2261 réponses à ce sujet

[Onilink1230]

Lumikki wrote...

Onilink1230 wrote...

and any one who says that mp will add something unachievable by sp only players and who have downloaded any of the me or me2 dlc shame on you for you are a hypocrite there are people out their who have not bought a single dlc they were not forced to buy it any more than you are forced to play me3 mp.

Yes, but this isn't so easy.

Example

I want to buy DLC and I have money for it, the money isn't the issue. Issue is the internet connection requirement.
I want to play MP content at solo. But again I don't want to play ONLINE or in my case I can't because no internet connection on my game computer. Simple way saying, internet connection requirement for singe player games, is the not acceptable part.

So, you say it's choise. Yes it's choise, but it's choise between accepting some unpleasant technical design or be without this game content (part of story). They are building content what requires internet connection on SINGLE PLAYER computer games. It's techical issue, not what player wants. It's choise to sacriface you privacy and security for game content (story) in single player games where is absulute no need for internet connections.

If we would talk about multi-player games, then the situation would be totally different as those games are ment to be played with internet connections. How to I follow ME series story if DLC's and Co-op content are part of the story, but they are behind online features?

It's totally different to require one time DRM check for istalled software, than require internet connection everytime you start the game or access game content. (PC). Some people don't care they own privacy and security, but some people do care.

well your right and wrong you can download and use SOME dlc without internet but some dlc requires at least connection to xbl through a silver membership to use and if you are saying to remove money as a "problem" then getting gold membership should not be a problem and thats only say 2/3 of people playing the game the other 1/3 are playing on psn now, a free online membership based system. now im not saying that there may not be a few people out their that truly can not have xbox live but 99% percent of us where money is not an issue will be able to have xbl. i said shame on the people who think "mp is bad for the sp story" not "its bad because i dont have xbox live" further more its only speculation that mp (multiplayer) will REQUIRE internet it would be a stupid idea to at least not allow system link games and in all honesty...
(speculation alert)
...i would not be surprised to find it has 4p split screen.

[dreman9999]

Onilink1230 wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

Onilink1230 wrote...

and any one who says that mp will add something unachievable by sp only players and who have downloaded any of the me or me2 dlc shame on you for you are a hypocrite there are people out their who have not bought a single dlc they were not forced to buy it any more than you are forced to play me3 mp.

Yes, but this isn't so easy.

Example

I want to buy DLC and I have money for it, the money isn't the issue. Issue is the internet connection requirement.
I want to play MP content at solo. But again I don't want to play ONLINE or in my case I can't because no internet connection on my game computer. Simple way saying, internet connection requirement for singe player games, is the not acceptable part.

So, you say it's choise. Yes it's choise, but it's choise between accepting some unpleasant technical design or be without this game content (part of story). They are building content what requires internet connection on SINGLE PLAYER computer games. It's techical issue, not what player wants. It's choise to sacriface you privacy and security for game content (story) in single player games where is absulute no need for internet connections.

If we would talk about multi-player games, then the situation would be totally different as those games are ment to be played with internet connections. How to I follow ME series story if DLC's and Co-op content are part of the story, but they are behind online features?

It's totally different to require one time DRM check for istalled software, than require internet connection everytime you start the game or access game content. (PC). Some people don't care they own privacy and security, but some people do care.

well your right and wrong you can download and use SOME dlc without internet but some dlc requires at least connection to xbl through a silver membership to use and if you are saying to remove money as a "problem" then getting gold membership should not be a problem and thats only say 2/3 of people playing the game the other 1/3 are playing on psn now, a free online membership based system. now im not saying that there may not be a few people out their that truly can not have xbox live but 99% percent of us where money is not an issue will be able to have xbl. i said shame on the people who think "mp is bad for the sp story" not "its bad because i dont have xbox live" further more its only speculation that mp (multiplayer) will REQUIRE internet it would be a stupid idea to at least not allow system link games and in all honesty...
(speculation alert)
...i would not be surprised to find it has 4p split screen.

But if the xbox is no hooked up online, you can't activate the mode.

[Garrison2009]

iakus wrote...

Garrison2009 wrote...

So, going by your own words, you're just jealous that those who play MP will have a better shot at getting a better ending, correct? My answer to that is simply this... Why do you care? If you have to complete more side missions in the SP campaign to be able to make it to the same point as someone who does far less of the side missions and simply plays MP to gain GR points, so what? I personally will not be complaining about that. It's my uninverse and I get to play it how I want to. MP simply gives people a different option on how they want to.

So, going by your own words, "I got mine, so STFU"?

classy

Your words, not mine... And I really shouldnt even waste my time trying to convince you, as others on here have been trying to do, that MP is ENTIRELY optional as the sig you've got shows your mindset perfectly. You're one of the people who think the mere word 'Multiplayer' should be counted as profanity and any game that it's incorporated into should be taken out and burned as sacrilege or something...

