2261 réponses à ce sujet

[Il Divo]

iakus wrote...

I like you.  You remind me of me.  Only, you know, wrong 

I also put story first and foremost.  I would not have cared if the gameplay mechanics went unchanged since ME1.  Part of what made DA2 a good game for me was the character interactions, which were thankfully left mostly alone.  

I was going to warn him, but figured you might want to let him know yourself.

[Killjoy Cutter]

iakus wrote...

IMO if Bioware really did land on the "story comes first" side , they would have completed the trilogy with Shepard's story, completely single player, and only add Galaxy at was as an expansion, a DLC, or a different game set in the Mass Effect universe.  As it is, I suspect Bioware landed "money comes first" side.

Bingo.

[Homebound]

wait what? iakus wants free stuff in the game as dlc?

[C9316]

Nice to see people are still butt hurt over Multiplayer. And just think a couple of weeks earlier I would've been in the same camp as most of you. Interesting how things change, while I would have preferred for Bioware to complete Shepard's story in a single player only experience I am fully prepared to give multiplayer a try. Besides we barely know a thing about MP don't cancel your preorders yet jeez...

[Iakus]

Hellbound555 wrote...

wait what? iakus wants free stuff in the game as dlc?

Nothing is free.  Nothing.  

[Il Divo]

iakus wrote...

Hellbound555 wrote...

wait what? iakus wants free stuff in the game as dlc?

Nothing is free.  Nothing.  

What about cookies?

[Iakus]

Il Divo wrote...

iakus wrote...

Hellbound555 wrote...

wait what? iakus wants free stuff in the game as dlc?

Nothing is free.  Nothing.  

What about cookies?

You still have to give blood.

Or be Santa.

[ZenJestr]

The cookies are the fat man's reparations for giving children free stuff

[Garrison2009]

iakus wrote...

Garrison2009 wrote...

Then we are on opposite sides of the spectrum here (a position I keep finding myself in). Let me state that I play Bioware games for one reason and one reason only: The story... as fun as gameplay is, the story is what drew me in in the first place and what keeps drawing me in every single time Bioware puts out another game. I love RPGs but, once again, those elements are secondary next to them putting in a concrete well-laid-out plot and characters.

What's happening here is you've got two groups. People like me, who value the journey, the narrative. And the others who, while they may also value the narrative, put RPG mechanics above everything. THAT is precisely what is causing this split in the fanbase. Bioware has finally landed on the story-comes-first side and those who value the gameplay as higher are disapointed. Granted, that is their right and I hold nothing against them for that..

I like you.  You remind me of me.  Only, you know, wrong 

I also put story first and foremost.  I would not have cared if the gameplay mechanics went unchanged since ME1.  Part of what made DA2 a good game for me was the character interactions, which were thankfully left mostly alone.  

But I cannot for the life of me see how adding a multiplayer component will add to the story.  Quite the opposite in fact.  I think it will dilute the story.  By:

A) not having a story and thus resources went into essentially making a multiplayer shooting gallery
it is necessary to the story, in which case those who cannot or will not do multiplayer will be excluded from part of the overall canon.  
C) it's a completely separate story in its own right.  In which case. what's it doing in Shepard's story to begin with?

I'm not some anti multiplayer zealot.  I do in fact play multiplayer games from time to time.  But as a social aspect.  For the players, not the story.  How often do people play mp for the story?  How deep is the Diablo storyline?

IMO if Bioware really did land on the "story comes first" side , they would have completed the trilogy with Shepard's story, completely single player, and only add Galaxy at War as an expansion, a DLC, or a different game set in the Mass Effect universe.  As it is, I suspect Bioware landed "money comes first" side.

lol, well you never know.. No one's stated outright that Multiplayer WONT have a storyline and, if it is connected to the Single player campaign as they say it is, it's my guess that it will. I suppose we'll just have to wait and see. Of course, if it doesnt, and it does turn out to detract from the SP experience (Which I doubt it will), I give you every right to come on here and tell me "I told you so."  

