568 réponses à ce sujet

[dreman9999]

Vegos wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

So your say we did not get homosexula romance because of the delay, even though they stated before we are not getting it?

Nice strawman.

I didn't see him saying that. He actually never said it.

So your forget the many months fill with topics asking for itand the mant times bw shot it down before the delay. And then all a suden, they say it's in as soon as it's delayed?

The sp team not using the extra month they have sitting on their hands. They 4 more months to work onthe game. You don't think they won'tadd thing tothesp with the extra time?

[sympathyforsaren]

tj987654321 wrote...

sympathyforsaren wrote...

tj987654321 wrote...

I took this from my Mass Effect 3 Demo FAQ Posting

Why shouldn't BF3 purchasers get early access to the multiplayer demo? It is only there to garner interest for the Mass Effect series. I think this is a wise move on EA's behalf, because it shows that they know how to properly market a game. By giving BF3 purchasers an "prestigious" bonus of early multiplayer ME 3 access, there is a far greater chance that they will get into the series.

Also, while they haven't been announced yet, there are other alternatives to gain early access without having to purchase something. This gives fans such as us to participate in the multiplayer demo too. So I do not see why there are so many complaints about EA being disloyal to its fans. If you are a true fan of the Mass Effect series; while you may be interested in the new co-op feature; you are really here to enjoy a fulling single player experience. On the other hand, if you are a Battlefield fan and a newcomer to ME, you would most likely be far more interested in the new multiplayer aspects of Mass Effect 3 than the singleplayer aspects. However, as these types of fans play the multiplayer demo, they may become even more interested in the singleplayer storyline.

In short, if BioWare and EA execute this marketing strategy perfectly, Mass Effect 3 is going to have a hell of a lot more players! (I am not demeaning the popularity of the Mass Effect series; I am just saying that this game can stand to gain an even bigger fan base with the inclusion of multiplayer.)

Oh, and for the minotity of fans here that believe that ME 3 will be less popular due to multiplayer, ask yourself this question: "If at restarant, you planned on purchasing a hamburger; would you still buy the same hamburger if it came with a free drink due to a promotion?

Next time you don't want something on your hamburger, maybe the waiter will tell you "its optional" and walk away, leaving you to pick it out.

And wow. That new fanbase you wont get, even if they were obtained, will offer up an even greater slew of changes. See ya, romances. Goodbye, any form of stat. See you later, complex storyline.

I didn't say anything about a new fanbase; I said a "BIGGER" fanbase. I know it is sometimes hard to understand, but people can enjoy more than one type of gerne. For example, I love playing FPS and TPS games with friends, but I also enjoy individual RPG experiences such as Mass Effect and Fallout.

What would happen if you were able to combine these elements together to get fans from both groups without affecting the individual game elements? That is what is being attempted with ME 3. It is projected to have the same quality in singleplayer gameplay, and also have a completely individual multiplayer co-op aspect. If neither gerne is affected, I see this as a "win win" situation.

Hey, im all for Bioware trying to make money. It's why they exist. But this new approach was tried with Dragon Age II and it didn't go too well. Heck, ME2 had watered down rpg elements, and ME3 seems like a pure third person shooter with dialogue and upgrades from my perspective.

Skyrim is coming out....I suggest checking in to see how they are doing profit wise. They cater exclusively to rpg fans. And they know they don't need to waste their time on co-op. I gave Bethesda oodles of my money. I got the Collector's Edition with money from my cancelled ME3 preorder.

BioWare can run their business however they see fit, but I am not interested in these multiplayer shooters they are making. A lot of us aren't, I personally know two other people at my second job alone who have cancelled their preorders as well.

Will be keeping an eye on things, but not very optimistic. But I'm very understanding of BioWare running their business as they see fit. Their supply just isnt meeting my demand from what im seeing.

[tj987654321]

Cutlass Jack wrote...

tj987654321 wrote...

Oh, and for the minotity of fans here that believe that ME 3 will be less popular due to multiplayer, ask yourself this question: "If at restarant, you planned on purchasing a hamburger; would you still buy the same hamburger if it came with a free drink due to a promotion?

Are you making up your own arguements to defeat? Its not a question of popularity, but rather quality. If a restaurant gave you a lesser quality hamburger for the same price so that it could afford to include a 'free' drink, would you enjoy your meal as much?

No matter how you feel about multiplayer, its still resources that could have been used to make the single player campaign even better. That its 'another studio' doesn't change that at all. They could have just as easily been used on some other grunt task on the single player game so that something else could have been done better by the main team.

If given a choice between every possible squadmate being able to return in ME3 as a full time squaddie and multiplayer, how many would really choose the latter? Or MP vs. more random conversations with your squad and crew?

Remember all those fun chats we had with our non-squad crew in ME2? Those were last minute additions done by people who weren't the main game designers. Something they wouldn't have had time to do if they were tied up with an optional multiplayer feature. As it was, they barely made it in.

