277 réponses à ce sujet

[sympathyforsaren]

I liked the OP's post.

Where's the story?

[staindgrey]

spiros9110 wrote...

You expressed exactly how I feel and what I keep trying to say, but there is always going to be people who are against it no matter what and won't give it a try. I don't understand that type of mindset, but there's only so much one can say. 

Well it's also unbecoming to expect someone to try out a part of the game they don't want to. Burger King may make great chicken sandwiches for all I know, but I don't care to try them.

What irks me is the amount of ire the mode receives when the people arguing against have no idea how it even plays and are not a reliable source of information themselves. How do they know how much, if at all, multiplayer affected work on the single player campaign? How do they know its inclusion will water down the single player experience? How do they know anything at all aside from the fact that it exists and what few minor details Bioware has offered thus far?

I find it very difficult to seriously entertain arguments against multiplayer's existence when they're filled with much more rhetoric than evidence. To those who argue so vehemently against something they've never seen nor played, I only say this:

It's fine, I get it. You don't like multiplayer. Awesome. Will you please shut the **** up about it until you know what it is you're bashing? Seriously.

[staindgrey]

Ferris95 wrote...

I'll just drop this here.

<3

[sympathyforsaren]

staindgrey wrote...

spiros9110 wrote...

You expressed exactly how I feel and what I keep trying to say, but there is always going to be people who are against it no matter what and won't give it a try. I don't understand that type of mindset, but there's only so much one can say. 

Well it's also unbecoming to expect someone to try out a part of the game they don't want to. Burger King may make great chicken sandwiches for all I know, but I don't care to try them.

What irks me is the amount of ire the mode receives when the people arguing against have no idea how it even plays and are not a reliable source of information themselves. How do they know how much, if at all, multiplayer affected work on the single player campaign? How do they know its inclusion will water down the single player experience? How do they know anything at all aside from the fact that it exists and what few minor details Bioware has offered thus far?

I find it very difficult to seriously entertain arguments against multiplayer's existence when they're filled with much more rhetoric than evidence. To those who argue so vehemently against something they've never seen nor played, I only say this:

It's fine, I get it. You don't like multiplayer. Awesome. Will you please shut the **** up about it until you know what it is you're bashing? Seriously.

We have reality and simply analyzing the content that is out now. It's right in front of us, and we see it. Sorry if you disagree.

Furthermore, your assertion we should "shut the **** up" isn't happening. We will express our views like you do yours, and if you don't like it, sorry. Tough.

[CAPSLOCK FURY]

sympathyforsaren wrote...

We have reality and simply analyzing the content that is out now. It's right in front of us, and we see it. Sorry if you disagree.

Furthermore, your assertion we should "shut the **** up" isn't happening. We will express our views like you do yours, and if you don't like it, sorry. Tough.

The inherent problem isn't that you don't like it. If you don't like it, more power to you. It's that a lot of people demand that those of us who are adopting the "wait and see" approach, don't like it too. We have every right to our opinions as you do, but it amazes me how people bust in here and expect us to be all civilized when someone is trying to tell us what we can and can't like in a game.

[whywhywhywhy]

Confused-Shepard wrote...

Tigerblood and MilkShakes wrote...

One simple Word:Fans

Not the Mass Effect fans I am sure. They seem to want to attract the COD crew
But the kiddies in the COD crew will never want to touch our "Gay ass alien game"

They should have included a mode to replace Shpeard's model with any other instead, Uncharted style

I'd say your not confused anymore shepard

[staindgrey]

sympathyforsaren wrote...

staindgrey wrote...

Well it's also unbecoming to expect someone to try out a part of the game they don't want to. Burger King may make great chicken sandwiches for all I know, but I don't care to try them.

What irks me is the amount of ire the mode receives when the people arguing against have no idea how it even plays and are not a reliable source of information themselves. How do they know how much, if at all, multiplayer affected work on the single player campaign? How do they know its inclusion will water down the single player experience? How do they know anything at all aside from the fact that it exists and what few minor details Bioware has offered thus far?

I find it very difficult to seriously entertain arguments against multiplayer's existence when they're filled with much more rhetoric than evidence. To those who argue so vehemently against something they've never seen nor played, I only say this:

It's fine, I get it. You don't like multiplayer. Awesome. Will you please shut the **** up about it until you know what it is you're bashing? Seriously.

We have reality and simply analyzing the content that is out now. It's right in front of us, and we see it. Sorry if you disagree.

Furthermore, your assertion we should "shut the **** up" isn't happening. We will express our views like you do yours, and if you don't like it, sorry. Tough.

