121 réponses à ce sujet

[didymos1120]

Hallusinaatti wrote...

Black Raptor wrote...
Origin exists to control the rampent piracy that goes on with all PC games. 

Allegedly.

No, it's not alleged. It really is for that, at least in part (I mean, it's also for competing with Steam).  It won't help much, but EA thinks it will.

Modifié par didymos1120, 16 octobre 2011 - 03:01 .

[Averross375]

 The OP: BAWWWWWWWWWWWWW!

[Kabanya101]

To the OP:

I agree with you one hundred percent. The Mass Effect series was never meant to have any multiplayer. All it needed was a great storyline and one hell of a single player experience to win my love.

I know, many people wanted multiplayer and the developers say that it expands on the war. Okay I get that, but why not make a separate game that focuses solely around that instead of a ****ty bonus disc.

I'm not going to complain or talk anymore, but just shake my head in dissapointment at Bioware for falling into peer pressure.

[Averross375]

Trololololol

[Bogsnot1]

Kabanya101 wrote...

To the OP:

I agree with you one hundred percent. The Mass Effect series was never meant to have any multiplayer. All it needed was a great storyline and one hell of a single player experience to win my love.

I know, many people wanted multiplayer and the developers say that it expands on the war. Okay I get that, but why not make a separate game that focuses solely around that instead of a ****ty bonus disc.

I'm not going to complain or talk anymore, but just shake my head in dissapointment at Bioware for falling into peer pressure.

No matter what Bioware did, people like you were bound to complain about it, whether it was incorporated, bonus disk, or entirely new game. You would crap on and moan about how ME was always SP, and MP should be nowhere near it.
Pull your head out of your arse, and look at Biowares history. Its full of multiplayer RPG's, to which ME3 has finally joined the ranks of. 
We get it, your butt hurts. Go see a proctologist instead of whinging on the forums.

[Hallusinaatti]

didymos1120 wrote...
No, it's not alleged. It really is for that, at least in part (I mean, it's also for competing with Steam).  It won't help much, but EA thinks it will.

Come on, what's wrong with a bit of conspiracy theory?
Origin is Skynet! ORIGIN IS SKYNET!

But indeed, Origin will do more harm than it does good. Even if it had noble intentions, results may not be so.

No matter what Bioware did, people like you were bound to complain about it, whether it was incorporated, bonus disk, or entirely new game. You would crap on and moan about how ME was always SP, and MP should be nowhere near it.
Pull your head out of your arse, and look at Biowares history. Its full of multiplayer RPG's, to which ME3 has finally joined the ranks of.
We get it, your butt hurts. Go see a proctologist instead of whinging on the forums.

I don't think your argument is any better with that constant referring to his rectum.

Personally I think it's about adding new, unnecessary content instead of putting all the money on making the old stuff great. ME2 was a great sequel so if BW just does what it does best ME3 will be great as well. When they put effort to MP it will inevitably mean that effort is away from SP. Of course, they failed with DA2 but I hope they could learn from mistakes. Still, I would have BW stick with that the fans have liked so far. After all it is the fans who will use the product.

Modifié par Hallusinaatti, 17 octobre 2011 - 12:23 .

[Bogsnot1]

I don't think your argument is any better with that constant referring to his rectum.

Failure to check up on facts is what leads to butthurt, bleating out opinions without bothering to check up on those facts is what leads people to tell you that you are butthurt.

Personally I think it's about adding new, unnecessary content instead of putting all the money on making the old stuff great.

So according to you, games are not allowed to evolve? Feel free to go back to your single player green screen text-based adventure games from the 80's then.

[Taritu]

Bogsnot1 wrote...

I don't think your argument is any better with that constant referring to his rectum.

Failure to check up on facts is what leads to butthurt, bleating out opinions without bothering to check up on those facts is what leads people to tell you that you are butthurt.

Being a jerk is what causes people to call you a jerk.

Jerk.

[Bogsnot1]

Taritu wrote...

Bogsnot1 wrote...

I don't think your argument is any better with that constant referring to his rectum.

Failure to check up on facts is what leads to butthurt, bleating out opinions without bothering to check up on those facts is what leads people to tell you that you are butthurt.

