441 réponses à ce sujet

[HyperLimited]

Meh, multiplayer won't harm Dragon Age, considering that the awesome button and the additional injections of awesome put into Dragon Age II already did that...

[jackkel dragon]

That article read like something I would write when I was bored and trolling. Heck, it sounds like someone played Dragon Rage and decided that BioWare should make a multiplayer version of that.

[JerHopp]

I thought Mike Laidlaw said in an interview that they were not planning on making a multiplayer Dragon Age...

If they are going to make a multiplayer, I hope they will focus on a singleplayer with a multiplayer as an extra...

And I do not want to play as a dragon...!!

[kael_159]

no no no no!! Please don't!!

[LordPaul256]

I bring myself out of Skyrim just long enough today to hear about this, and all I can say is that it gives me no good feelings about the future of Dragon Age.  Kind of the opposite, in fact.

The whole anonymous source thing is suspect, but I've never known Kotaku to post rumors that were later proven to be false.  This could be that time, but like with Dragon Age 2, I tend to wait to be bitten before I distrust someone.  That, and it fits the recent cycle of deny, deny, deny... confirm.  Oh, and the idea that multiplayer is cure to the scourge of piracy and game return sales.  What I'm saying is, that if it's trolling, it's brilliantly well done. 

[Marionetten]

HyperLimited wrote...

Meh, multiplayer won't harm Dragon Age, considering that the awesome button and the additional injections of awesome put into Dragon Age II already did that...

That's the thing though. Dragon Age II wasn't primarily horrible because of those things. It was primarily horrible because it was extremely rushed. Now they're thinking about wasting resurces on a multiplayer component. EA has really wrecked this studio beyond repair if there is any truth to this rumor.

[Aaleel]

With the direction Bioware has been going I see no way this doesn't happen. Only way I can see it not happening is if the MP in ME3 is an outright disaster. Aside from that, I see MP in the next DA game.

If ME3 multiplayer is a success, it's a done deal.

[Merilsell]

ratzerman wrote...

No comment
No comment
Kinda-sorta-deny
No comment
Confirm

^ Bioware's way to handle MP- rumours perfectly summarized. Watch it now happen to the DA- franchise. *grabs her popcorn to watch the upcoming mount of fail*

[willjbish]

This is like reading the Mass Effect 3 forums all over again. People denying it, mocking the "insider"
Look, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but if you think this game isn't going to have multiplayer....well, I wish I shared your optimism

[Fast Jimmy]

I wouldn't be completely surprised if a BW "insider" leaked this rumor out just so Bioware could test the waters and see fan's reaction to a proposed multiplayer option before investing in resources.

Given the multitude of "no, no, GAWD NO!" responses, I'd bet they might give it the chop before any real development time is spent on it. If the responses had been more positive, they might go ahead and green light it for full development.

Just my two cents... the truth of the rumor is based solely on how people react to it.

[Mr.House]

It's funny that people seem to forget that DAO was going to have multiplayer but it was cut because of the console versions. Ignorance is bliss I see.

[jackkel dragon]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

I wouldn't be completely surprised if a BW "insider" leaked this rumor out just so Bioware could test the waters and see fan's reaction to a proposed multiplayer option before investing in resources.

Given the multitude of "no, no, GAWD NO!" responses, I'd bet they might give it the chop before any real development time is spent on it. If the responses had been more positive, they might go ahead and green light it for full development.

Just my two cents... the truth of the rumor is based solely on how people react to it.

This was my second line of thought after I gave this "insider" the benefit of the doubt (of being a troll.) But the wording of the article is still ridiculous. I mean, dragons vs. humans? Is there any doubt who wins?

RPG multiplayer can be done right (NWN series comes to mind, as well as the early info for DAO multiplayer), but it can also go horribly wrong (Fire Emblem 7 and 8 arena mode).

Edit:

Mr.House wrote...

It's funny that people seem to forget that DAO was going to have multiplayer but it was cut because of the console versions. Ignorance is bliss I see.

Now if only this "insider" info matched up with the old DAO multiplayer info...

