348 réponses à ce sujet

[Homey C-Dawg]

Poll seems to be pretty overwhelming at the moment.

Since the announcement of multiplayer, I don't think many people are taking the "diverting resources" argument very seriously anymore.

[N172]

Shia Luck wrote...
No matter what you say or want you will not turn MP into SP! Give it up already!

No need to do so, since MP is only defined by the fact that you have more than one player you actually have SP as soon as there is no other player in your game or even if all but one player are afk.

Shia Luck wrote...

No. because it takes away from those
players who want to experience something more difficult by playing with
less people (3 is the traditional number in ME, no? And what about those
who want to solo for the satisfaction (not acheivement) of doing so?
And 2 is the buddy number, no?

If it is Biowares Intention to
give Solo-Players the possibility of higher difficulties than insanity
they whould add difficulty #6, 7,...

Difficulty-Scaling based on the number of players i mentioned was neither a wish nor a suggestion, i just expect that something like this is already implemented/planned, because it is necessary to provide everyone the challenge they want without having to switch difficulties all the time.

[Ramdori]

Homey C-Dawg wrote...

Poll seems to be pretty overwhelming at the moment.

Since the announcement of multiplayer, I don't think many people are taking the "diverting resources" argument very seriously anymore.

Agreed! They have set their sight on MP so why not add bots to make those of us who want them happy.

[In Exile]

The ridiculous thing is we play ME3 PS with bots, but not the MP?

[Sunny8872]

Please add bots for everyone!!!

[Comsky159]

 It's a perfectly reasonable compromise. Weird that there are multiplayer purists on the BSN. I can empathize with RPG elitists in this situation but I cannot imagine why there would be anyone in opposition to AI squadmates in multiplayer. It's "optional" after all.  

The best argument I'm willing to concede to is that bots violate the integrity of that which already stands as a violation. If I could synthesise a decent SP experience out of this mess then I'd graciously accept its presence.

[jeweledleah]

for those concerned with removing difficulty or what not - make bots optional. they already have the code or at least basis of one. in both Dragon age games you could just leave squadmates behind and go out solo.

and to say something I have said before,becasue I think it bears repeating. I play guild wars. an MMO. I play it solo with henchmen. it doesn't make it any less of an MMO. ability to play multiplayer missions solo or with bots will NOT make them any less multiplayer missions. it will not remove people's ability to play with other real people. it will merely give an extra option for those who either don't want to play with other people,or don't want to pug random strangers when their friends aren't online.

[Forsythia]

I agree with the OP, bots would be welcome.

It's funny that before the mp announcement, people were screaming "no multiplayer in ME3!" (including me), and we were told it was an optional feature, don't whine about it.

Now some people ask for another option, and they are told by the same people, "no bots in multiplayer"... bloody hypocrites.

[Kakita Tatsumaru]

flyboy85 wrote...

I understand that you can play the MP missions solo. If that's the case, wouldn't bots be unnecessary?

It depends if they balance difficulty on the number of players, which I doubt.
And as a non gold members of X360, it concerns me.

[DragonRageGT]

Give us bots and call them Cylons! I voted yes! Please give us a bot of Number Six! =)))

[Lumikki]

Bogsnot1 wrote...

Note that it says alternative. Now the defination for alternative is;

The choice between two mutually exclusive possibilities.

It does not mean extra. So you do the missions either in SP mode, or MP mode. Not both.

Clear enough?

Taritu wrote...

Getting the "optimal outcome" will be a lot easier for people who play the co-op missions as well. Bioware has been really clear about that. Yes, you "can" get the optimal outcome playing only SP, but it will be harder.

There is conflict between these two message. One say missions are choise as do them SP or MP, but not both. While other says people can play the co-op mission as well. The word choise "as well", means it's addional as something more. Because if it would have been choise between SP or MP, then word choise would have been different. Or does it means you can play two times same content as SP and then MP? How can out come be better with "as well", if it's choise between them? Or does this mean to get better out come we all are forced to play mixed gameplay, partly SP and partly MP?

So which one is correct?

Modifié par Lumikki, 23 octobre 2011 - 11:22 .

[Bogsnot1]

Lumikki wrote...

Bogsnot1 wrote...

Note that it says alternative. Now the defination for alternative is;

The choice between two mutually exclusive possibilities.

It does not mean extra. So you do the missions either in SP mode, or MP mode. Not both.

Clear enough?

Taritu wrote...

Getting the "optimal outcome" will be a lot easier for people who play the co-op missions as well. Bioware has been really clear about that. Yes, you "can" get the optimal outcome playing only SP, but it will be harder.

There is conflict between these two message. One say missions are choise as do them SP or MP, but not both. While other says people can play the co-op mission as well. The word choise "as well", means it's addional as something more. Because if it would have been choise between SP or MP, then word choise would have been different. Or does it means you can play two times same content as SP and then MP? How can out come be better with "as well", if it's choise between them? Or does this mean to get better out come we all are forced to play mixed gameplay, partly SP and partly MP?

So which one is correct?

