568 réponses à ce sujet

[Ianamus]

dreman9999 wrote...

This is diffent. It's so diffenet that it drives me mad that people do not understand this......
Everyone who is complineing about mp is forgeting the most important thing about the  game...The sp... If the sp is fine, fantactic, and glorious, it does not matter if the add extra modes. If the extra modes does not effect the sp you don'twantto play, then their is no problem with it being their. With that, you you don't like mp and don't want it to effect your sp, you can just not play it. Heck, you even have the option of playing the mp and not having the gr points you get not be in putted in your sp game.
So wht ever complains you have is mute.

What if my concern is that the multiplayer itself will not be very good?

[AtreiyaN7]

EJ107 wrote...

I don't think that it's right to throw "It's optional" at anyone who has anything to say against multiplayer. 

Watching a movie is optional, but that dosen't mean that you have no right to complain about the movie if it is bad. 

Playing as a biotic is optional. Does that mean that if Biotics are handled poorly we have no right to complain? 

Playing through the side missions in Mass Effect 1 is optional. Does that make it wrong to complain that they were repetetive, the mako controls are poor, and that it used the same three buildings on every planet? 

Yes, things may be optional in life, but we still have every right to complain if we pay for them and they are of poor quality, and from what we've heard of Mass Effect 3's multiplayer it is not fantastic. 

Obviously, it's not wrong to criticized the Mako or repetitive layouts, etc. from ME1, but that's because we have all actually played through those tedious ME1 side missions and driven the Mako by now, whereas people harping on the ME3 MP have not actually played it and can't actually claim that it impinges on their hypothetical single-player experience in a game they aren't going to be able to touch until next year.

The previews haven't said that MP is fantastic, because it isn't with the decision to go with horde-style gameplay. The opinions seem to range from it being enjoyable in doses to being meh, but so what? Multiplayer isn't the focus of the game and isn't/shouldn't be the centerpiece of the game - it's just an option for people to have extra fun or to take an alternative approach in preparing for war.

[Killjoy Cutter]

dreman9999 wrote...

EJ107 wrote...

I don't think that it's right to throw "It's optional" at anyone who has anything to say against multiplayer. 

Watching a movie is optional, but that dosen't mean that you have no right to complain about the movie if it is bad. 

Playing as a biotic is optional. Does that mean that if Biotics are handled poorly we have no right to complain? 

Playing through the side missions in Mass Effect 1 is optional. Does that make it wrong to complain that they were repetetive, the mako controls are poor, and that it used the same three buildings on every planet? 

Yes, things may be optional in life, but we still have every right to complain if we pay for them and they are of poor quality, and from what we've heard of Mass Effect 3's multiplayer it is not fantastic. 

This is diffent. It's so diffenet that it drives me mad that people do not understand this......
Everyone who is complineing about mp is forgeting the most important thing about the  game...The sp... If the sp is fine, fantactic, and glorious, it does not matter if the add extra modes. If the extra modes does not effect the sp you don'twantto play, then their is no problem with it being their. With that, you you don't like mp and don't want it to effect your sp, you can just not play it. Heck, you even have the option of playing the mp and not having the gr points you get not be in putted in your sp game.
So wht ever complains you have is mute.

If it's driving you mad, maybe you should stop and take a moment to grasp what they're actually concerned about, instead of just repeating things over and over again that are in fact absolutely irrelevent to those actual concerns. 

But that's not your style, is it? 

Modifié par Killjoy Cutter, 28 octobre 2011 - 07:52 .

[Phaedon]

C9316 wrote...

Phaedon wrote...

C9316 wrote...

Can we please stop with the ME3/ Fast food analogy? It's not even a good one, with this you'd have to assume that Bioware is here just to serve each and every individual's often times narrow taste. And while many of you might believe that it's just not so. It is not like they are forcing you to buy ME3 if you don't want to, and honestly not buying it for the reason that they put in a feature that you don't like and don't plan on using is your problem not bioware's. They chose to add the feature, and you don't get to ask them to take it back for you just because you don't like it as if they were some fast food joint.

Well... The gaming market is just a market after all, not very different than the fast food one.

You still have the employees, the customers and the products. It's okay to boycott a product because they changed a minor feature, but that's your own issue. Go buy from another fast food restaurant if you don't like it. You are only helping or harming yourself.

And honestly, when you have to explain why the free soda is not a reasonable reason to be disappointed by a hamburger, I think that the game is lost already.