Modifié par jackkel dragon, 30 novembre 2011 - 06:23 .

[yusuf060297]

Could somebody explain this to me, do they mean frostbite 2 like multiplayer or is da3 going to use frostbite 2? If so it would be.... awesome! omg

[Dazaster Dellus]

I have to say that this doesn't shock me at all. Kotaku has been right about plenty of other stuff before. And just as some have already said, everyone was saying the Mass Effect multiplayer was false as well, and we see what happened there.

I also have to say that EA is definitely behind this because if you read the similar article at G4 about EA brass putting pressure on Visceral Games to "expand" the Dead Space series to a wider audience..........I'm sorry, I just reread it and it says they were commanded to go bigger. Now the rumor is that they are working on an FPS, a space sim, and an adventure type game. I love how they phrase it too. Gotta love that second paragraph.

www.g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/718750/dead-space-getting-an-fps-a-flight-combat-sim-an-adventure-game/

Modifié par Dazaster Dellus, 30 novembre 2011 - 06:33 .

[AlexXIV]

Mr.House wrote...

It's funny that people seem to forget that DAO was going to have multiplayer but it was cut because of the console versions. Ignorance is bliss I see.

Well but logic dictates that if they had not cut the MP they would have had to cut something else instead. I think that's what people are concerned of. That the MP feature goes to the expense of single players. I for one don't use MP most likely. So it adds nothing but probably subtracts something for me.

[tmp7704]

Mr.House wrote...

It's funny that people seem to forget that DAO was going to have multiplayer but it was cut because of the console versions. Ignorance is bliss I see.

I think people are focusing more on the idea that DAO worked fine without it, whether it was at some point intended or not.

[jlb524]

dafangirl wrote...
Except that DA:O did not at its culmination have it; it stood on its own and was, imho, an RPG masterpiece. Why, keep changing, instead of tweaking, it so completely as to not even remotely resemble it's predecessor?

Because they don't want to keep making DA:O over and over and over again.

I wish they'd keep making BG2 over and over again but they won't....blast.

[Barbarossa2010]

Well, MP is not, in and of itself, a bad thing if it is well-implemented, supports or integrates well into a fantastic single player experience, makes sense, and offers great and engaging gameplay. 
Which makes this "rumor" problematic, because unfortunately at this point, I have very little faith in Bioware doing much of anything other than maybe not screwing up ME3 too bad, having just been a first-hand eyewitness to the train wreck of their latest single player offering. 

[Aaleel]

jlb524 wrote...

dafangirl wrote...
Except that DA:O did not at its culmination have it; it stood on its own and was, imho, an RPG masterpiece. Why, keep changing, instead of tweaking, it so completely as to not even remotely resemble it's predecessor?

Because they don't want to keep making DA:O over and over and over again.

I wish they'd keep making BG2 over and over again but they won't....blast.

It's not the same game over and over though.  I think where people are stuck is that usually when you have a successful product (In this case your best selling game ever) you don't completely revamp it on the next installment.  Usually you completely revamp something if the previous one was a failure.

[SphereofSilence]

I don't mind if Bioware explore a multiplayer if:

1. It is completely optional.
2. Developing the multiplayer does not in any way compromise the quality of the single player campaign.

But we all know DA2 was rushed. I'm assuming EA/Bioware has already boosted their resources to the DA franchise, which I believe will help matters to a certain degree. But sometimes, there are no complete substitute for ample time, needed to make a quality game, which I hope EA/Bioware learned from the DA2 experience.

Bioware's strength has always been narrative quality, multiplayer obviously isn't their strong suit. Trying to make a multiplayer game, and a good one at that, isn't usually wise. In an attempt to capture more audience and all, going into a field that you're newbie at while your previous game wasn't up to standard at what you're known to be great at, is pure stupid bravado. I just don't trust this John Riccitiello, the current CEO of EA. He sounds like an executive at the top that just hands out decisions, without a good understanding at what's going on with the guys at the bottom, disconnected from things, no understanding on what constitutes making a great/good game that fans will love, and that attempting to move things too quickly and in too many directions just don't cut it, but instead inevitably led to the degradation of the single player experience.