But that's my point. Nobody on this forum has any inside information on just how much multiplayer affects the single player campaign, or how it detracted from development of the single player campaign, or anything else. The arguments are grasping at hypotheticals being presented as absolutes. That is the annoying part, and it happens on every forum for every game.

When I ask people to shut the **** up, I'm not meaning to imply that the conversation shouldn't exist (because it should). Valid points are valid points. But to the people who already have their pitchforks in hand and bash the game as if they've played it already, my point stands: shut the **** up. Complaints about a game type only really sound legitimate once we know what the hell it is. Without proper knowledge, arguments sound like whining, which in turn get nothing done at all.

Again, I'm not trying to stifle the conversation; I'm trying to stifle the nonsensical side of it that does nothing to further any goals whatsoever, besides wasting time on a forum.

[spirosz]

sympathyforsaren wrote...

We have reality and simply analyzing the content that is out now. It's right in front of us, and we see it. Sorry if you disagree.

Furthermore, your assertion we should "shut the **** up" isn't happening. We will express our views like you do yours, and if you don't like it, sorry. Tough.

That's fine, but there is people on both sides who will insult other people because they have a different opinion. I'm not too excited for the multiplayer myself, but I'll be open to the idea of trying it. My opinion is neither right or wrong, as are people who dislike what they're reading so far concerning the multiplayer. 

Most of these agruments are becoming frusterating because people will present their own opinion as fact or insult someone for not agreeing with them.

[whywhywhywhy]

Prince Zeel wrote...

Very well said. I've been saying this for the past few days. but no one wants to listen. They want to be optimistic fools. We will see who's "trolling" when the game comes out. I personally, think EA games is the worst troll the Internet has ever seen. They've taken a game, warped it beyond repair and are still trying to sell it for the same price.

If gamers take a stand and refuse to buy it or buy it used the new price will drop quickily.  And EA will have learned a valuable lesson.

[sympathyforsaren]

CAPSLOCK FURY wrote...

sympathyforsaren wrote...

We have reality and simply analyzing the content that is out now. It's right in front of us, and we see it. Sorry if you disagree.

Furthermore, your assertion we should "shut the **** up" isn't happening. We will express our views like you do yours, and if you don't like it, sorry. Tough.

The inherent problem isn't that you don't like it. If you don't like it, more power to you. It's that a lot of people demand that those of us who are adopting the "wait and see" approach, don't like it too. We have every right to our opinions as you do, but it amazes me how people bust in here and expect us to be all civilized when someone is trying to tell us what we can and can't like in a game.

Can and can't like and what should or shouldn't be in the Mass Effect trilogy are two different things.

[CAPSLOCK FURY]

sympathyforsaren wrote...

Can and can't like and what should or shouldn't be in the Mass Effect trilogy are two different things.

No, They're not. What you think shouldn't be in the trilogy, someone else might think should be. It's all subjective.

[staindgrey]

CAPSLOCK FURY wrote...

sympathyforsaren wrote...

Can and can't like and what should or shouldn't be in the Mass Effect trilogy are two different things.

No, They're not. What you think shouldn't be in the trilogy, someone else might think should be. It's all subjective.

Yahtzee. +10xp

[slimgrin]

Don't mention Yahtzee, what a tool..

[Computer_God91]

whywhywhywhy wrote...

Prince Zeel wrote...

Very well said. I've been saying this for the past few days. but no one wants to listen. They want to be optimistic fools. We will see who's "trolling" when the game comes out. I personally, think EA games is the worst troll the Internet has ever seen. They've taken a game, warped it beyond repair and are still trying to sell it for the same price.

If gamers take a stand and refuse to buy it or buy it used the new price will drop quickily.  And EA will have learned a valuable lesson.

That's the problem. Organizing enough people to make a dent. Nobody (broad generalization here) gives a crap enough about online passes, malicious "services" that scan our computers and sell off our personal info, or Disc locked DLC to stand up and say "No, I will not buy this crap because this is unacceptable!". It's the hard truth, their are some like myself and others around here that do try to get the word out and refuse purchasing things (Battlefield 3 in my case) but it's not enough. Our refusal isn't even a fraction of a percent of the sales they are gauranteed just for making the game. In order for us to impact them we either take the issue directly to them or we tell as many people as we possibly can and have them do the same and then it'll make a dent.

[whywhywhywhy]

Confused-Shepard wrote...

Blitzkrieg0811 wrote...

Um... you're living on the same planet that Skyrim is being released on, right?...

