is.....You guy just keep warpig what has beenstated.
We are told the getting the maximum ending we also need GR point....We can get it in the sp and the mp.
What that means is that we are have a goal to reach, and we have 2 options to reach that goal... Path A (THE SP)
and path b(the mp).....Both path A and path B be get us to the same goal, not path a and path b get use to different goals.
If path a and path b let use get to the same goal.... what on earth is the problem?

It's only an alternative if it's one or the other.  If you do both, it's not an alternative, it's an extra

If yoiu can gain x resources in SP, and y resources in mp, and you need z amount for the "optimal ending, then

SIngle player will need x +0 to equal z
sinlge+multiplayer folk will need x + y (which will be more than 0) to equal z  

There will be an advantage to doing mp.  SP only will be hampered.

Choosing to side with Morinth rather than Samara is an alternative.  Going after Vido or saving the refinery workers is an alternative.  You can take either path, but not both.

Did Bioware say that there will be SP versions of the multiplayer game?  WIll we be able to send Shepard and his/her squad to do SP-versions of the missions that xxxGarrus2.0xxx would otherwise be sent on?  With accepting one mission closing off the other?

So. it's a problem because you can take both? The fault of your logic is the very goal your getting to. If you take both path and path b, you still reach your goal. It doesn't make getting to the goal any easier if you too both paths or make the reward for the goal better. In the end  you still get their and you still equal to any one who took only path a or path b only. You till made it to your goal. It doesn't make the reward of reaching the goal better if you take both path than taking only one path. Taking path a, path b, or both gets you to the same goal and no matter how you get their the reward is equal.
Remember getting the max ending is based on the getting the right amount of GR point, not what path you took.
In short, if you don't want to paly the mp....don't play the mp. No matter what, you still have to get GR points regardless if the game has mp or not.

Modifié par dreman9999, 22 octobre 2011 - 04:09 .

[Iakus]

dreman9999 wrote...

iakus wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Yes it is.....You guy just keep warpig what has beenstated.
We are told the getting the maximum ending we also need GR point....We can get it in the sp and the mp.
What that means is that we are have a goal to reach, and we have 2 options to reach that goal... Path A (THE SP)
and path b(the mp).....Both path A and path B be get us to the same goal, not path a and path b get use to different goals.
If path a and path b let use get to the same goal.... what on earth is the problem?

It's only an alternative if it's one or the other.  If you do both, it's not an alternative, it's an extra

If yoiu can gain x resources in SP, and y resources in mp, and you need z amount for the "optimal ending, then

SIngle player will need x +0 to equal z
sinlge+multiplayer folk will need x + y (which will be more than 0) to equal z  

There will be an advantage to doing mp.  SP only will be hampered.

Choosing to side with Morinth rather than Samara is an alternative.  Going after Vido or saving the refinery workers is an alternative.  You can take either path, but not both.

Did Bioware say that there will be SP versions of the multiplayer game?  WIll we be able to send Shepard and his/her squad to do SP-versions of the missions that xxxGarrus2.0xxx would otherwise be sent on?  With accepting one mission closing off the other?

So. i'st a problem because you can take both? The fault of your logic is the very goal your getting to. If you take both path and path b, you still reach your goal. It didn't make getting to the goal any easier if you too both paths. In the end  you still get their and you still equal to any one who took only path a or path b. You till made it to your goal. It doen't make the reward of reaching the goal better if you take both path thantaking only one path. Taking path a, path b, or both gets you tothe same goal and no mattter how you get their the reward is equal.
Remeber getting the max ending is based on the getting the right amount of GR point, not what path you took.

Taking both path a and path b makes it overall easier.  You have two sources to draw on for resources.  If you resolve SP quests in ways that give you less readiness, you can make up the difference by running multiplayer.  If you miss a quest, or don't feel like doing one?  Do a mp mission and make up the difference.  

The problem isn't that there are two paths to the same goal, the problem is you can apparantly skip from one to the other whenever you want.  That's not two paths, that's two sources readiness draw on.  Unless you don't like mp, then you're SOL.

[dreman9999]

iakus wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

iakus wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Yes it is.....You guy just keep warpig what has beenstated.
We are told the getting the maximum ending we also need GR point....We can get it in the sp and the mp.
What that means is that we are have a goal to reach, and we have 2 options to reach that goal... Path A (THE SP)
and path b(the mp).....Both path A and path B be get us to the same goal, not path a and path b get use to different goals.
If path a and path b let use get to the same goal.... what on earth is the problem?

It's only an alternative if it's one or the other.  If you do both, it's not an alternative, it's an extra

If yoiu can gain x resources in SP, and y resources in mp, and you need z amount for the "optimal ending, then

SIngle player will need x +0 to equal z
sinlge+multiplayer folk will need x + y (which will be more than 0) to equal z  

There will be an advantage to doing mp.  SP only will be hampered.