I like to think people wouldn't be so petty to completely get up in arms or disappointed in something just because one feature was added to it.

To be honest, I am not disturbed at all by the idea that this place will potentially be cleared by the people who think that the addition of co-op will ruin the SP. Fresh air, this forum needs it.

[Ianamus]

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

Obviously, it's not wrong to criticized the Mako or repetitive layouts, etc. from ME1, but that's because we have all actually played through those tedious ME1 side missions and driven the Mako by now, whereas people harping on the ME3 MP have not actually played it and can't actually claim that it impinges on their hypothetical single-player experience in a game they aren't going to be able to touch until next year.

The previews haven't said that MP is fantastic, because it isn't with the decision to go with horde-style gameplay. The opinions seem to range from it being enjoyable in doses to being meh, but so what? Multiplayer isn't the focus of the game and isn't/shouldn't be the centerpiece of the game - it's just an option for people to have extra fun or to take an alternative approach in preparing for war.

I have no problem with people saying "Don't judge it until you have played it" and I agree that it's not right to complain about multiplayer until we've actually played the game ourselves, my only problem is with "It's optional" being (apparently) the response to any and every concern about multiplayer, no matter how valid. 

[C9316]

Phaedon wrote...

C9316 wrote...

Phaedon wrote...

C9316 wrote...

Can we please stop with the ME3/ Fast food analogy? It's not even a good one, with this you'd have to assume that Bioware is here just to serve each and every individual's often times narrow taste. And while many of you might believe that it's just not so. It is not like they are forcing you to buy ME3 if you don't want to, and honestly not buying it for the reason that they put in a feature that you don't like and don't plan on using is your problem not bioware's. They chose to add the feature, and you don't get to ask them to take it back for you just because you don't like it as if they were some fast food joint.

Well... The gaming market is just a market after all, not very different than the fast food one.

You still have the employees, the customers and the products. It's okay to boycott a product because they changed a minor feature, but that's your own issue. Go buy from another fast food restaurant if you don't like it. You are only helping or harming yourself.

And honestly, when you have to explain why the free soda is not a reasonable reason to be disappointed by a hamburger, I think that the game is lost already.

I like to think people wouldn't be so petty to completely get up in arms or disappointed in something just because one feature was added to it.

To be honest, I am not disturbed at all by the idea that this place will potentially be cleared by the people who think that the addition of co-op will ruin the SP. Fresh air, this forum needs it.

Now that is something I can agree on! High five?

[spirosz]

EJ107 wrote...

I have no problem with people saying "Don't judge it until you have played it" and I agree that it's not right to complain about multiplayer until we've actually played the game ourselves, my only problem is with "It's optional" being (apparently) the response to any and every concern about multiplayer, no matter how valid. 

They should have a big emphasis on it being optional. Look at the rage before they said anything regarding the feature and it's not like they aren't excited about the addition, but most of their "hardcore" fans are only in it for the SP.  Till the game comes out, there's going to be arguments that you can only have the best SP experience by playing the MP as well, but that's not true. Bioware wants to establish that isn't the case and  it seems like the biggest fear/complaint out of anything concerning this feature.

Modifié par spiros9110, 28 octobre 2011 - 08:00 .

[Phaedon]

C9316 wrote...
Now that is something I can agree on! High five?

Wow. Rude.

You know very well that us turians have only three fingers. And you know how bad I feel for not being able to set up a rock concert in the Normandy because I can't handle a guitar due to the lack of fingers.

You have made me go in the corner and cry, I hope you feel good for yourself.


()

[111987]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

111987 wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

It's both sad and funny that some people don't seem to understand that "optional" and "affects the singleplayer game in bad ways" are not mutually exlcusive.

And yet it doesn't, for reasons laid out many times. It simply comes down to whether or not you believe BioWare when they say it doesn't negatively affect singleplayer.

First, given that they were deceptive about the very existence of MP in ME3, no, I do not trust them.

Second, singleplayer now has to be designed with the possibility of the effects that the multiplayer can have on it in mind -- or are some of you going to now pretend that multiplayer will never have any effect on singleplayer? 

1. Okay then. No-one is going to convince you to trust BioWare, so until the game comes out, no-one is going to be able to convince you because you've already decided to not believe anything BioWare says.

2. Multiplayer has an effect on singleplayer only if you want it to. We don't know how Galactic Readiness will effect the end game, specifically. It's possibly playing multiplayer does nothing to change the game but add some percentage points on some abstract meter.

[C9316]

Phaedon wrote...