Seriously, I honestly understand your concerns that it might detract from the Single Player experience or simply that you dont want to have to share your world with other people, but the devs have stated on MULTIPLE occasions, as well as others who have playtested the game, that MP is (once again) ENTIRELY optional... You dont HAVE to play it at all. Not to mention that it was created by a completely different Bioware team and THEN incorporated into ME3. All of the facts that show that MP wont make the campaign suffer are there... It's up to you however if you wish to see and acknowledge them or not.

[Killjoy Cutter]

dreman9999 wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

iakus wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

iakus wrote...

tetrisblock4x1 wrote...

You are not making sense. According to Bioware, the MP team are new hires, and that nobody from the SP level building team got involved, but for some reason you think that more = less?

Because everything made by both teams have to share the same disks.  However much content is developed, there is a limited amount of space to put it on.  So if room has to be made, do you really think they'll cut a mission from the "new and shiny" feature?

Unless of course, mp is on a separate disk, which would be great but I somhow doubt it.

Oh, yah....It's not like ME2 was on 2 disks or anything?

So?  That's how much room a single player campaign required.  If they tried to squeeze a mp system into ME2 onthe same two disks, what would have happened?

Remember when Bioware told us that content didn't suffer to get all of DA2 onto a smaller install footprint? 

Oh, right. You also, forgot thatME2 was on 2 disk as well.

Completely beside the point. 

[Onilink1230]

A. well now wait a minute yes sp was on both disks but first we have no idea how much free space the disk would have had if BW had decided not to have both disks share i say at least 50% of the same data

B. i think you are completely wrong about bioware they would not take out sp content just to make their "new and shiny feature" that stands against every thing they believe in as they have said over and over again "we (bioware) will not include extra content (in the initial releases) at the cost of the single player experience that you (the player) have come to love.

C. the cost of the actual disk is less than $.10 the money we pay for games is not so much about the cost of the disk, the case, or the instruction book its the price of paying people to work for them and the computers and software required to make the game it self so including another disk would cost them practically nothing

[Killjoy Cutter]

Onilink1230 wrote...

B. i think you are completely wrong about bioware they would not take out sp content just to make their "new and shiny feature" that stands against every thing they believe in as they have said over and over again "we (bioware) will not include extra content (in the initial releases) at the cost of the single player experience that you (the player) have come to love.

They also said that there was no MP, didn't they?

[Blazenor]

It seems like if an author writes a story from A to D and then add E, some of you think that adding E would be like removing C or something.

[Lunatic LK47]

Garrison2009 wrote...

Seriously, I honestly understand your concerns that it might detract from the Single Player experience or simply that you dont want to have to share your world with other people, but the devs have stated on MULTIPLE occasions, as well as others who have playtested the game, that MP is (once again) ENTIRELY optional... You dont HAVE to play it at all. Not to mention that it was created by a completely different Bioware team and THEN incorporated into ME3. All of the facts that show that MP wont make the campaign suffer are there... It's up to you however if you wish to see and acknowledge them or not.

Medal of Honor 2010, BioShock 2, Dead Space 2, and Brothers in Arms: Hell's Highway woud like to have a word with you (i.e. Mediocrity on all these titles DESPITE these dedicated separate teams.)

[Iakus]

Garrison2009 wrote...]

Your words, not mine... And I really shouldnt even waste my time trying to convince you, as others on here have been trying to do, that MP is ENTIRELY optional as the sig you've got shows your mindset perfectly. You're one of the people who think the mere word 'Multiplayer' should be counted as profanity and any game that it's incorporated into should be taken out and burned as sacrilege or something...

Umm, no, notice my sig says if I have to install it to play ME3.  Multiplayer itself I'm indifferent.  If a seperate game was made called Mass Effect: Galaxy at War, I'd say great, go for it.  If it had been a separate expansion or DLC, again, great.  But shoehorning it into ME3, a single player experience thus far, focusing on one character (Commander Shepard) smacks of gimmickry.  And the dishonest way it had been conealed until now gives me little confidence that it will be as "optional" or "nonintrustive" as they claim.  Much trust was lost with that

Seriously, I honestly understand your concerns that it might detract from the Single Player experience or simply that you dont want to have to share your world with other people, but the devs have stated on MULTIPLE occasions, as well as others who have playtested the game, that MP is (once again) ENTIRELY optional... You dont HAVE to play it at all. Not to mention that it was created by a completely different Bioware team and THEN incorporated into ME3. All of the facts that show that MP wont make the campaign suffer are there... It's up to you however if you wish to see and acknowledge them or not.

Yes yes, Multiiplayer is this totally addictive and awesome experience.  Heard the same thing leading up to DA2 as well

Heard the same things about planet scanning too, come to think of it.