Well written response, Jack. I appreciate it.
Yes, I completely understand what you are saying; however, we do not currently know the full quality of the singleplayer game. Also, while a game can always be improved on by extra funding and dedication, who says that the singleplayer game is not an even greater quality than its predecessors already.

[Cutlass Jack]

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 what I'd want. I hate it when they try to force 'free' sodas on me in the drive through. I'd rather have a more delicious burger than have to worry about a soda falling over while I'm driving.

[Iakus]

Il Divo wrote...

Phaedon wrote...

But, Il Divo.

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.

You got me Phaedon. I don't have a rebuttal for ya'.

What if they spill the soda on your hamburger? 

Modifié par iakus, 28 octobre 2011 - 07:29 .

[Phaedon]

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



Throw them to the ground!

Modifié par Phaedon, 28 octobre 2011 - 08:16 .

[dreman9999]

Il Divo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

But that's not the case. Mp does not make the game cost more to have it. It's not even a full mp mode. Your not being chargeg more for it. You getting the same ammout of content as the  last 2 games an more as this game at the same price, not including the mp in the equation.

That's exactly the case. In charging me $60 for this experience, the sum total results in features I don't want. You're assuming that multiplayer is some free extra and at this point in time don't have grounds to say how much content I'm getting compared to the last two games, or the quality of the overall experience. Game prices are typically stable at release from $50-$60.

Even going back to your McDonald's example. If I get a free drink, which I don't want, if given the choice, I'd rather tell them "hey, keep the drink and knock off a buck".  I'd gladly take that option, which unfortunately doesn't exist.

No , it not.
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?

[Il Divo]

iakus wrote...

What if they spill the soda on your hamburger? 

Then I'll be demanding they remake me a new hamburger, with no multiplayer soda, cooked to absolute perfection. Oh, and extra pickles. 

[dreman9999]

[quote]Cutlass Jack wrote...

[quote]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.

[/quote]

That's exactly what I'd want. I hate it when they try to force 'free' sodas on me in the drive through. I'd rather have a more delicious burger than have to worry about a soda falling over while I'm driving.
[smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/joyful.png[/smilie]

[AdmiralCheez]

onelifecrisis wrote...

You're starting to make MP sound like fun. Stop that immediately.

So fun I just made a thread about it.

I'm the freshest of the fresh.

[Killjoy Cutter]

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

AtreiyaN7 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.

Affecting the single-player campaign in bad ways is an assumption that some people are making without any actual evidence to back it up, and it usually includes the use of the bugaboo of "wasted resources" that they feel should have/could have gone to the single-player game.

That's ignoring the fact that they had the Montreal team in place already. And honestly, it doesn't seem terribly sensible for BW to just up and decide halfway through, hey, let's just toss multiplayer in for the heck of it. One would assume that they had budgeted for the addition and that it required some planning. Based on all the MP previews, it doesn't seem like this effort would have taken all that much in the way of resources.

While some people can have a decentdiscussion about MP, the majority of people flailing around don't have any logical reasons or arguments other than "I don't like MP, keep it away from me."

There are at least as many assumptions on the part of the pro-MP posters, not least of which is that we can trust anything coming out of Bioware's collective pie hole at this point. 

And I'm not "trusting" them. I read the hands-on previews, and the details from those hands-on previews seem to indicate that co-op gameplay is relatively simple. As described in the previews, if you choose to play co-op, what happens is that you can import your character into the main single-player campaign as a GR-related war asset (if I understand that correctly).

The description of the co-op gameplay was very clear: horde-style maps involving surviving waves with simple objectives and no story/dialogue. So for those who have claimed that they're somehow going to miss out on content due to their personal pecadilloes involving MP, they're clearly NOT going to be missing out on story content, dialogue or anything all that exciting as far as anyone can tell right now.

I added a list of concerns not yet addressed to my post. 

[C9316]

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.

[Il Divo]

dreman9999 wrote...

No , it not.
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?

Because in an ideal world, I wouldn't have to pay for things which I did not want, or plan on using. Hell, Mass Effect worked the same way. I would gladly have said "Keep your crappy inventory system" and knock off $5.

That's the point of the McDonald's example. They don't offer the option to reject the free coke and drop the price. I'm lamenting that I don't have that option open, despite how unrealistic it may be.

Modifié par Il Divo, 28 octobre 2011 - 07:34 .

[dreman9999]

Il Divo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

No , it not.
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?

Because in an ideal world, I wouldn't have to pay for things which I did not want, or plan on using. Hell, Mass Effect worked the same way. I would gladly have said "Keep your crappy inventory system" and knock off $5.

That's the point of the McDonald's example. They don't offer the option to reject the free coke and drop the price. I'm lamenting that I don't have that option open, despite how unrealistic it may be.

You ma yfeel that way...But It still not going to happen.

[dreman9999]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

AtreiyaN7 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.

