121 réponses à ce sujet

[Joecos]

Title pretty much says it all. It looks like you guys finally sold out to the 'Fraghead' crowd. I don't care how much you try justify the need to add in multiplayer. It just wasn't nesscary. It's a cheap and lazy approach to ultimatley say ''Well here is your replayability folks''. I'd prefer to keep the last series in the game Single Player with the DLC approach but hey... It's not like us consumers who pay the full MSRB shouldn't have an opinion right...  

Now, I don't really mind how Mass Effect 2 derailied from it's RPG roots. All I expect from you guys are Great Story lines and good Solo play. If I wanted to play with other idiots in a game I'd go play some crappy online FPS or an MMORPG..

Oh well looks like I won't be buying this now since you just raped it for me.

At least Skyrim is sticking to it's original roots...

[Tramain1987]

It's co-op, jeez. It's optional, and I bet you will get it. Stop hyping and being a troll. Fans wanted it and they delivered, if you don't want multi-player, then don't play.

[The Grey Ranger]

Actually a lot of fans did not want it. But there was no need to make yet another thread complaining about it.

[Hallusinaatti]

I stopped having faith in BioWare after DA2, but I still have some hope that Mass Effect 3 will be carried out successfully with the first two games' success in mind. They know what the fans want.

Maybe it's just EA sucking all the blood out of them.

[wolfennights]

You don't have to play co-op. The single player is still there. Wait for the game to come out before you jump to conclusions.

[Sarah_SR2]

I'm with you guys (wolfennights & PlainOlJane2) in that I'm prepared to reserve judgement until I've read the proper pre-release reviews. I think the single player experience will be much the same and multiplayer is just another means of opening up the game to a wider audience. The first 2 games already allow a wide range of playstyles and this is most likely an extension of that again. I hope so anyway!

[d1sciple]

what's his face on IGN summed it up best when he said that the vast majority of people were incredibly happy with the games so far and didn't need to make a whole lot of noise about it, but the very few who weren't made a big deal about what they wanted and so they got heard.
another case of the loud few ruining it for the happy and quiet many.

[Black Raptor]

It's co-op people. It hasn't ruined anything. You want to play a few extra missions with friends then you can. If you don't want to then you don't have to.
Nothing is lost either way.

It's not like they added PVP online for the sake of having multiplayer like Dead Space 2 and Bioshock 2.

Even if they did add PVP, it wouldn't "ruin" anything. The SP will still be there. This thread is idiotic in premise.

[Bogsnot1]

There there, just rub this on and it will soothe the butthurt.

[capn233]

Ha. More like he needs to get a some 10% lidocaine jelly.

[AwesomeAuger]

Tramain1987 wrote...

It's co-op, jeez. It's optional, and I bet you will get it. Stop hyping and being a troll. Fans wanted it and they delivered, if you don't want multi-player, then don't play.

This

[Taciter]

Joecos wrote...
...Now, I don't really mind how Mass Effect 2 derailied from it's RPG roots. All I expect from you guys are Great Story lines and good Solo play. If I wanted to play with other idiots in a game I'd go play some crappy online FPS or an MMORPG..
Oh well looks like I won't be buying this now since you just raped it for me...

I totally empathise with you Joecos, had this been ANY other game, the announcement would be meh but this is 'Mass Effect', the gaming industry's gift to SP RPG'ers - our refuge! It's like adding cast members from an Australian daytime soap opera to Star Trek DS9 - bang goes the immersion, wheeee goes the escapism and 'hoorah!' the world's collective pie eating couch potatoes shout. Clearly their influence far outsrips their intellect.

But fear not Joecos, I'm certain that despite the insulting presence of a co-op 'only' section, the single player will compensate sufficiently to justify your continued support. Don't deny yourself the satisfaction of concluding an otherwise awesome saga!

Tramain1987 wrote...
It's co-op, jeez. It's optional, and I bet you will get it. Stop hyping and being a troll. Fans wanted it and they delivered, if you don't want multi-player, then don't play.

wolfennights wrote...
You don't have to play co-op. The single player is still there. Wait for the game to come out before you jump to conclusions.