And I continue to wonder how much of this "incorporation" involved removing elements from the single player game to make room for multiplayer maps, dialogue, missions, etc.

[Onilink1230]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Onilink1230 wrote...

B. i think you are completely wrong about bioware they would not take out sp content just to make their "new and shiny feature" that stands against every thing they believe in as they have said over and over again "we (bioware) will not include extra content (in the initial releases) at the cost of the single player experience that you (the player) have come to love.

They also said that there was no MP, didn't they?

uh no if you read my post it does already disscuse that. in fact ^

Modifié par Onilink1230, 24 octobre 2011 - 01:38 .

[Garrison2009]

Lunatic LK47 wrote...

Garrison2009 wrote...

Seriously, I honestly understand your concerns that it might detract from the Single Player experience or simply that you dont want to have to share your world with other people, but the devs have stated on MULTIPLE occasions, as well as others who have playtested the game, that MP is (once again) ENTIRELY optional... You dont HAVE to play it at all. Not to mention that it was created by a completely different Bioware team and THEN incorporated into ME3. All of the facts that show that MP wont make the campaign suffer are there... It's up to you however if you wish to see and acknowledge them or not.

Medal of Honor 2010, BioShock 2, Dead Space 2, and Brothers in Arms: Hell's Highway woud like to have a word with you (i.e. Mediocrity on all these titles DESPITE these dedicated separate teams.)

One VERY easy answer to this... None of the developers that made those games were Bioware... Have at least a little faith, and (once again) if you dont... Why are you even here on these forums? If you've given up on Bioware, then go play Bethesda games or something.

[dreman9999]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

iakus wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

iakus wrote...

tetrisblock4x1 wrote...

You are not making sense. According to Bioware, the MP team are new hires, and that nobody from the SP level building team got involved, but for some reason you think that more = less?

Because everything made by both teams have to share the same disks.  However much content is developed, there is a limited amount of space to put it on.  So if room has to be made, do you really think they'll cut a mission from the "new and shiny" feature?

Unless of course, mp is on a separate disk, which would be great but I somhow doubt it.

Oh, yah....It's not like ME2 was on 2 disks or anything?

So?  That's how much room a single player campaign required.  If they tried to squeeze a mp system into ME2 onthe same two disks, what would have happened?

Remember when Bioware told us that content didn't suffer to get all of DA2 onto a smaller install footprint? 

Oh, right. You also, forgot thatME2 was on 2 disk as well.

Completely beside the point. 

No it's dead on. Why? Because BW doesnot need to cut  things from the game due to using one disk. They can use multiple disk if they need more space.

[Killjoy Cutter]

Onilink1230 wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Onilink1230 wrote...

B. i think you are completely wrong about bioware they would not take out sp content just to make their "new and shiny feature" that stands against every thing they believe in as they have said over and over again "we (bioware) will not include extra content (in the initial releases) at the cost of the single player experience that you (the player) have come to love.

They also said that there was no MP, didn't they?

uh no if you read my post it does already disscuse that. in fact ^

So at no point did they say or directly imply that MP would not be part of ME3? 

(And no, there's nothing in the written words of your post, blue or not, that addresses that question.)

[Lunatic LK47]

Garrison2009 wrote...

One VERY easy answer to this... None of the developers that made those games were Bioware... Have at least a little faith, and (once again) if you dont... Why are you even here on these forums? If you've given up on Bioware, then go play Bethesda games or something.

Uh, BioWare or not, chances of failure for half-assing CAN happen. I've seen the negative aspects of multiplayer affecting the game as a whole TOO MANY ****ING TIMES. I'll remain ****ing skeptical until my copy of ME3 is here and voice them, ******.

BTW, I consider Bethesda games to be UTTER CRAP.

Modifié par Lunatic LK47, 24 octobre 2011 - 05:35 .

[Onilink1230]

So at no point did they say or directly imply that MP would not be part of ME3? 

(And no, there's nothing in the written words of your post, blue or not, that addresses that question.)
[/quote]

never did they say 100 percent no the most i have heard them say is probably not

ps
yes i did because again they have never said 100 percent no mp so my
quote ( "as they have said over and over again "we (bioware) will not
include
extra content (in the initial releases) at the cost of the single player

experience that you (the player) have come to love.") means we might
make mp if it works with the sp and in no way screws it up, this has
been their philosophy since they started making ME2 . thus meaning they
would never say 100 percent no which means the never said, nor implyed
nor even thought of implying that it was not going to happen. so this
means that my original quot was a proper response to your follow up
question. thank you and goodnight sir!

Modifié par Onilink1230, 24 octobre 2011 - 07:30 .

[TobyHasEyes]

 Would be cool if they had a map based on all cookie-cutter side-mission warehouses in ME1, enjoy a bit of nostalgia with the new controls and new characters

[Garrison2009]

Lunatic LK47 wrote...