Affecting the single-player campaign in bad ways is an assumption that some people are making without any actual evidence to back it up, and it usually includes the use of the bugaboo of "wasted resources" that they feel should have/could have gone to the single-player game.

That's ignoring the fact that they had the Montreal team in place already. And honestly, it doesn't seem terribly sensible for BW to just up and decide halfway through, hey, let's just toss multiplayer in for the heck of it. One would assume that they had budgeted for the addition and that it required some planning. Based on all the MP previews, it doesn't seem like this effort would have taken all that much in the way of resources.

While some people can have a decentdiscussion about MP, the majority of people flailing around don't have any logical reasons or arguments other than "I don't like MP, keep it away from me."

There are at least as many assumptions on the part of the pro-MP posters, not least of which is that we can trust anything coming out of Bioware's collective pie hole at this point. 

And I'm not "trusting" them. I read the hands-on previews, and the details from those hands-on previews seem to indicate that co-op gameplay is relatively simple. As described in the previews, if you choose to play co-op, what happens is that you can import your character into the main single-player campaign as a GR-related war asset (if I understand that correctly).

The description of the co-op gameplay was very clear: horde-style maps involving surviving waves with simple objectives and no story/dialogue. So for those who have claimed that they're somehow going to miss out on content due to their personal pecadilloes involving MP, they're clearly NOT going to be missing out on story content, dialogue or anything all that exciting as far as anyone can tell right now.

I added a list of concerns not yet addressed to my post. 

Again,you don't have to play the mp.

[Il Divo]

dreman9999 wrote...

You ma yfeel that way...But It still not going to happen.

Excellent observation, as I pointed it out a page and a half ago. Let me mourn in peace.

[Phaedon]

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.

[Ianamus]

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. 

I'm going to reserve judgement until I have played it myself, but I'm not going to start having a go at anyone who complains about multiplayer becuase they have every right to.

Modifié par EJ107, 28 octobre 2011 - 07:43 .

[dreman9999]

Il Divo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

You ma yfeel that way...But It still not going to happen.

Excellent observation, as I pointed it out a page and a half ago. Let me mourn in peace.

Mourn what? The fact you have a feature in the game you don't like and don't have to play?

[Killjoy Cutter]

dreman9999 wrote...

Again,you don't have to play the mp.

That negates exactly ZERO of my concerns.  ZERO. 

POSSIBLE bad effects that have nothing to do with whether it's technically "optional", and nothing to do with whether any one particular player chooses to play MP at all. 

1)  Adjustment of SP progression to account for possible influx of benefits from MP play.
2)  Disk space used for MP content instead of additional SP content.
3)  Increased likelihood of Origin spyware being required even on installs from hardcopy
4)  Increased likelihood of anti-mod measures that affect SP content in blunderbus attempt to "protect" MP "fairness"
5)  Increased likelihood of being required to log in to play any content, not just MP. 
6)  Influx of dudebros and CoD-kiddies. 
7)  Etc, in case I'm forgetting any.  (typing this while waiting on reports to run at work)

And that doesn't count all the issues that SEEM to have been laid to rest by what we provisionally know but can't be certain of at this point.  For example, the differences between the setup of SP and the setup of MP seem to preclude the inevitable MP balance issues and crying players causing constant adjustments to SP gameplay, something which afflicts many online multiplayer games (WoW, etc).

Modifié par Killjoy Cutter, 28 octobre 2011 - 07:46 .

[Il Divo]

dreman9999 wrote...

Mourn what? The fact you have a feature in the game you don't like and don't have to play?

[C9316]

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.

[dreman9999]

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 different. It's so different that it drives me mad that people do not understand this......
Everyone who is complaining about mp is forgetting the most important thing about the  game...The sp... If the sp is fine, fantastic, and glorious, it does not matter if the add extra modes. If the extra modes does not effect the sp you don't want to 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 what ever complains you have is mute.

Modifié par dreman9999, 28 octobre 2011 - 08:00 .

[Cutlass Jack]

tj987654321 wrote...

Well written response, Jack. I appreciate it.
Yes, I completely understand what you are saying; however, we do not currently know the full quality of the singleplayer game. Also, while a game can always be improved on by extra funding and dedication, who says that the singleplayer game is not an even greater quality than its predecessors already.

True enough, its too early to say in either direction. However, I think we know from past Bioware releases, that no matter how good a game is, there will be hundreds of threads complaining that something or another wasn't included. With ME3, we can guarantee that nearly every such thread will blame this squarely on multiplayer.

When your favorite character is reduced to a quick cameo but there's this whole other unrelated feature you didn't ask for, it will be hard not to be annoyed by it. And we already know that some companions are limited to single mission (at best) appearances.

That said, as long as the single player experience delivers on all counts, I've got no problem with Multiplayer being tacked on. And if I can easilly team with my wife for it (instead of randomly picked strangers) I might even enjoy giving it a shot.

But I'd gladly give it up for one more cutscene of Mordin singing.