430 réponses à ce sujet

[Someone With Mass]

Which weapons are available in the demo?

[essarr71]

King Minos wrote...

If a bully robs your money and you don't fight back, they think they can continue to do it as you won't do anything to stop. it.

Except Bioware doesn't beat you up if you don't pay them.

Early indications certainly seem like they made something people are really happy with.. sooo you're upset that a company wouldn't try to keep giving them that product?  Or upset that they'd charge someone for their work?

[Bhaal]

But even Baldur's Gate had multiplayer:? Why all the fuss now?

Modifié par Adakutay, 13 février 2012 - 09:42 .

[Arppis]

Ok I played few games on "bronze" diffculty. I just unlocked Krogan Soldier and some cool stuff for my M8 rifle. I tried Vanguard, but I think Soldier is MUCH better in the multiplayer (scoring top score in every game I have been at, but it's understandable, as people are still learning stuff). I can just hose those enemies down with my M8. I have Mattock, but I don't really like the gun that much.

Also it seems like "gun versions" are back in ME3. You get diffirent level guns "1, 2, 3, etc..".
And well... you can unlock characters trough these "boxes". It kinda sucks because it's random, I really wish I had male version of Vaguard open, so I could give it a serious try.

Well I'll play some more tommorrow!

EDIT: Oh and I think that rolling being on same button as taking cover HAS TO GO, it's really poorly done in this game. Most of the time I'll be rolling when I don't want and I'm NEVER sure when the character goes against the wall and when he will just keep rolling against it.

Modifié par Arppis, 13 février 2012 - 09:44 .

[Pattonesque]

King Minos wrote...

Pattonesque wrote...

King Minos wrote...

Fasty1 wrote...

king minos, some of us have friends that we want to play mass effect with because being lonely is never fun XD

Some games that focus on gunplay actually benefit with multiplayer and make the overall experience better.

Gears of War, Killzone, Halo, Resistance and Call of Duty actually focus on gameplay and shooting elements therefore multiplayer actually suits it.

But Dead Space? Mass Effect? Darkness 2, Bioshock2 and God damn Dragon Age 3 (according to rumours)?

If people have fun with multiplayer, then it's not really tacked-on, is it?

Just because the perfect game you created in your head doesn't exist doesn't mean that you have to get all mad about it.

It's not the fact that people enjoy it, it's that fact that every developer has to add some kind of multiplayer feature THINKING that it will make their game instantly great with perfect scores.

So you're mad because adding a fun multiplayer mode will lead to more fun, which leads to better scores, which leads to more developers wanting to add fleshed-out multiplayer modes to their games?

[RocketManSR2]

Damn it, Minos, it's still very much Mass Effect. That makes this particular MP special. The powers, gameplay, enemies, and whatever else is from the SP. It took no time at all for me to get comfortable. I hated the Horde mode on Gears 3. I couldn't stand it at all. ME3 has a very fun MP, even if fairly basic.

[King Minos]

Loreshield wrote...

King Minos wrote...

Every ****ing developer believes that adding multiplayer makes their game 'great'. Are developers unsure theirs games are not good enough?

OK, now to be fair, I can absolutely see your point. But honestly, I think you are reading WAAAAAY too much into this. Sure, you could turn out to be right, but there appears to be just as much evidence for that as for any other outcome. The only thing that CAN be done at this point is lean back and see where it goes. If it works and people enjoy it, why on Earth not go with it?

In short: "Relax, Minos, you're going to give yourself an ulcer."

Mark me words, no literally, save my post and read it in 5 years time.

Every game will practically have some sort of ****ty multiplayer add-on and single player focus games will diminish. And Bioware's games will all have multiplayer, some games with more of a focus than single player but they will have some sort of multiplayer addition.

One company needs to have their game fail. Preferably one that in the past had a huge focus on single player and on the story until the latest one has a cheap horde like game mode.

If that fails and blows up in their face, destroying their company in the process then hopefully, every god damn developer will get it through their skulls that multiplayer does not = great success.

God I the gaming industry.

[The Dark Knight of Steel]

just a quick question to be playing multiplayer right now I need both bf3 and the early single player demo so since I don't have the so demo I have to wait till tomorrow?

[WizenSlinky0]

Pattonesque wrote...

So you're mad because adding a fun multiplayer mode will lead to more fun, which leads to better scores, which leads to more developers wanting to add fleshed-out multiplayer modes to their games?