I want DA franchise to be successful, to expand, to explore new frontiers. Heck if Bioware can eventually become good at multiplayer as well, then it's good. I just don't necessarily agree with the pace/way at which Bioware/EA is doing that right now. I believe that a company's growth should be proportional to the way they can attract the right talents and the degree they can explore new stuffs w/o compromising in any way what they're originally good at.

Assuming the multiplayer being developed is true, I'll only be satisfied if Bioware/EA actually acquired a studio that has experience and track record developing good multiplayer games, to make the multiplayer for DA. Someone such as DICE.

[Fast Jimmy]

jlb524 wrote...

Because they don't want to keep making DA:O over and over and over again.

WHY they don't want to do this, when it was one of the most commercially successful RPGs made in the past decade, is beyond me. I mean, I could get if they had played the series to death before trying a "new direction." But they only had one installment (with an expansion and various DLC) before saying that 90% of what they did in the first game was wrong.

I just don't get it.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 30 novembre 2011 - 06:52 .

[Nerevar-as]

This is reminding me of some TV series that got cancelled not because really low audience, but becuase the public demographic wasn´t the one the network wanted. BW seems to be trying to appeal to a new fanbase even if it loses a good chunk of the current one on on the way.

[Brockololly]

Mr.House wrote...

It's funny that people seem to forget that DAO was going to have multiplayer but it was cut because of the console versions. Ignorance is bliss I see.

Wasn't DA originally going to be much more like NWN too? I don't think they ever planned to have the kind of deathmatch type multiplayer which is being proposed here. Co-op in a BG2 sort of way would be one thing, but the MP as rumored is something else entirely.

Dazaster Dellus wrote...
I have to say that this doesn't  shock me at all. Kotaku has been right about plenty of other stuff  before. And just as some have already said, everyone was saying the Mass Effect multiplayer was false as well, and we see what happened there.

I also have to say that EA is definitely behind this because if you read  the similar article at G4 about EA brass putting pressure on Visceral  Games to "expand" the Dead Space series to a wider audience..........I'm sorry, I just reread it and it says they were commanded to go bigger. Now the rumor is that they are working on an FPS, a space sim, and an  adventure type game. I love how they phrase it too. Gotta love that  second paragraph.

This sounds just like EA really and fits with everything else they've been doing as of late. TOR= we need to beat WoW! BF3= We need to beat CoD! Now its Dead Space = we need to beat Uncharted! Its all completely reactionary and a knee jerk to what other people are doing.

The problem is that the more these games get diluted and stretched thin in some attempt to appeal to everyone, they simply become a jack of all trades master of none. I want damn good single player party based tactical RPGs out of DA. If I want giant multiplayer action I'll go to Battlefield. If I want massive open worlds I'll go to Bethesda.

Tacked on multiplayer never works out well.

Modifié par Brockololly, 30 novembre 2011 - 06:43 .

[AlexXIV]

Nerevar-as wrote...

This is reminding me of some TV series that got cancelled not because really low audience, but becuase the public demographic wasn´t the one the network wanted. BW seems to be trying to appeal to a new fanbase even if it loses a good chunk of the current one on on the way.

Maybe the figured the new one would be much larger than the old one. If they manage to appeal to it. Which may be the case since most people who play video games probably are action junkies.

[jlb524]

Aaleel wrote...
It's not the same game over and over though.  I think where people are stuck is that usually when you have a successful product (In this case your best selling game ever) you don't completely revamp it on the next installment.  Usually you completely revamp something if the previous one was a failure.

People want DA:O with tweaks, right?

I want BG2 with tweaks.  It was a successful product.  I actually wish DA:O was like BG2 with tweaks.  Remove the cinematics and voice acting (not just PC voice acting, but NPC voice acting)...bring back the little sprites for your PC.  Bring back all that dialog (when you don't have to pay VAs, you can write more dialog and do more with the story).

But they definitely moved on from that...oh well.