[OMTING52601]

Now, I'm even more confused. I've read the FAQ. I've read most of the threads related to MP. So, I just watched the 'special' BW Pulse ep about the MP. Casey Hudson says (direct quote) "Whereas Mass Effect 1 and 2 were about Cmdr. Shepard and his small crew, this(ME 3) is really the beginning, middle, end of the whole galactic war."

Okay, so if that's the case, then the focus not being on Shepard makes sense, ie MP, but then again, why would the final part of the trilogy veer so far away from the first two installments? Is this game Shepard's finale or not? Is Shepard's part only 'integral' if a player avoids MP, meaning it's Shep's story if you play SP, but if you play MP then Shep's stuff is sort of told, off screen? Don't worry, I don't expect an answer this far out from release.

Mr. Hudson follows the above comment with(again direct quote) "Because it's(ME 3) been an integrated design effort, we've created something that's a cohesive experience between the single player and the multiplayer aspects of Mass Effect 3. These places that Cmdr. Shepard is trying to secure across the galaxy, as part of your war assets on the single player side, you're fighting to control those on the multiplayer side. And the better you do, the more you control, the better your single player ending will be."

Okay, but everyone keeps screaming, Mr. Hudson, that we don't have to play MP in order to get the penultimate 'happy'(which rumor has it is anything but) ending in SP. That isn't what you just said there. Oh wait...

(direct quote) "If you want to do a really complete, single player playthrough, then you can absolutely get to the highest levels of success in the endgame. But you also now have an alternative. You can take more of that experience into multiplayer."

Not to be nitpicky, but it can't be both ways. The "highest levels of success" does not equate to "the better your single player ending will be". Either I need to play MP to get the bestest best ending or I don't. It can't be either or, not the way things were worded in that video.

Again, not trying to be rude, but either the folks who wrote up what was to be said in that video didn't get a thorough edit or MP is much more "integrated" into the SP than the FAQ implies. And I know, I know, everyone is just hen pecking the hell out of this topic, but truthfully did Bioware/EA expect something different? They've added an entirely opposing element to a popular SP/TPS RPG(wow that's a lot of letters), which at release is going to cost people fifty bucks or more. Fifty bucks is a lot of dough in this economy and nobody wants to invest in a game they hope to be x only to find out it's y, with zero option of getting their money back if they aren't satisfied.

[Taciter]

[quote]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.[/quote]Give the conformists their due too - Dreeman and his retinue of feeble syncophants have been fairly active in this 'debate' too - kudos to them!

Voicing one's concerns over a product or service is not a consumer handicap, it provides a means by which vendors can gauge customer satisfaction and by which customer's can attempt to influence the percieved value of said product or service on a presonal level - The free market will decide the outcome.

[quote]Comsky159 wrote...
Multiplayer seems to attract a larger audience but it does somewhat alienate some of the intrinsic core of Bioware's cult fans, not enough to make them leave in droves but enough to spark mutterings of mutiny I think...
...It's the ultimate immersion breaker, an infringement upon the sanctity of my relationship with the text and the personalised interactive medium (Shepard)...[/quote]Signed, endorsed and submitted for publishing rights!

[quote]coyote_blue wrote...

...But BioWare shouldn't make that calculation while taking us for granted. Waiting to purchase, or not purchasing at all, is the only recourse left to us...[/quote]Bingo... ultimately, after all our blustering, THIS will decide Bioware's legacy.

[quote]Gatt9 wrote...
...Multiplayer in a narrative driven single player game offers no financial incentives on it's own.  If persons X were not interested in a narrative driven single player game,  a handful of co-op missions isn't going to change their mind...
*lots of insightful goodness supported by an airtight argument*
...I doubt I'm alone,  my money will go to Steam,  not to EA and their forced-multiplayer to sell Online Passes and their forced DLC to get everything on the disc you paid $60 for.  Not to Ubisoft who tries to force me to buy a copy of a game for each of my family...[/quote]One thing that IS certain is that my purchase of ME3 will be decided by its availability through Steam. No Steam release... No ME3. I don't say that flippantly, the Mass Effect frnachise has grown very close to my heart.