No, he's mad because if multiplayer is successful enough bioware will start slacking in the story and character department in order to put extra effort into their multiplayer modes, thereby converting Bioware into a company that no longer makes some of the best story-based games around in a market that is already hurting majorly for them.

[RocketManSR2]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Which weapons are available in the demo?

You start with the basics: Avenger, Shuriken, Katana (I think), and Predator. I unlocked the Tempest, too. Didn't unlock any others yet.

- You can also use credits earned in MP to purchase things from a store that can get you weapon mods, too. I got a couple of shotty mods that increase accuracy by 30%, I think.

Modifié par RocketManSR2, 13 février 2012 - 09:49 .

[Pattonesque]

WizenSlinky0 wrote...

Pattonesque wrote...

So you're mad because adding a fun multiplayer mode will lead to more fun, which leads to better scores, which leads to more developers wanting to add fleshed-out multiplayer modes to their games?

No, he's mad because if multiplayer is successful enough bioware will start slacking in the story and character department in order to put extra effort into their multiplayer modes, thereby converting Bioware into a company that no longer makes some of the best story-based games around in a market that is already hurting majorly for them.

How the hell does one follow the other?

[StartOrange]

King Minos wrote...

I respect that you have no outright called me a troll, and the fact that your giving your own opinion must mean that you know where i am coming from right?

Surely I am not the only person who sees this?

Multiplayer is not an amazing new feature like it ws before.

I see where you're coming from, but I think you are overreacting.

We all know EA is the scourge of gaming, but they have actually evolved and they have learned from mistakes in the past. EA's primary goal is to make money and their good at it. If Bioware loses it's audience, they will make less money. Sure, they may try cheap tactics sometimes, but I still very much doubt this will be another Dead Space. Perhaps a bad comparision, but I think you get it.

[King Minos]

essarr71 wrote...

King Minos wrote...

If a bully robs your money and you don't fight back, they think they can continue to do it as you won't do anything to stop. it.

Except Bioware doesn't beat you up if you don't pay them.

Early indications certainly seem like they made something people are really happy with.. sooo you're upset that a company wouldn't try to keep giving them that product?  Or upset that they'd charge someone for their work?

Are you even reading my posts or just being dense on purpose?

What i am trying to say is MULTIPLAYER does not always mean your game will be super awesome and will horde in a **** load of cash.

Single player has it's benefits and has always proven to be successful in the past. Skyrim and Batman Arkham City are great examples.

The Call of Duty mindset has poisoned gaming. (Yearly release with the same multiplayer content and always somehow gets more than 4 million per game).

There is absolutely nothing wrong with single player games.

[KayB1991]

 hope they put that form online soon for early access, i really eant to try this out already, if only my older brother didn't use my online code for battlefield 3<_<

[King Minos]

WizenSlinky0 wrote...

Pattonesque wrote...

So you're mad because adding a fun multiplayer mode will lead to more fun, which leads to better scores, which leads to more developers wanting to add fleshed-out multiplayer modes to their games?

No, he's mad because if multiplayer is successful enough bioware will start slacking in the story and character department in order to put extra effort into their multiplayer modes, thereby converting Bioware into a company that no longer makes some of the best story-based games around in a market that is already hurting majorly for them.

This is exactly what my point is.

This multiplayer add-on is destroying the gaming industry. It will take more than a slap to stop this, a big games developer needs to literally crumble before it get's through developers heads that multiplayer does not always guaranteed a success.

It's like multiplayer is your passport to riches and every company is trying to do this.

[WizenSlinky0]

Pattonesque wrote...

WizenSlinky0 wrote...

Pattonesque wrote...

So you're mad because adding a fun multiplayer mode will lead to more fun, which leads to better scores, which leads to more developers wanting to add fleshed-out multiplayer modes to their games?

No, he's mad because if multiplayer is successful enough bioware will start slacking in the story and character department in order to put extra effort into their multiplayer modes, thereby converting Bioware into a company that no longer makes some of the best story-based games around in a market that is already hurting majorly for them.

How the hell does one follow the other?

Game development is resource intensive. If you put additional time into multiplayer something has to give in order to avoid the budget and time commitment going up.

In this case, I think bioware handled it perfectly. A seperate team did each. I like that approach very much, however, I doubt that will stick. It's far more common for a single developer to do both, thereby one experience inherently, must have gotten more attention. And whichever proves more profitable will normally become the focus of developer resources.