Ive just rewatched the Pulse episode, as well as read the Official FAQ, and nowhere does it say "as well". It does not even say it will be "easier" to achieve the same outcome in co-op as compared to SP.
It does say that co-op is an alternative method to achieving ultimate victory, not another method. As I opreviously mentioned, alternative connotes one OR the other, not both simultaneously.

[Lumikki]

Bogsnot1 wrote...

Ive just rewatched the Pulse episode, as well as read the Official FAQ, and nowhere does it say "as well". It does not even say it will be "easier" to achieve the same outcome in co-op as compared to SP.
It does say that co-op is an alternative method to achieving ultimate victory, not another method. As I opreviously mentioned, alternative connotes one OR the other, not both simultaneously.

If it so, then there is new question.

If SP and MP are alternative choises, then the question is, will the content of missions and missions it self also be same. If the content of missions are not same then it's alternative path to end, but not alternative experience for player. Like two road to leads same place, the end will be same, but the travel experience wasn't.

Now the point is, if the msisions are also same, like content is same, then there is not much need for bots, because they are allready in SP side. 

4 player Co-op = Co-op allready
3 player Co-op + 1 bot
2 player Co-op + 2 bots
1 player Co-op + 3 bots.
1 player SP + 2 bots = SP, because SP side has allready bots (npcs).

Point been 4 player doesn't need bots. 1 player doesn't need bots, if the mission and content is same in SP and Co-op. Because it would meen there is not much difference between them, than online or offline.  So, only 2-3 player teams benefits from bots.

Am i mistaken?

Are the content of alternative "paths" exactly same?

Point been when FAQ talks about alternative method to get there, it doesn't say it's exactly same missions. So, in my opinion when they talk alternative, they talk generally that player can choose between SP or Co-op gameplay to play ME3 "story". I'm sure as opinion that many missions are same, but because SP has named character, I also assume it does affects many missions too as how story flow goes.

Modifié par Lumikki, 23 octobre 2011 - 01:38 .

[Iakus]

Bogsnot1 wrote...
Ive just rewatched the Pulse episode, as well as read the Official FAQ, and nowhere does it say "as well". It does not even say it will be "easier" to achieve the same outcome in co-op as compared to SP.
It does say that co-op is an alternative method to achieving ultimate victory, not another method. As I opreviously mentioned, alternative connotes one OR the other, not both simultaneously.

So the question is, are there single player versions of the mp missions in the game?

For example, Admiral Hackett reports that Cerberus is attacking a lab on Noveria.  Shep then has the option to say

"I don't have time for this" which unlocks a multiplayer mission.  Hackett sends a team to deal with the incursion.  Player gets all the mp experience and goodies plus War Assets.

or Shepard says:

"I should go" unlocking a single player version of the mission, Shepard goes to Noveria with his/her squad to deal with Cerberus personally.  Shep gets single player xp and goodies, and the same amount of War Assets

You can do one or the other, but not both.  That's what I think of as an "alternative method".

If this is the case, it could significantly alter the debate about bots in multiplayer.

I don't suppose anyone's tweeted about this?

[Kakita Tatsumaru]

So who's got a twitter account to ask the dev what they thinks about that idea which gets a positive response from 89% of the people?

[chkchkchk]

I remember one-man fan teams programming bots for Quake way back in the mid-1990s.  Both co-op and player-vs-player.  Even so, I don't think Bioware would need to program fresh AI to implement bots.

In Mass Effect 3 wouldn't it be fairly straightforward to take the programming for a biotic singleplayer crewmate (Jack, Miranda, etc.) and give it to a multiplayer bot called "Human Biotic"?  Even if you only have access to a small number of bot types, and even if they were clumsy and quick to die, it could still create a satisfying squad atmosphere.

There's a variety of races/classes represented in Shepard's crew, so any of those AI programs could become multiplayer bots.  Since there are options to make singleplayer crewmates level up automatically, that kind of system could also be used for bots.  Over time you could built up a roster of such bots, like a fake friends list.  Upon starting a multiplayer mission you could fill up the other three slots with bots, with real people, a mixture of both, or you could go it alone.  Once the mission starts the bots would be out of your control.

Obviously real live humans are going to be waaaaay more skilled, so playing with real live humans (as intended) would be an advantage.  I intend to play with real live people as much as possible, but I think bots could mimick that multiplayer experience reasonably well without requiring new AI from scratch.  I'm just speculating wildly, of course.  I wouldn't want Bioware going out of their way to implement super special never-before-seen bots.

[Ramdori]

the only vaild argument i get from this thread and the one previous is that if the MP and SP missions are designed exactly the same, with amped up Ai for MP. Then i can understand why bots would be pointless. But i think Bioware is semi more creative than that and will add totally seperate maps. OP's Case in adding optional bots makes complete sense. MP becomes a real extension to SP and MP people get something they will need or may want to have in the future.


So add bots please Bioware.

[Ricinator]

iakus wrote...