[quote]realguile wrote...
After reading this thread I really hope I'm able to friendly fire the anti-social nerds to death l4d-style in the MP.[/quote]'fraid not kiddo, anti-social nerds don't play MP so you'll have to make do with one-shotting your bunny hopping COD mates - assuming you can convince them of the merits of investing $60 in a predominantly RPG franchise but don't hold your breath.

[quote]Lumikki wrote...
...I'm gonna do exactly same as Warlorejon, vote with my wallet. Not that i believe it would affect anyting, but at least i will save some money and i personally don't pay full price because MP. It's more a message to EA.[/quote]
Me three!

[quote]Arkitekt wrote...
Stop freaking out. It'll be alright.[/quote]If Neville Chamberlain had been less selective about the wording of his final ministerial folly, that's what he would have said... just prior to Germany's invasion of Poland.

[quote]realguile wrote...
Some of you clowns are so scared to play a game with others it's pathetic. Go play street fighter 4 or mk or tekken 6 and experience what it's like to go toe to toe online and get beat and come back for more. Thousands of times. That will toughen you up.  Have you ever played online multiplayer before? It's nothing differenet from arcades except for the rage quitting.
All i read in this thread are spineless scrubs crying about having to play a game with others when it's completly optional. Just pathetic. Some of you need to grow a pair and learn to have fun causing chaos with some multiplayer.
God damn.[/quote]Wow, our very first Mass Effect ME'peen - you must be the vanguard of the forthcoming COD invasion force. If I ever needed reminding of just why I don't 'indulge' in MP, you have single handedly subdued any such uncertainty.

Oh and thanks for the advice re: Street Fighter and Tekken, I'll certainly consider the appeal of dying thousands of times to 'toughen' me up just as soon as I've finished writing my compendium on 'Pointless activites udertaken by insecure teenage blowhards', Ironically, 'Causing chaos in MP arenas' is the final chapter, just after 'monkey-spanking'.

[quote]Garrison2009 wrote...
...You watch it from the beginning to the end, unlike Mass Effect, where you choose what direction you want to take or 'what part of the movie you want to watch.' MP is simply another part of that movie that can be easily 'fast-forwarded' through if you so wish.[/quote]And you wouldn't be cheesed-off with having to fast-forward through scenes that have a bearing on the plot?

[quote]iakus wrote...
...Nor do I believe that MP will be as optional as they are claiming.  Much of the stuff being said about MP is the same kind of stuff said about the changes in DA2.  Essentially, it amounts to "Trust us, it'll be awesome".
I fear that regardless of words, regardless of intentions, in combining sp and mp, one, the other, or both will suffer.  I hope I don't sound too selfish when I say I hope it's not the sp that suffers for it.[/quote]This is my fear, I called out for a show of support in the idea of incorporating AI 'bots' as an 'optional' alternative to teaming up with people like 'realguile' there somepages back, and after a period of indecision, unaninimty was almost achieved (with the excpetion of Dreeman who clearly has all the empathy and charity of Ghengis Khan), however, that suggestion appears to have vanished into obscurity - perhaps just a sad reflection of EA's interest in providing such an equitable compromise.

[quote]Garrison2009 wrote...
...In short, once again I must state, make your decisions about what will be affected or not when you actually have hard TANGIBLE facts to go by and not simply what you presume.[/quote]Apathy, idleness and implicit trust are dangerous traits to which to subscribe. Proactive discourse is the only way to ensure a reasonable outcome.