Mind you, he is speaking in a worst case scenario manner, but story-based games have been dying to make way for more multiplayer games for a long time now. It's natural for frustrations to start boiling over.

[Arppis]

KayB1991 wrote...

 hope they put that form online soon for early access, i really eant to try this out already, if only my older brother didn't use my online code for battlefield 3<_<

Would be win/win for everyone. More players = more fun. :happy:

[King Minos]

Honestly, to those who replied to me with honest opinions i respect you and i thank you for not outright calling me a troll but for listening and responding to my posts in an adult manner. BSN does have some hope then.

[Hyrist]

Minos is one of those alarmists haters who think adding a new feature to the game instantly detracts away from the single player experience.

He has not played SWTOR yet, obviously.

[Loreshield]

King Minos wrote...

If that fails and blows up in their face, destroying their company in the process then hopefully, every god damn developer will get it through their skulls that multiplayer does not = great success.

Oh, by all means, of course not. But multiplayer also does not = great failure. Which is why I said that ultimately, whether one is enthusiastic or worried about the inclusion of MP in ME3, we'll all just have to wait and see how it turns out before rendering judgment.

I like what I've seen so far, but obviously, I can't tell whether it's good or bad until I have played it myself and know how it "feels". If it turns out that it sucks, I'll never touch it again. If it's good, I'll probably invest a good chunk of spare time in it. Considering that I expect everyone else to do the same, it will likely send an appropriate signal to BioWare whether or not their effort MP-wise is ultimately appreciated (servers abandoned two weeks after launch = probably not a good sign - active community years after launch = looks like it worked).

[King Minos]

This is why i want multiplayer to hurt and damage Mass Effect 3 overall score. Because then it will show multiplayer does not = $$$, amazing reviews and a huge fanbase.

Look at what Mass Effect 1 and 2 and Dragon Age Originshas achieved. This forum. BSN has a huge amount of users, it has exploded in users and it will continue to grow.

We may all ****, whine, cry and complain. But you are all here for one reason, you have enjoyed their previous games. Dragon Age 2 was poor and it has soured some members here but your still here because of those previous games.

Multiplayer is not needed and i believe and hope it will damage Bioware in the future.

Modifié par King Minos, 13 février 2012 - 09:55 .

[SykoWolf]

Man if I didn't have to get to my CO in an hour, I'd on all day. (I've been playing since it came out at around 5 in the morning where I am.

[siarheicka]

RocketManSR2 wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

Which weapons are available in the demo?

You start with the basics: Avenger, Shuriken, Katana (I think), and Predator. I unlocked the Tempest, too. Didn't unlock any others yet.

- You can also use credits earned in MP to purchase things from a store that can get you weapon mods, too. I got a couple of shotty mods that increase accuracy by 30%, I think.

Are the credits you earn attached to that particular character or are earned into a common pool?
(I.e., if earn creds as solider, can I spend them on my infiltrator?)

[Someone With Mass]

RocketManSR2 wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

Which weapons are available in the demo?

You start with the basics: Avenger, Shuriken, Katana (I think), and Predator. I unlocked the Tempest, too. Didn't unlock any others yet.

- You can also use credits earned in MP to purchase things from a store that can get you weapon mods, too. I got a couple of shotty mods that increase accuracy by 30%, I think.

Sweet. Can't wait to get my stuff going. 

[WizenSlinky0]

Hyrist wrote...

Minos is one of those alarmists haters who think adding a new feature to the game instantly detracts away from the single player experience.

He has not played SWTOR yet, obviously.

I have to run so I can't really fully flush out my opinions, but there is a difference between a paranoid alarmist and someone who happens to notice a trend.

I'm not saying it will happen to bioware but it could and some people are more frightened for that possibility than others. Multiplayer isn't just a feature. Ask any multiplayer developer...it takes a huge commitment to make one that is properly balanced, fun, and rewards players enough to keep them interested. It's not something you can *tack on* and have it do well. It needs to be flushed out. The same goes for single-player stories...you can't tack on a story and expect the single-player to be good. It needs to be fully realized.

So, if you have a single developer doing both, 9 times out of 10 one of those modes will be terrible (there are a few developers who have, surprisingly, been able to do both quite consistantly).

SWTOR is the opposite of this argument. It is a multiplayer that has attempted to mix in single-player experiences (ie. story-based gameplay). It's a very interesting concept that I've payed a lot of attention to. I'm not quite sure it's been worked enough to be feasible as a long-term genre though.