Bogsnot1 wrote...
Ive just rewatched the Pulse episode, as well as read the Official FAQ, and nowhere does it say "as well". It does not even say it will be "easier" to achieve the same outcome in co-op as compared to SP.
It does say that co-op is an alternative method to achieving ultimate victory, not another method. As I opreviously mentioned, alternative connotes one OR the other, not both simultaneously.

So the question is, are there single player versions of the mp missions in the game?

For example, Admiral Hackett reports that Cerberus is attacking a lab on Noveria.  Shep then has the option to say

"I don't have time for this" which unlocks a multiplayer mission.  Hackett sends a team to deal with the incursion.  Player gets all the mp experience and goodies plus War Assets.

or Shepard says:

"I should go" unlocking a single player version of the mission, Shepard goes to Noveria with his/her squad to deal with Cerberus personally.  Shep gets single player xp and goodies, and the same amount of War Assets

You can do one or the other, but not both.  That's what I think of as an "alternative method".

If this is the case, it could significantly alter the debate about bots in multiplayer.

I don't suppose anyone's tweeted about this?

I really don't think anything sheperd will do effects the MP. I think the MP maps are just other locations that are under attack from reapers and these are just the groups working to repel them.

But i'm sure there will be missions on the same planets that sheperd goes to. I just dont think sheperd has any influence on MP, only MP has an influence on SP. That being the case Bots are a no brainer, if you are doing the same missions as sheperd has done just with 4 people then bots are pointless.

If im wrong please correct me.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

www.gamepur.com/news/5921-fresh-mass-effect-3-multiplayer-details-revealed.html
if you didn't see the updated OP, here again is the Info about Multiplayer so far.

Taking into acount that there will be a leveling system, Implementing bots may be a bit harder than we thought. But i think if Bioware could make the Bots similar to Ai, as discussed before, except to have them be fully built as far as skill sets go. Just let us pick their 2 weapons, and then the difficulty of the game will determine how smart your bots are.

thoughts on updated material?

Modifié par Ricinator, 23 octobre 2011 - 11:46 .

[Ramdori]

Personally i want bots whether or not there is a lvling thing going on. I don't have XBL and i'm buying this game because i love ME and i don't want to miss out on all that content.

Modifié par Ramdori, 23 octobre 2011 - 11:51 .

[Homey C-Dawg]

Ricinator wrote...

<snip>

Taking into acount that there will be a leveling system, Implementing bots may be a bit harder than we thought. But i think if Bioware could make the Bots similar to Ai, as discussed before, except to have them be fully built as far as skill sets go. Just let us pick their 2 weapons, and then the difficulty of the game will determine how smart your bots are.

thoughts on updated material?

Well they do already have an "auto level-up" system for squadmates in SP and have since ME1 which decides on it's own what skills to level up . I suppose they could apply the same concept to MP bots, except have it happen automatically instead of having to go to a squad screen.

I could imagine some people being disappointed at not having control over their bots skill trees, but it would be fine for me as I don't feel they would need to be as player-controlled as SP squadmates are.

Just a thought.

[Ramdori]

Homey C-Dawg wrote...

Ricinator wrote...

<snip>

Taking into acount that there will be a leveling system, Implementing bots may be a bit harder than we thought. But i think if Bioware could make the Bots similar to Ai, as discussed before, except to have them be fully built as far as skill sets go. Just let us pick their 2 weapons, and then the difficulty of the game will determine how smart your bots are.

thoughts on updated material?

Well they do already have an "auto level-up" system for squadmates in SP and have since ME1 which decides on it's own what skills to level up . I suppose they could apply the same concept to MP bots, except have it happen automatically instead of having to go to a squad screen.

I could imagine some people being disappointed at not having control over their bots skill trees, but it would be fine for me as I don't feel they would need to be as player-controlled as SP squadmates are.

Just a thought.

good point about the auto lvl system i forgot they had that since i always just lvl up my squad in SP.

[Ricinator]

@Homey C-Dawg
your absolutely right about people being disappointed about not being able to lvl up the Bots on our own, but i've hated the Multiplayer from the beginning and just getting the bots in MP for us RPG fans is better than not having them at all. That being said i still have the SP customization and if bots are added i'll have MP that i could consider an extension of SP.

Modifié par Ricinator, 24 octobre 2011 - 02:07 .

[Sethan_1]

Go a step further, and if there are bots available to cover empty mp slots in the multiplayer section of the game, let the players choose the number of bots (up to 4 players max).

So, if someone wanted to run the multiplayer part of the game with no bots they could - or with 1, 2, or 3 bots. Likewise, 2 players could play with 0, 1 or 2 bots.

Doing it that way gives the players maximum flexibility in terms of how they want to play that part of the game.

[Ricinator]

Sethan_1 wrote...

Go a step further, and if there are bots available to cover empty mp slots in the multiplayer section of the game, let the players choose the number of bots (up to 4 players max).

So, if someone wanted to run the multiplayer part of the game with no bots they could - or with 1, 2, or 3 bots. Likewise, 2 players could play with 0, 1 or 2 bots.

Doing it that way gives the players maximum flexibility in terms of how they want to play that part of the game.

please read the thread before you post...