C9316 wrote...
Now that is something I can agree on! High five?

Wow. Rude.

You know very well that us turians have only three fingers. And you know how bad I feel for not being able to set up a rock concert in the Normandy because I can't handle a guitar due to the lack of fingers.

You have made me go in the corner and cry, I hope you feel good for yourself.


()

Oh Snap! I forgot! I'm so terribly sorry, how could I be so inconsiderate!? Uh....brofist?

[Phaedon]

That can be done, I suppose.

Phaedon wrote...

I do however, have the solution for you people who dislike free stuff.



Throw them to the ground!

Link fixed

Modifié par Phaedon, 28 octobre 2011 - 08:17 .

[dreman9999]

EJ107 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

This is diffent. It's so diffenet that it drives me mad that people do not understand this......
Everyone who is complineing about mp is forgeting the most important thing about the  game...The sp... If the sp is fine, fantactic, and glorious, it does not matter if the add extra modes. If the extra modes does not effect the sp you don'twantto play, then their is no problem with it being their. With that, you you don't like mp and don't want it to effect your sp, you can just not play it. Heck, you even have the option of playing the mp and not having the gr points you get not be in putted in your sp game.
So wht ever complains you have is mute.

What if my concern is that the multiplayer itself will not be very good?

If that'st he case then you will have the inconvenience of having a bad mp.  But he fact remains people want a fantastic sp rather than a good mp.

[dreman9999]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

EJ107 wrote...

I don't think that it's right to throw "It's optional" at anyone who has anything to say against multiplayer. 

Watching a movie is optional, but that dosen't mean that you have no right to complain about the movie if it is bad. 

Playing as a biotic is optional. Does that mean that if Biotics are handled poorly we have no right to complain? 

Playing through the side missions in Mass Effect 1 is optional. Does that make it wrong to complain that they were repetetive, the mako controls are poor, and that it used the same three buildings on every planet? 

Yes, things may be optional in life, but we still have every right to complain if we pay for them and they are of poor quality, and from what we've heard of Mass Effect 3's multiplayer it is not fantastic. 

This is diffent. It's so diffenet that it drives me mad that people do not understand this......
Everyone who is complineing about mp is forgeting the most important thing about the  game...The sp... If the sp is fine, fantactic, and glorious, it does not matter if the add extra modes. If the extra modes does not effect the sp you don'twantto play, then their is no problem with it being their. With that, you you don't like mp and don't want it to effect your sp, you can just not play it. Heck, you even have the option of playing the mp and not having the gr points you get not be in putted in your sp game.
So wht ever complains you have is mute.

If it's driving you mad, maybe you should stop and take a moment to grasp what they're actually concerned about, instead of just repeating things over and over again that are in fact absolutely irrelevent to those actual concerns. 

But that's not your style, is it? 

You don't even understandthe concern yourself. Your warping this"consern" the cover the fact your hate mp just to hate it.

[Thompson family]

Phaedon wrote...

C9316 wrote...
Now that is something I can agree on! High five?

Wow. Rude.

You know very well that us turians have only three fingers. And you know how bad I feel for not being able to set up a rock concert in the Normandy because I can't handle a guitar due to the lack of fingers.

You have made me go in the corner and cry, I hope you feel good for yourself.


()

Humans are so racist.

[Killjoy Cutter]

dreman9999 wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

If it's driving you mad, maybe you should stop and take a moment to grasp what they're actually concerned about, instead of just repeating things over and over again that are in fact absolutely irrelevent to those actual concerns. 

But that's not your style, is it? 

You don't even understandthe concern yourself. Your warping this"consern" the cover the fact your hate mp just to hate it.

What I can piece together from your broken, incoherent English is that you're claiming that I don't understand my own concerns, and the concerns of those who share those concerns.  

Which is pretty much the nonsense answer I expected from you -- you have yet to actually post anything that is at all relevent to any of the actual concerns that people have about MP in ME3... you just keep parrotting "it's optional, it's optional!"  

Here, have a ******. 

Modifié par Killjoy Cutter, 28 octobre 2011 - 08:19 .

[Killjoy Cutter]

dreman9999 wrote...

If that'st he case then you will have the inconvenience of having a bad mp.  But he fact remains people want a fantastic sp rather than a good mp.

Ironic coming from you. 

[Ricinator]

Less of an option when people dont have XBL.

Modifié par Ricinator, 28 octobre 2011 - 08:23 .

[RamirezWolfen]

Ricinator wrote...