To continue my 'Deep Soap 9' analogy, what you're suggesting is that we should be thankful that these cast members have been introduced to the series at very little extra cost to the production team and with only a year's delay to the release schedule. Now, those who love 'Deep Soap 9' can have the best of both worlds and those who have faithfully loved 'Deep Space 9' for all these years can simply fast forward through the 'Soapey' bits and miss out on only a modest part of the plot which, thankfully, isn't needed to understand the conclusion to the episode anyway.

Do you think such a announcement would garner much sympathy from fanatical DS9 viewers?

The Grey Ranger wrote...
Actually a lot of fans did not want it. But there was no need to make yet another thread complaining about it.

PlainOLJane2 wrote...
I don't like it either but I have faith the single player gameplay will still be good. Wait and see.

d1sciple wrote...
...another case of the loud few ruining it for the happy and quiet many...

I agree with all these statements and d1sciplpe summed up Bioware's likely motivation nicely, however, I suspect it was also galvanised by EA's commitment to MP the hell out of any game that has the audacity to betray some semblence of taste or individuality, thus...

Hallusinaatti wrote...
...Maybe it's just EA sucking all the blood out of them.

Personally, I was sceptical but open to compromise. So long as bots or solo play could be an applicable alternative to forced 'co-operation' with those erstwhile gate-crashers, I was happy. Having followed the heated Mass Effect 3 thread on this topic, it seems likely that neither ammicable compromise will be implemented (at least not formally).

Bots are apparently (and somewhat predictably) a no-go and solo play is essentially impossible given that certain scenarios will require the use of 'companions' to crack terminals whilest the rest defend the aforementioned hacker. Of all the mechanical restrictions I hate most - these are the worst... it's like a DRM for solo play.

Modifié par Taciter, 14 octobre 2011 - 02:41 .

[Chaos Gate]

They ruined the Mass Effect series when they dumbed down,stripped out, and completely castrated Mass Effect 2.

However, the ME3 multiplayer component is reportedly going to have little, if any, impact on the single player campaign, and is being entirely designed by another developer. And so I will reserve my judgement until ME3 comes out.

I don't have much faith in BioWare these days, but I'm not going to complain about a game that has not been released.

[d1sciple]

Chaos Gate wrote...

However, the ME3 multiplayer component is reportedly going to have little, if any, impact on the single player campaign, and is being entirely designed by another developer.

 

that's the point. if it does then it's robbing the majority of fans of something they've enjoyed since 2007, a well crafted, unique, single player immersion.
if something brand new they've developed and added into the very last installment of a trilogy negatively impacts the SP nature of the series then that's a bottle in the face to all the current fans, get it? to establish something then change the nature of it will have a negative effect, that's just logical. if the change is in itself negative, then it's lose lose for everyone.
much like, ahem, SW 1/2/3.

[Bogsnot1]

So a purely optional, alternative method for achieving the exact same outcome as what is available in SP mode somehow robs fans of the SP experience? Especially as that optional experience can still be performed solo, and without any other players joining in?

[didymos1120]

Chaos Gate wrote...

However, the ME3 multiplayer component is reportedly going to have little, if any, impact on the single player campaign, and is being entirely designed by another developer.

Um, no.  It's being developed by Bioware.  There's simply an additional team in the Montreal studio doing the vast majority of the work on MP.  And that team still answers to Casey Hudson and Preston Watamaniuk.

Modifié par didymos1120, 14 octobre 2011 - 05:19 .

[didymos1120]

d1sciple wrote...


if something brand new they've developed and added into the very last installment of a trilogy negatively impacts the SP nature of the series then that's a bottle in the face to all the current fans, get it?

"If".

[Taciter]

Bogsnot1 wrote...

So a purely optional, alternative method for achieving the exact same outcome as what is available in SP mode somehow robs fans of the SP experience? Especially as that optional experience can still be performed solo, and without any other players joining in?

Oh sure, IF the 'optional' experience CAN be performed solo then great but as I said before, rumours abound of hard-coded co-op objectives that require simultaneous yet independent objectives to be completed give me sufficient cause for concern.. that would essentially preclude any possibility of solo play.