Choosing to side with Morinth rather than Samara is an alternative.  Going after Vido or saving the refinery workers is an alternative.  You can take either path, but not both.

Did Bioware say that there will be SP versions of the multiplayer game?  WIll we be able to send Shepard and his/her squad to do SP-versions of the missions that xxxGarrus2.0xxx would otherwise be sent on?  With accepting one mission closing off the other?

So. i'st a problem because you can take both? The fault of your logic is the very goal your getting to. If you take both path and path b, you still reach your goal. It didn't make getting to the goal any easier if you too both paths. In the end  you still get their and you still equal to any one who took only path a or path b. You till made it to your goal. It doen't make the reward of reaching the goal better if you take both path thantaking only one path. Taking path a, path b, or both gets you tothe same goal and no mattter how you get their the reward is equal.
Remeber getting the max ending is based on the getting the right amount of GR point, not what path you took.

Taking both path a and path b makes it overall easier.  You have two sources to draw on for resources.  If you resolve SP quests in ways that give you less readiness, you can make up the difference by running multiplayer.  If you miss a quest, or don't feel like doing one?  Do a mp mission and make up the difference.  

The problem isn't that there are two paths to the same goal, the problem is you can apparantly skip from one to the other whenever you want.  That's not two paths, that's two sources readiness draw on.  Unless you don't like mp, then you're SOL.

Not really, You still have to gun people down to do it and that takes time. Just because you have alot of oil does not mean you can get to it if you only have one guy digging to it.
And not matter what you do, taking path a, path b or both does not effect the reward. You get the same reward no matter how you get to the goal.

Modifié par dreman9999, 22 octobre 2011 - 04:22 .

[Iakus]

[quote]dreman9999 wrote...

[/quote] Not really, You still have to gun people down to do it and that takes time. Just because you have alot of oil does not mean you can get to it if you only have one guy digging to it.
And not matter what you do, taking path a, path b or both does not effect the reward. You get the same reward no matter how you get to the goal.
[/quote]

But it gives you a greater margin of error.  You can get less optimal results in your quests and still get the more optimal ending.

Let's say, for example, you need a readiness "score" of 100 to get this optimal ending. Just to pull a nice round number out of the air.

Let's also say that thre are 120 points available in the single player campaign.  Do all the quests, do them well, and you'll have more than enough points for the best ending to be possible.

But let's say a player doesn't do so well.  Say he only gets a score of 80 doing the SP campaign.  He missed a mission, found another a crushing bore to do, and got endings to others that didn't net a lot of readiness.  Looks like he's doomed to have a less than perfect ending, right?

Wrong!  there's still MP missions, worth, let's say a total of 30 points, only a quarter of what's in the single player campaign.  Now suddenly, an optimal ending is possible again!

But wait, this person doens't have an online pass.  Or spotty/nonexistant Internet service.  Or just plain doesn't like multiplayer.  And bots and offlline modes are badwrongunfun.  Guess he's outta luck after all 

[dreman9999]

@iakus


That's only if side missions are hard to find...Which they are not. And that only if bioware lowers the amount of gr points you can getting the sp, with if you look at how they treated the normandy upgrade system, you'll see they are aware of. You based on what we've seen, their multiple sp side missions per planet. You really think it would be hard to find. Making this statement is just grasping for straws. It's not impossible or near difficult to be able to get the right gr point in the sp.

Modifié par dreman9999, 22 octobre 2011 - 05:13 .

[sympathyforsaren]

I still can't believe Mass Effect has become THIS. What an absolute shame.

[dreman9999]

sympathyforsaren wrote...

I still can't believe Mass Effect has become THIS. What an absolute shame.

The mp or the mindless arguements?

[Iakus]

dreman9999 wrote...

@iakus


That's only if side missions are hard to find...Which they are not. And that only if bioware lowers the amount of gr points you can getting the sp, with if you look at how they treated the normandy upgrade system, you'll see they are aware of. You based on what we've seen, their multiple sp side missions per planet. You really think it would be hard to find. Making this statement is just grasping for straws. It's not impossible or near difficult to be able to get the right gr point in the sp.

side missions not hard to find:  You know this how?  The demo's not even coming out until January!  In ME2 I was still finding anomalies on planets even after 3-4 playthroughs.  I for one do not want to have to wander the galaxy scanning random planets on the off chance that there's a pirate base there i can knock over for points.

And Casey Hudson outright said you have to have done most or all of the missions, and done them well, get get the optimal number of single player readiness points.  MP will let you circumvent that, at least to some degree.