Garrison2009 wrote...

One VERY easy answer to this... None of the developers that made those games were Bioware... Have at least a little faith, and (once again) if you dont... Why are you even here on these forums? If you've given up on Bioware, then go play Bethesda games or something.

Uh, BioWare or not, chances of failure for half-assing CAN happen. I've seen the negative aspects of multiplayer affecting the game as a whole TOO MANY ****ING TIMES. I'll remain ****ing skeptical until my copy of ME3 is here and voice them, ******.

BTW, I consider Bethesda games to be UTTER CRAP.

You definitely have the right to be skeptical if you so choose. The right to use profanity on these forums? not so much... Might want to curb that a bit...

I am just sick and tired of people coming on here and doing nothing but griping and complaining. Is there NOTHING good you can say?? Seriously... negativity appears to be the only ruling emotion on the BSN amongst most of its members. If you hate Bioware and hate the direction they're taking SO MUCH then why dont you go and play something else, write on some other developer's forums, and complain about some other game! I'm sick and tired of it...

[Lunatic LK47]

Garrison2009 wrote...


I am just sick and tired of people coming on here and doing nothing but griping and complaining. Is there NOTHING good you can say?? Seriously... negativity appears to be the only ruling emotion on the BSN amongst most of its members. If you hate Bioware and hate the direction they're taking SO MUCH then why dont you go and play something else, write on some other developer's forums, and complain about some other game! I'm sick and tired of it...

For the record, I am holding the Mass Effect franchise with a high regard, and am expecting a big pay-off since I bought both of the first two games at launch. 9 out of 10 times with MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, MULTIPLAYER RUINED IT FOR ME. You say "you understand why people have concerns about MP affecting single-player negatively," but you apparently tend to cherry-pick them with "Bioware can do no wrong." Problem is, as much as I like most of BioWare's products (i.e. Not a big fan of the Dragon Age franchise, and never got exposed to their earlier titles), I felt ME3 just joined the band-wagon of "Latest entries to single-player games must mandatorily HAVE MP/CO-OP.  I would have been fine with a Mass Effect: Galaxy at War DLC pack or a spin-off game, period.  BTW, My profanity is not going to go.

[The Elder King]

An Italian website posted an hands-on on the ME3 co-op. Their impression about the co-op was negative.

http://www.everyeye...._hands-on_15187

[KBomb]

hhh89 wrote...

An Italian website posted an hands-on on the ME3 co-op. Their impression about the co-op was negative.

http://www.everyeye...._hands-on_15187

Can anyone post a brief summary of this in English? I’m rather interested in what it says.

[Someone With Mass]

KBomb wrote...

hhh89 wrote...

An Italian website posted an hands-on on the ME3 co-op. Their impression about the co-op was negative.

http://www.everyeye...._hands-on_15187

Can anyone post a brief summary of this in English? I’m rather interested in what it says.

They're just whining about the AI of some geth that didn't use melee when they got close or they spent too much time behind cover, or they spawned in a bad place. Something about the lack of exploration (seriously, what did they expect?) was also mentioned.

That and they don't think there's much strategy involved.

Judging the whole thing based on fighting one of the weakest enemies in the game is hardly fair, though. It'd be like if I played the first five rounds of Horde mode in Gears of War 3 and complained that it was too easy.

[Lumikki]

You can use google translator:

http://translate.goo...n_15187&act=url

[The Elder King]

Someone With Mass wrote...

KBomb wrote...

hhh89 wrote...

An Italian website posted an hands-on on the ME3 co-op. Their impression about the co-op was negative.

http://www.everyeye...._hands-on_15187

Can anyone post a brief summary of this in English? I’m rather interested in what it says.

They're just whining about the AI of some geth that didn't use melee when they got close or they spent too much time behind cover, or they spawned in a bad place. Something about the lack of exploration (seriously, what did they expect?) was also mentioned.

That and they don't think there's much strategy involved.

Judging the whole thing based on fighting one of the weakest enemies in the game is hardly fair, though. It'd be like if I played the first five rounds of Horde mode in Gears of War 3 and complained that it was too easy.

I agree with you. I posted it only because it's the first hands-on about the co-op. I prefer to wait and see more previews about the co-op. The only things that could be take seriously is the anonymous ambientation.

Modifié par hhh89, 24 octobre 2011 - 11:19 .

[Daryst]

wasn't the xbox magazine scheduled for release tomorrow? They will probably have more and in-depth details about the multiplayer

[KBomb]

Lumikki wrote...

You can use google translator:

http://translate.goo...n_15187&act=url

Well, that's what I usually do in this situation, but this morning my internet is being an ass. I am lucky to even load this site and even this page.


@Someone With Mass, thanks for posting.