And, your point is? I was talking about shooters here. Skyrim is not a shooter and even then I would debate the inclusion of multiplayer in the slow, over complicated gameplay that is trademark of the Elder Scrolls series. But oh look, Bethesda removed multiplayer from the game! 

Neither Skyrim nor Mass effect need multiplayer. Does Bioware know better than Bethesda? Those guys are like Western Nintendo. Once again, huge waste of resources. Mass Effect would do better remaining reletively unique. 
Mass Effect 3 needs better and deeper singleplayer to compete with Skyrim, not multiplayer

Stumbled across this reading up on Skyrim.  It made me chuckle.

[capn233]

Another QQ about multiplayer thread....

I don't see what the problem is. Adding features is nice, and it gives you a little something extra to do with your other Mass Effect friends. If you don't want to play it then don't. Claiming it has ruined the game when it won't be out for another half year is a bit premature.

[CAPSLOCK FURY]

whywhywhywhy wrote...
Stumbled across this reading up on Skyrim.  It made me chuckle.

Is it bad that I know people that was probably exactly like he was at the end of that when they saw the trailer?

[whywhywhywhy]

vader da slayer wrote...

Prince Zeel wrote...

CAPSLOCK FURY wrote...

If you use a bow then Elder Scrolls is a shooter.

Can you guys just take your moronic points elswhere? This topic is about the ridiculousness of Multiplayer. Why can't we have one topic to complain in? You guys have like 5  THAT ARE ACTIVE right now, that you guys can hi-five it up about how you've successfully ruined a good game.

how does adding in coop well after the SP was completed (love how people forget that the SP campaign was playable front to back in Dec of 2010) impact the quality of the SP? thats like saying that after you finished building an air plane for the "enthusiast" that adding an autopilot feature some how makes the plane less enjoyable to fly. the fact is neither do as both are options that you can choose to use or choose not to use. your irrationality is the only thing that is ruining anything and it (and others) is whats ruined this forum.

If the game was delayed but the SP portion completed how could the additional months for MP help SP ?  Could the SP campaign have been improved in that time period as well ?

What would you prefer a ME3 that when released was entirely a Single player effort(including the delay) from beginning to end ?  This includes any and all teams working on the same goal as well as MP arrving a couple months after launch.

Or would you prefer ME3 with MP at launch ?

Or would you prefe

[sympathyforsaren]

CAPSLOCK FURY wrote...

sympathyforsaren wrote...

Can and can't like and what should or shouldn't be in the Mass Effect trilogy are two different things.

No, They're not. What you think shouldn't be in the trilogy, someone else might think should be. It's all subjective.

Of course its subjective. So there are direct differing perspectives. Please understand our side isn't going just shut up about it, though. Also, let's show some maturity over discussion about a video game.

Multiplayer has zero place in Mass Effect. Its existence breaks immersion. To shoot at waves and waves of aliens! It's not going to change, but it makes you walk away shaking your head and waiting to buy the game after reviews from fear of a weak singleplayer....and inherently different, single player.

[CAPSLOCK FURY]

sympathyforsaren wrote...

Of course its subjective. So there are direct differing perspectives. Please understand our side isn't going just shut up about it, though. Also, let's show some maturity over discussion about a video game.

Multiplayer has zero place in Mass Effect. Its existence breaks immersion. To shoot at waves and waves of aliens! It's not going to change, but it makes you walk away shaking your head and waiting to buy the game after reviews from fear of a weak singleplayer....and inherently different, single player.

I never said you should shut up about it. You believe that it shouldn't be here. That's entirely up to you, and you should fight to have your voice heard. What I'm saying is that people need to be civil about it. Instead of actual discussions a lot of people rush in here to point fingers at the "fanboys" (most times without realizing what the word means) and throw tantrums at anyone that doesn't follow the same ideal. In essence, attacking people for not falling in line. Ironically they also play the victim card when they get the same treatment.

Modifié par CAPSLOCK FURY, 16 octobre 2011 - 04:32 .

[CAPSLOCK FURY]

whywhywhywhy wrote...

Or would you prefer ME3 with MP at launch ?

Or would you prefe

Ok let me put my geek hat on here a sec and ask a question.

Did anyone play a rogue in WoW a few years back and remember the thread in those forums where everyone left the last few letters off their senten

Modifié par CAPSLOCK FURY, 16 octobre 2011 - 04:37 .

[Barry Bathernak]

it will be funny for everybody when the co-op can only be unlocked with an online pass or $10

[Lukertin]

Barry Bathernak wrote...

it will be funny for everybody when the co-op can only be unlocked with an online pass or $10

Why? I don't care if the make it a $100 online pass.