Less optional when people dont have XBL.

How so?

[Phaedon]

Ricinator wrote...

Less optional when people dont have XBL.

You are thinking of 'more', since in order to play the co-op mode, you will have to subscribe to XBL.

The problem lies with Microsoft's system here anyway

Modifié par Phaedon, 28 octobre 2011 - 08:21 .

[AtreiyaN7]

EJ107 wrote...

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

Obviously, it's not wrong to criticized the Mako or repetitive layouts, etc. from ME1, but that's because we have all actually played through those tedious ME1 side missions and driven the Mako by now, whereas people harping on the ME3 MP have not actually played it and can't actually claim that it impinges on their hypothetical single-player experience in a game they aren't going to be able to touch until next year.

The previews haven't said that MP is fantastic, because it isn't with the decision to go with horde-style gameplay. The opinions seem to range from it being enjoyable in doses to being meh, but so what? Multiplayer isn't the focus of the game and isn't/shouldn't be the centerpiece of the game - it's just an option for people to have extra fun or to take an alternative approach in preparing for war.

I have no problem with people saying "Don't judge it until you have played it" and I agree that it's not right to complain about multiplayer until we've actually played the game ourselves, my only problem is with "It's optional" being (apparently) the response to any and every concern about multiplayer, no matter how valid. 

If someone had legitimate, serious issues that haven't been shot down by now in the previews, then maybe we could all discuss their concerns without resorting to "it's optional." How many people have started irrational "I'm going to cancel my preorder solely because of the mere presence of multiplayer" threads or things like that? When someone is ranting and only goes "it's just because I hate multiplayer," it's hard to take them seriously - especially when they usually don't actually give any valid reasons that you can discuss. What's left then? Your only option is, heh, to point out that it's optional and that they don't have to deal with it.

Modifié par AtreiyaN7, 28 octobre 2011 - 08:24 .

[Thompson family]

Trying to look at this from the other point of view, I'll offer this:

If BioWare is able to pull off the SP campaign we all hope for and a useful and fun MP option too, I for one shall be quite impressed.

I think the SP campaign will be fine because that will depend mostly upon the story. The gamplay mechanics and so forth all stem directly from the first two games. RPG elements are definitely being put back in and in a "branching" system. So I'm not really worried about the SP campaign technicalities, especially given the long development time. BW is clearly looking for a blockbuster here, too, and nothing kills a potential blockbuster like being buggy, so I'm not worried about that.

I want a satisfying resolution to the tale, and I think we're going to get that. ME2's story set up a lot of very interesting situations: Shep's trial, the Geth/Quarian situation, the Cerberus mystery, etc.

People who want a smooth, good MP element should be the ones worried. The chances appear far more likely to me that it will just be tacked on added feature.

[Vegos]

Phaedon wrote...

Vegos wrote...

Phaedon wrote...


What are you talking about. That free soda makes the tray much more difficult to carry, and I would have rather the effort put into preparing the free soda was instead invested on making my hamburger more delicious.

That's exactly it.

I was being absolutely sarcastic. Be shameful, please.

EDIT: Especially for you thinking that the guy or gal who prepares the soda can somehow alter the concentrations of the natural ingredients of the meat to make it more delicious.

Maybe the cash they spent on the soda they gave out for free could have been spent on R&D instead, ever thought of that?

[Vegos]

ME1 was a 40 hour + game if you did every thing and it was $60.
ME2 wasa 50 hour + game if you did every thing and it was $60.
ME3 is a  50 hour + game if you do every thing(not icluding doing the mp)and it's going to be $60.
Why should the value be less if to take off mp if the game is the same value as it privious game?

Oh look, another one who has no idea about what the words "value" and "price" mean.

Hint: They don't mean the same thing.

[AtreiyaN7]

Thompson family wrote...

People who want a smooth, good MP element should be the ones worried. The chances appear far more likely to me that it will just be tacked on added feature.

Yep, I'm neither particularly for or against MP, myself. From what I've read in the preview articles, the multiplayer doesn't seem all that substantive, and it's not something I'd play for hours on end. However, as long as it doesn't actually detract from the single-player game, I really don't take issue with them adding it in.

I would have liked for it to be more complex and story-related, but I'm guessing that BW didn't want to force people who despise multiplayer into having to play it. That probably meant not having it tie in to the main story other than the contribution to your Galactic Readiness level. So far, the only major release with co-op that I 've considered clever and unique, and that also ties in to the story of the single-player campaign, is Portal 2.