[d1sciple]

i agree about the big if, both ways.
nothing's been confirmed as far as gameplay goes, we just have broad statements to go on so any reasonable fears are justified at this point and some people on here are sharing the reasonable fears they have, what's wrong with that?
for my part i've said in another thread that i have fears, i don't trust Bioware implicitly for any other reason than trusting anything implicitly is crazy and so im not only sceptical but massively cynical about the developments and what they will mean for the game.
before i heard i would've put money down on a preorder based on my experiences with ME1 and ME2, now i won't because there is a massive shift away from the standard design as a purely SP game and i don't trust that my experience will benefit from that change, there's simply not enough information on it yet.

[Hallusinaatti]

Taciter wrote...

Personally, I was sceptical but open to compromise. So long as bots or solo play could be an applicable alternative to forced 'co-operation' with those erstwhile gate-crashers, I was happy. Having followed the heated Mass Effect 3 thread on this topic, it seems likely that neither ammicable compromise will be implemented (at least not formally).

Bots are apparently (and somewhat predictably) a no-go and solo play is essentially impossible given that certain scenarios will require the use of 'companions' to crack terminals whilest the rest defend the aforementioned hacker. Of all the mechanical restrictions I hate most - these are the worst... it's like a DRM for solo play.

I'm not slitting my wrists because of co-op, even if I think there are better ways to spend development money.
The thing is that after what DA2 was I'm having the hunch that ME3 will be sacrifing plot and believability for the sake of more sex and gore.

[Taciter]

Hallusinaatti wrote...

Taciter wrote...

Personally, I was sceptical but open to compromise. So long as bots or solo play could be an applicable alternative to forced 'co-operation' with those erstwhile gate-crashers, I was happy. Having followed the heated Mass Effect 3 thread on this topic, it seems likely that neither ammicable compromise will be implemented (at least not formally).

Bots are apparently (and somewhat predictably) a no-go and solo play is essentially impossible given that certain scenarios will require the use of 'companions' to crack terminals whilest the rest defend the aforementioned hacker. Of all the mechanical restrictions I hate most - these are the worst... it's like a DRM for solo play.

I'm not slitting my wrists because of co-op, even if I think there are better ways to spend development money.
The thing is that after what DA2 was I'm having the hunch that ME3 will be sacrifing plot and believability for the sake of more sex and gore.

lol... I wouldn't pass-up either but certainly not at the expense of plot - I confess, I did enjoy those 'shredder rounds' though

Modifié par Taciter, 14 octobre 2011 - 09:47 .

[Black Raptor]

As far as analogies go, that DS9 one was the worst I've ever seen, and I get into arguments with creationists.

The Co-op mode is entirely optional. You don't want to play it? You don't have to play it. It's not like you'll be missing out on anything since it's clearly not catered to you anyway.

Also, to the argument that ME2 was a dumbed down rpg, I ask this? Why does every rpg have to follow the exact same formula?

Seriously, if every "hardcore" rpg fan had complete control over the devs then the only difference between any rpg game would be the spelling for the word "ork".

Mass Effect 2 made the logical step of removing unessential RPG components from ME1 (like 50 different weapons and suits in your inventory when you don't even have a bag to put them in) to make better use of the lore in game and improve the combat.

[Bogsnot1]

Taciter wrote...
Oh sure, IF the 'optional' experience CAN be performed solo then great but as I said before, rumours abound of hard-coded co-op objectives that require simultaneous yet independent objectives to be completed give me sufficient cause for concern.. that would essentially preclude any possibility of solo play.

Check out the FAQ I whipped up in the ME3 forum. Among the many questions asked was the possibility of soloing the MP side of thnigs,  and Brennon Holmes came with an answer to the affirmative.

[Bogsnot1]

Black Raptor wrote...
Seriously, if every "hardcore" rpg fan had complete control over the devs then the only difference between any rpg game would be the spelling for the word "ork".

You know thats not true. There is also the halfling/hin/hobbit debate, dwarfen/dwarven, and elfin/elven.