414 réponses à ce sujet

[Fiery Phoenix]

Mass Effect 3 multiplayer: six reasons to drop it

Caught this on my Facebook feed a little while ago. Not a bad read.
Now don't shoot me, BioWare. I promise you I'm not the one who wrote the article

[someone else]

Agreed. I've never done multiplayer, not intrigued and am at a stage in life where if my friends knew of my interest in the game, they'd laugh and/or wonder, rather than get hyped about a co-op session against the cretins down the block, so no, I ain't particularly excited. Single player suits me fine.

[Andorfiend]

That's a pretty weak list of arguements if you ask me. And I'm not a big MP fan, so the multiplayer aspect is not a selling point for me.

If I thought the MP was being done by the same team as the main campaign, I would be upset that it was distracting them from their proper focus. But since it's a seperate team and I can dive in, dabble, or ignore it as I please... I say go for it,.

[CptBomBom00]

What the in the flaming ****?
God some people don't understand, multiplayer is in the game and it's going to stay.
nuff said.

[Steppenwolf]

It's not even a well-informed article. There are things that are just blatantly wrong and/or misleading. They say that the multiplayer is required to play, but that's obviously not true. And then they suggest that this new mode has come at the cost of RPG elements but ME3 has more RPG elements than ME2. WTF? Did the writer of that article stick his fingers in his ears as soon as he heard "MP in ME3"?

[RPGamer13]

liesandpropaganda wrote...

"Decisions lose impact"

which they never had

You're right, decisions never did have impact and I find it doubtful that they all of a sudden will.

I have a friend who's opposed to the idea, but I'd like to play a race other than Female -Shepard and I'm glad multiplayer at least allows you to do that.

And I have fun in Horde 2.0 on Gears of War 3, so...

[CptBomBom00]

Multiplayer it's good thing, especially for me, because when I finish the game,I can kick some ass there.

[Chewin]

CptBomBom00 wrote...

What the in the flaming ****?
God some people don't understand, multiplayer is in the game and it's going to stay.
nuff said.

So are you saying that people aren't allowed to state their opinion? That b/c MP is in the game, we should just "deal with it"?

BSN at its finest.

[CroGamer002]

1. That makes no sense. And could you at least spell Shepard right?

2. Agreed, but how's that a reason to drop Co-Op?

3. Bioware Edmonton Mass Effect team is doing what you just said for SP campaign. If you don't like it, don't attempt Co-Op at all which is made by Bioware Montreal.

4. If it's optional then why do you complain about it? I won't use it, but some people will and might want that. Long enough is not mandatory, there's no problem.

5. It's optional. You don't have to play Co-Op so no need to help yourself if you screwed yourself in SP campaign and decisions will still keep impact.

6. How the f*ck are they "stealing" Modern Warfare costumers, game that is famous do to competitive multiplayer, with cooperative multiplayer?!




Thanks Fiery Phoenix for wasting my time for linking that article.
It was not interesting to read.

[Sailears]

While I might not be ecstatic about multiplayer, that is a very weak set of reasons against it.

The only one I can agree on is number 4 - social network integration and "apps"... *shudder*

[Someone With Mass]

1. It'll damage the context.

Eh, no. It won't. People are always asking about this expanding universe and once they finally got one that shows more than Shepard's world, they want it be about only Shepard, even though this multiplayer barely affects his/her progress or decisions at all? Okay.

2. Multiplayer doesn't equal success

That's the thing, though. It's not trying to be the best multiplayer out there. It's just trying to be a nice alternative to someone who wants to play Mass Effect with his/her friends and still get a little bonus out of it when connecting that character to the singleplayer. More options? BAD! We can't have that!

3. We don't want relentless combat

Same old and weak argument that doesn't work here either. Even if they did drop the multiplayer now, (which would be very stupid) they won't get anything back. Also. If you don't like it, DON'T PLAY IT. If I don't like a multiplayer mode like free-for-all, then I'm not going to whine about how it could've been a better investment somewhere else (because, you know, the fans always knows best when it comes to economical investments). No, I'll simply ignore it, and do something else with the game.

4. It won't end here

Optional apps are optional.

5. Decisions lose impact

Since the co-op is only giving simple war assets to you and you have to use that brain of yours to do the critical decisions in singleplayer, I don't see how that works. Or makes sense, for that matter. It'd be like if I got some extra funds in a multiplayer mode and then claim that my choices in the singleplayer (like which squadmate to assign to which task and such) will be weaker because of it. Which doesn't make any goddamn sense, since all that'll happen is that I'll have an easier time requiring certain objects. Or it's like saying that if I got some money from someone before going to the grocery store, I can't make the right decision when it comes to the products I should and want to buy.