Being a jerk is what causes people to call you a jerk.

Jerk.

I would rather be a correct jerk, then a wrong whiner. 

[Zaalbar]

I can not see why people are so worried, ME3 is and always will be a single player experience, the multiplayer is an optional add on. Bioware would have had 2 teams working on it, the first focused on the single player experience, the second team focused solely on the coop all under the guidance of the Project Director so whether or not the multiplayer coop is placed in it or not should not matter, ME 3 single player experience will turn as intended.

[Black Raptor]

Hallusinaatti wrote...
Personally I think it's about adding new, unnecessary content instead of putting all the money on making the old stuff great. ME2 was a great sequel so if BW just does what it does best ME3 will be great as well. When they put effort to MP it will inevitably mean that effort is away from SP. Of course, they failed with DA2 but I hope they could learn from mistakes. Still, I would have BW stick with that the fans have liked so far. After all it is the fans who will use the product.

Co-op was developed by a seperate team to SP. Co-op hasn't taken anything away from Sp and has actually added to it. If they weren't making Co-op, then those guys wouldn't be working on ME at all. 

Why should Bioware stagnate with their self proclaimed "hardcore" fanbase instead of inovating and incorperating new ideas? There isn't a single legitimate reason to NOT buy ME3 because of the MP but there are several good reasons as to why somebody would pick up ME3 because of it when they otherwise wouldn't have.

Some people just fear change. 

[Averross375]

Taritu wrote...

Being a jerk is what causes people to call you a jerk.

Jerk.

Being a whiny fantard is what causes people to call you a whiny fantard.

[JonathonPR]

What worries me is the potential for single player mechanics might be altered for the sake of multiplayer balance. I am interested in knowing "how things work" in a games universe so changes to single player for the sake of multiplayer brings disappointment and anger. That potential and my experience with DA2 has been enough for me to cancel my preorder and borrow from a friend to see what it is like.

[Black Raptor]

JonathonPR wrote...

What worries me is the potential for single player mechanics might be altered for the sake of multiplayer balance. I am interested in knowing "how things work" in a games universe so changes to single player for the sake of multiplayer brings disappointment and anger. That potential and my experience with DA2 has been enough for me to cancel my preorder and borrow from a friend to see what it is like.

It's co-op...
You're not playing against other people, you are essentially playing the game with a different character and intelligent squadmates. Why should any mechanics be changed?

[Averross375]

JonathonPR wrote...

What worries me is the potential for single player mechanics might be altered for the sake of multiplayer balance. I am interested in knowing "how things work" in a games universe so changes to single player for the sake of multiplayer brings disappointment and anger. That potential and my experience with DA2 has been enough for me to cancel my preorder and borrow from a friend to see what it is like.

FFS, did you even read the FAQ?

[CAPSLOCK FURY]

I think he's referring to class balance and the inevitable "<insert class> is overpowered." not the readiness thing.

[Joshuaxe]

No matter what any of these trolls say, they will all buy ME3 and then complain AGAIN why they shouldn't of bought it. those that complain about DA2 have probably played through it more than once. Bioware delivers. even if they changed their games up a lot.

[CAPSLOCK FURY]

Joshuaxe wrote...

No matter what any of these trolls say, they will all buy ME3 and then complain AGAIN why they shouldn't of bought it. those that complain about DA2 have probably played through it more than once. Bioware delivers. even if they changed their games up a lot.

I haven't. But I don't flood the forums about how much better Origins was either. Varric was amazing, the rest was bland to me.

[Black Raptor]

CAPSLOCK FURY wrote...

I think he's referring to class balance and the inevitable "<insert class> is overpowered." not the readiness thing.

Why would the classes need to be "balanced"? Just as long as they are all fun to play.

[CAPSLOCK FURY]

Black Raptor wrote...

CAPSLOCK FURY wrote...

I think he's referring to class balance and the inevitable "<insert class> is overpowered." not the readiness thing.

Why would the classes need to be "balanced"? Just as long as they are all fun to play.

How the hell should I know? Ask the people who will be crying Overpowered at something in March.

[Hallusinaatti]

Bogsnot1 wrote...

So according to you, games are not allowed to evolve? Feel free to go back to your single player green screen text-based adventure games from the 80's then.