[quote]iakus wrote...
You say I am presuming too much negativity.  I say you are being far too optimistic.  I cannot simply take Bioware's word anymore.  Not after the last couple of years.  Not after Dragon Age 2 (which was decent despite the changes rather than because of them).  Not after Mass Effect 2 (yes, I'm a "ME2 hater")  Not after Bioware took such pains to hide multiplayer for so long.  I'm seeing a pattern of behavior here.  You may not see it, but it's plenty tangible to me.  I have seen little to no "tangible facts"  to give me hope.  Just a lot of "this will be AWESOME!" talk.  Sorry, that stuff doesn't make me go starry-eyed anymore.
Bioware has to prove they're worthy of trust again.  Thus my sig.  If mp is so optional, if sp is so whole and complete, then it should run just fine without any mp files at all.[/quote]THIS!

Modifié par Taciter, 27 octobre 2011 - 10:14 .

[Killjoy Cutter]

C9316 wrote...

 butthurt 

You use that word, it means you have no point.  Bye.

[Iakus]

Taciter wrote...

iakus wrote...
...Nor do I believe that MP will be as optional as they are claiming.  Much of the stuff being said about MP is the same kind of stuff said about the changes in DA2.  Essentially, it amounts to "Trust us, it'll be awesome".
I fear that regardless of words, regardless of intentions, in combining sp and mp, one, the other, or both will suffer.  I hope I don't sound too selfish when I say I hope it's not the sp that suffers for it.

This is my fear, I called out for a show of support in the idea of incorporating AI 'bots' as an 'optional' alternative to teaming up with people like 'realguile' there somepages back, and after a period of indecision, unaninimty was almost achieved (with the excpetion of Dreeman who clearly has all the empathy and charity of Ghengis Khan), however, that suggestion appears to have vanished into obscurity - perhaps just a sad reflection of EA's interest in providing such an equitable compromise.

There actually is a thread discussuing bots in the multiplayer.  The general idea is being failrly well received, by fans at least.  FInal product is another matter.

Bots For Multiplayer - Show Support

[Killjoy Cutter]

Taciter wrote...

realguile wrote...

Some of you clowns are so scared to play a game with others it's pathetic. Go play street fighter 4 or mk or tekken 6 and experience what it's like to go toe to toe online and get beat and come back for more. Thousands of times. That will toughen you up.  Have you ever played online multiplayer before? It's nothing differenet from arcades except for the rage quitting.
All i read in this thread are spineless scrubs crying about having to play a game with others when it's completly optional. Just pathetic. Some of you need to grow a pair and learn to have fun causing chaos with some multiplayer.
God damn.

Wow, our very first Mass Effect ME'peen - you must be the vanguard of the forthcoming COD invasion force. If I ever needed reminding of just why I don't 'indulge' in MP, you have single handedly subdued any such uncertainty.

Oh and thanks for the advice re: Street Fighter and Tekken, I'll certainly consider the appeal of dying thousands of times to 'toughen' me up just as soon as I've finished writing my compendium on 'Pointless activites udertaken by insecure teenage blowhards', Ironically, 'Causing chaos in MP arenas' is the final chapter, just after 'monkey-spanking'.

So true, on all fronts.  

Tools like that are exactly why I gave up on MP, and why I won't bother with ME3's tack-on MP.  It really says something about a person when they think that online MP gaming can make them tough, and that it shows their manhood.  Anyone who uses the terms like "courage" and "cowardice" and "manup" and "gutless" and "thoughen you up" in reference to playing a video game has clearly not left his mother's basement in order to find out what constitutes hard times in the real world -- they have absolutely no perspective. 

Try keeping it together when a parent dies because you're the one that the rest of the family needs strong. 
Try dealing with a miscarriage on your first try, when your deepest dream is to have children. 
Try making the decision that a pet you've had for over 15 years and is closer to you than most people, is better off being put to sleep.   

Just a few samples of the real issues that friends have had to deal with here in real life in the last year.  Anyone who thinks that video games have anything to do with toughness can go shove their xbox controller up their arse. 