Does that make any sense? No.

6. It's second-hand goods

Again. Don't like it, don't play it. Deal with it.

It's like they copied the statements and arguments from certain threads of this forum without a second thought.

If you're going to argue against multiplayer (again), at least come up with something new.

Modifié par Someone With Mass, 02 décembre 2011 - 02:29 .

[mbr.to]

oh yeah a wrex screenshot

[Wulfram]

The resources have already been spent, so there aren't many good reasons to drop it.

Though I wish they hadn't felt the need to entangle it with single player.

[Ticktank]

CptBomBom00 wrote...

Multiplayer it's good thing, especially for me, because when I finish the game,I can kick some ass there.

Let me guess, you're going to use a female Quarian and name her Taliismine, and squeal keelah! through the microphone everytime you charge into enemies like a retard.

[Wulfram]

Ticktank wrote...

CptBomBom00 wrote...

Multiplayer it's good thing, especially for me, because when I finish the game,I can kick some ass there.

Let me guess, you're going to use a female Quarian and name her Taliismine, and squeal keelah! through the microphone everytime you charge into enemies like a retard.

You say this like it's a bad thing

[Kaiser Shepard]

[bickering removed]

As for the whole multiplayer 'issue', I'm with liesandpropaganda on this one.

Modifié par Stanley Woo, 02 décembre 2011 - 06:58 .

[Fixers0]

Someone With Mass wrote...

If you're going to argue against multiplayer (again), at least come up with something new.

Why? Age alone, does nothing to the quality of Arguments

[MarchWaltz]

I'm not a big MP fan, the MP game I play right now is UMVC3, and that's only a few matches every couple of days. SKyrim has been taking most of my gaming time anywho.

I'm looking forward to the MP for ME (heh), mostly because I can play with my buddies.

[RyuGuitarFreak]

Weak list. The only one worth mentioning is #6, which is the point why I think it can hurt the game's quality.

ME3 Horde Mode looks like Horde Mode from Gears of War 2 when GeOW3 improved so much ME3's mode will look completely outdated.

They're not doing much to make it stand out from other games. No facil customization, no armor customization, no roleplay elements and from what I've seen no gender customization for all races. Those features would make justice for a Mass Effect multiplayer mode, not what I've seen in the leaked beta. I hope there's A LOT more than that.

[Someone With Mass]

Fixers0 wrote...

Why? Age alone, does nothing to the quality of Arguments

Because those "argumants"  like "multiplayer should be removed to free up resources" have been proven again and again that it's not how it works. By some of the developers, even.

And because they're saying that something like playing multiplayer somehow diminishes the choices in the singleplayer, even though that's not how it works. At all. It's like if I'm getting money for completing some tasks in multiplayer and then starts complaining about how that negates my choices in singleplayer when I transfer that money. Which it won't.

You won't be able to win the entire thing on War Assets alone in singleplayer. It'll help, sure, but you still have to make the choices (like which races to help out or which/how many missions to do) yourself.

[cr3ative_name]

But since it's a seperate team and I can dive in, dabble, or ignore it as I please... I say go for it,.

Separate team? Thank god.

I don't mind Bioware putting MP in as long as they don't screw the campaign up or make it short like Halo or COD, and having a separate team do the multiplayer development seems to bode well in that direction.

[Il Divo]

Only argument I can really agree with is the "slippery slope" argument, particularly with this new Dragon Age 3 multiplayer rumor abound. Time reveals all.

Modifié par Il Divo, 02 décembre 2011 - 03:14 .

[SNascimento]

It's really feel like a short sighted angry fan writing... most things don't make any point at all.

[Someone With Mass]

Ticktank wrote...

LOL WHAT? Wow he's more pathetic than I thought. And he could be past 20...

Thanks for the info.

Not that I know what my age has anything to do with this, since I've seen collage students with more maturity and reasoning than most adult people here. Like yourself. Ah, who am I kidding. You can't possibly be over the age of 20. If you are, you're sure as hell not acting like someone of that age.

Because the people I know that are around the age of twenty aren't going out on homophobic rants.

Modifié par Someone With Mass, 02 décembre 2011 - 03:16 .