Now, you are missing the whole point here, perhaps you are just busy putting words into peoples' mouths.

I didnt' say games shouldn't evolve. Multiplayer is not "evolving", it's one of the oldest forms of gaming, you know that. My point is that we have a game series with two past releases neither of which had multiplayer. Both were fantastic single player games and worked well that way. Introducing a new element to a perfectly fine product is not necessary and is a waste of resources that could well be put safely on assets we know and love. Polls show that a small minority of fans want multiplayer, which means people want BW to focus on making a good single player story with good gameplay. It's just that simple.
I am not saying that multiplayer is a bad thing, and I obviously don't know what ME3's multiplayer is going to be like. But I do know that it's not necessary, and as apparently a minor gameplay factor will be rather short lived.

Now I suggest you stop acting like some self-righteous degenerate and take others' opinions into consideration, too. You know, not just insulting others and dramatically overreacting to everything.

No matter what any of these trolls say, they will all buy ME3 and then complain AGAIN why they shouldn't of bought it. those that complain about DA2 have probably played through it more than once. Bioware delivers. even if they changed their games up a lot.

Stop making such assumptions as they are wrong.
I had two playthroughs in DA2, one as Warrior male and one as Female Mage, and I considered DA2 that "great" I didn't even register it to my account here. The story was intriguing but it was nothing like DA:O. Too many unnecessary changes, and absolutely abominable gameplay. I loved the characters but all that potential was wasted by pulling my hair out when another dozen of generic bandits spawn behind my back and kill Anders.

Co-op was developed by a seperate team to SP. Co-op hasn't taken anything away from Sp and has actually added to it. If they weren't making Co-op, then those guys wouldn't be working on ME at all. 

Why should Bioware stagnate with their self proclaimed "hardcore" fanbase instead of inovating and incorperating new ideas? There isn't a single legitimate reason to NOT buy ME3 because of the MP but there are several good reasons as to why somebody would pick up ME3 because of it when they otherwise wouldn't have.

Some people just fear change.

 
I understand you point but all I'm saying is that there are probably a limited amount of dollars in developing the game and all the dollars spent on co-op could be spent on perfecting single player even further.

I think BW should indeed stagnate - for now. We have two Mass Effects both entirely single player so why change it now? They know what the fans want so why not keep Shepard's last voyage the way it was in the previous titles. They can make all future games MMORPGS for all I care. But if they decide to make co-op anything else than a minor extra for separate mini missions it WILL result in gameplay eating the story. It's inevitable.
But I suppose I am "afraid" of change, that much I admit. I am a "play it safe" type of person anyway. Got a good thing going - keep it that way.
Furthermore, I am not such a drama queen that refuses to buy ME3 because one thing there doesn't amuse me. Hell will freeze before ME3 will be a game not worth buying.

Modifié par Hallusinaatti, 17 octobre 2011 - 07:21 .

[Black Raptor]

Hallusinaatti wrote...
I understand you point but all I'm saying is that there are probably a limited amount of dollars in developing the game and all the dollars spent on co-op could be spent on perfecting single player even further.

These people still work for Bioware. If they weren't spending their time working on ME3 Co-op then their paychecks wouldn't be going to someone working on ME3 and less money is spent developing the game. 

Co-op hasn't detracted from the SP. MP is a good idea to have in ME3 because it scales up the story and shows that it's not only Shepard who is fighting. 

[Averross375]

@Hallusinaatti
UMAD?

[Hallusinaatti]

Black Raptor wrote...

These people still work for Bioware. If they weren't spending their time working on ME3 Co-op then their paychecks wouldn't be going to someone working on ME3 and less money is spent developing the game. 

Co-op hasn't detracted from the SP. MP is a good idea to have in ME3 because it scales up the story and shows that it's not only Shepard who is fighting. 

Fair enough. I'll hold fire at least until we know more. But I'm still having some serious doubts about this.

@Hallusinaatti
UMAD?

No, why should I be?

12-year-old kids trolling using l33tspeak makes me chuckle rather than bash my fist in the table in anger.

[Averross375]

Right. You're getting pretty worked up over this.
Also, way off on the age, not that I would expect the butthurt fanboy to to consider that, or believe me.