[StowyMcStowstow]

This multi-player BETTER be playable on the same console with one other person at least. If the Mass Effect MP follows the sme suit as Battlefield three my anger will know no bounds, because not having couch co-op in a CO-OP game is absolutely moronic. I want to get a friend into ME3, not make him watch while me and three dumb*sses go around online.

[Taciter]

iakus wrote...
There actually is a thread discussuing bots in the multiplayer. The general idea is being failrly well received, by fans at least. FInal product is another matter.

Bots For Multiplayer - Show Support

Awesome.. thansk for the heads up Iakus, I'll go and spill some diatribe!

Killjoy Cutter wrote...
So true, on all fronts.

...in reference to playing a video game has clearly not left his mother's basement in order to find out what constitutes hard times in the real world -- they have absolutely no perspective.

...Try keeping it together when a parent dies because you're the one that the rest of the family needs strong.

Just a few samples of the real issues that friends have had to deal with here in real life in the last year. Anyone who thinks that video games have anything to do with toughness can go shove their xbox controller up their arse.

Cheers KJ, sorry to hear about your recent trials, you've clearly had a tough few years which is why...

Mass Effect appeals to ESCAPISTS!

This is what these multiplayer fanatics either don't understand or don't want to acknowledge. For the majority of us, we're not looking to extend our daily dose of reality by immersing ourselves in yet more social interaction, we're looking to postpone it.

I'm not against multiplayer games on principle, nor do I dissaprove of 'multiplayer' (be it co-op or otherwise) being tacked on to ME3, what I dissaprove of is the fact that it never occurred to anyone in the EA/Bioware hegemony to provide a single player 'option' to the multiplayer add-on - in essence, allowing escapists to retain their emancipatory illusion in the form of single-player arena/co-op matches.

When I bought Unreal Tournament 3 (entirely for the graphics - yes, I'm that shallow), I was convinced that I'd hate it but the single player 'campaign' which was essentially identical to the multiplayer PvP but with bots and cinematics and was suprisingly edifying. I think bEAware would be fools to overlook such an opportunity for compomise.

Modifié par Taciter, 27 octobre 2011 - 02:29 .

[Liec]

http://www.dealspwn....orde-time-81462

[SergeySW]

Liec wrote...

http://www.dealspwn....orde-time-81462

For the first time in the series, we can choose from a selection of seven races

[Mclouvins]

StowyMcStowstow wrote...

This multi-player BETTER be playable on the same console with one other person at least. If the Mass Effect MP follows the sme suit as Battlefield three my anger will know no bounds, because not having couch co-op in a CO-OP game is absolutely moronic. I want to get a friend into ME3, not make him watch while me and three dumb*sses go around online.

ME3 actually has the potential to support splitscreen since its still using the unreal 3 engine. Games with really high graphical fidelity such as BF3 with the frostbite2 engine can't support it on consoles becasue the hardware simply can't render two spearate images anymore. Rage at microsoft for trying to grab 10 years out of a console not the developers.

[Liec]

SergeySW wrote...

Liec wrote...

http://www.dealspwn....orde-time-81462

For the first time in the series, we can choose from a selection of seven races

This one also mentions seven races.

http://www.co-optimu...mpressions.html

Modifié par Liec, 27 octobre 2011 - 04:39 .

[Domnuxx]

i don't know if anyone posted this already but there's an article and interview about Me3 multiplayer on gamespot.
It's here

[vracarr1]

www.dualshockers.com/2011/10/27/preview-we-played-mass-effect-3-mulitplayer-and-it-was-awesome/ 

[111987]

ps3.ign.com/articles/121/1210812p1.html

IGN article on hands-on coop. Not all that positive.

[Someone With Mass]

Mixed opinions, eh?

[Riknas]

111987 wrote...

ps3.ign.com/articles/121/1210812p1.html

IGN article on hands-on coop. Not all that positive.

Not all that negative either.