414 réponses à ce sujet

[KrazyKiko]

slyborg wrote...

 More complaints on multiplayer. wanderson75.net/archives/4281

Personally, I'm not a fan of the MP / Co-op intro for this series.  I can understand their logic: War has many fronts; and the intro of MP / Co-op allows the player to be in those various battlefronts and help 'win the war'.  Sure - I'll give it chance - provided I know friends that actually play this game - but the author of the critique was spot-on with how I view its inclusion.  Bioware may never have envisioned ME as a single player experience throughout its lifecycle, but to me, it was...and is.

Modifié par KrazyKiko, 07 décembre 2011 - 11:14 .

[Quole]

Savber100 wrote...

Quole wrote...

StephanieBengal wrote...

Quole wrote...

I honestly still cant believe they actually integrated it in ME3 at all. Really disappointed in Bioware.

Take a tissue and go cry. 

Oh, I already cried when DA2 came out.

Then get a life. 

Cry for stuff that actually matters to reality. Just saying... 

Yes, I was disappointed with DA2 but to act like it's the end of the world because Bioware is ruined FOREVER because of DA2 is just plain silly. <_<

Lol? I am fine with my life right now. I am allowed to complain. DId I ask for your opinion? reported.

[Lunatic LK47]

KrazyKiko wrote...

slyborg wrote...

 More complaints on multiplayer. wanderson75.net/archives/4281

Personally, I'm not a fan of the MP / Co-op intro for this series.  I can understand their logic: War has many fronts; and the intro of MP / Co-op allows the player to be in those various battlefronts and help 'win the war'.  Sure - I'll give it chance - provided I know friends that actually play this game - but the author of the critique was spot-on with how I view its inclusion.  Bioware may never have envisioned ME as a single player experience throughout its lifecycle, but to me, it was...and is.

Free beer for you, if I ever run into you. Saved that article to my favorites.

[Someone With Mass]

The co-op seems fun enough to me, so I don't care if other companies have done it before (seriously, name me one work of fiction or interactive game that's completely original and wasn't inspired by anything else) because it seems to be simple enough.

[Lunatic LK47]

Someone With Mass wrote...

The co-op seems fun enough to me, so I don't care if other companies have done it before (seriously, name me one work of fiction or interactive game that's completely original and wasn't inspired by anything else) because it seems to be simple enough.

Question is longevity. Unless the title was Gears of War, Halo, or Call of Duty, there's an artificial time limit involved. I saw F.E.A.R. 3 dying out in two months, when a a YouTube player wanted to try it out in July 2011 because he was busy with reviewing other releases. I played Tom Clancy's EndWar since launch, and found the game dead in January 2009.  I played other Tom Clancy games when they hit the $20 price tag YEARS AFTER RELEASE, and found zero activity in the MP campaigns. Whatever MP sections I found were either Team Deathmatch with the same four or five players, or Terrorist Hunt with 13 year olds (Rainbow Six: Vegas).

[Someone With Mass]

No multiplayer game will last forever.

[Lunatic LK47]

Someone With Mass wrote...

No multiplayer game will last forever.

Then how did the AAA titles like I mentioned exactly live as long as they do?

[Someone With Mass]

Lunatic LK47 wrote...

Then how did the AAA titles like I mentioned exactly live as long as they do?

Halo 2 lasted for about six years until they shut down the servers.

Most of the other games you mentioned have existed for about as long.

Unless they can support local server hosting, they will all die out sooner or later.

[goofyomnivore]

Someone With Mass wrote...

No multiplayer game will last forever.

Unless they can support local server hosting, they will all die out sooner or later.

The Tribes series is still around despite Sierra being bought out and it has no local server hosting.

Modifié par strive, 08 décembre 2011 - 12:28 .

[Someone With Mass]

Arcian wrote...
Except Starcraft 1.

Yeah, but it's like Korea's national sport or something.

Sure, there are some exceptions, but they are few. Not every game will reach that level.

Modifié par Someone With Mass, 08 décembre 2011 - 12:29 .

[Lunatic LK47]

Someone With Mass wrote...
Halo 2 lasted for about six years until they shut down the servers.

One tiny technicality, Microsoft shut down the regular X-Box servers, though I understand what you're saying.

[Quole]

Arcian wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

No multiplayer game will last forever.

Except Starcraft 1.

It will last longer than SC2 thats for sure.

[ThePatriot101]

The fact that so many people pledged to boycott the game solely because of the notion of there being multiplayer (of which I would say no more than 20% would) makes this article inconsequential. No one source of news is the end-all-be-all, and OXM's writers are entitled to their views as those of GT, Playstation Magazine, Nintendo Power, etc etc etc.

MP isn't for everybody, that's a given. Moving on...

[Il Divo]

whywhywhywhy wrote...

@Il Divo wrote...
I was reading your post just now and I'll freely admit I didn't finish it.  When I got to the part quoted below and I saw that you tried to quote me out of context and commited the fallacy of accusing me of making a contradiction.  You took the worn road of if you can't beat my argument misquote, quote out of context or just plain fudge it, I knew our time was done.

whywhywhywhy!
They were searching for proof of the reapers, searching for Saren and exploring his ties to Benzia, searching for the conduit, the mu relay and he's a spectre.  That's off the top of my head being both a Spectre and alliance soldier Shepard's being tasked with discovering what Saren was up to doesn't absolve him of all his other duties.  Especially given the fact no one believed in the reapers, I doubt all his other responsibilities and needs(funds and such) disappears.

Il Divo wrote...
Your bolded contradicts the underlined.

The underline is in reference to your request of "demonstrate how any exploration elements in ME1 support the main
narrative."  The underline is exactly that, these are the reasons for the exploration.  Again the main narrative is not about the reapers they are but a footnote, it's Shepard's story.  The telling of his trials as the first Spectre he attempts to protect the galaxy first and foremost by stopping Saren who would cause the reaper invasion.  Erase every side mssion and this still doesn't change.  The game opens talking of him/her and ends on his/her vow to protect the galaxy.  And me3 has been describe by the developer as the "End of shepard's story."  The Reapers are no more but a pending threat one not realized until the third act in which the main Narrative becomes Shepard's struggle to stop the Reapers. 

Main narrative the reapers ???  Your confused.

Take your education and move along you weren't ready for the Big Time.

It's okay. This isn't the first time I've seen you attempt to pull the "I'm not going to respond because I have no decent counter-argument, so I'll pretend I'm smarter than you" card. In short, if you don't think this is about the Reaper threat, you didn't understand Mass Effect 1, as evidenced by your description of the Reapers as a footnote.

And I laugh at anyone who considers a random internet thread on a video game forum "the big time".

Modifié par Il Divo, 08 décembre 2011 - 04:55 .