232 réponses à ce sujet

[humes spork]

NeecHMonkeY wrote...

What you wrote makes perfect sense... but it still suggests that you can't achieve 100% of the potential War Asset points unless you play the Multiplayer.

I know you can still beat the single player without touching anything else but aren't we still missing out on something that we were told we wouldn't if we only go down that route?

No, war assets are what you get in single player. Getting 100% of the war assets is...well, getting 100% of the war assets. That on its own doesn't affect anything.

Now to have an EMS equal to your war assets you have to play multiplayer to get the 100% galactic readiness modifier. As I said,

(war assets) x (galactic readiness) = (effective military strength)

EMS is what dictates the final outcome. Not war assets, not galactic readiness. War assets times galactic readiness equals effective military strength.

[panamakira]

Well too bad for you. I like multiplayer and have no issue playing both campaigns. However, it's been said that you don't need MP to have complete readiness in SP~

[felipejiraya]

NeecHMonkeY wrote...

Nashiktal wrote...

NeecHMonkeY wrote...

This has now been confirmed.

What happened to being able to achieve everything just by playing the Single Player campaign?

You are both right and wrong.

Indeed, you can only get 100% galactic readiness if you play multiplayer. However you are confusing galactic readiness, with war assets. 

This is how it works. The game assumes, if you do not touch multiplayer, that you have a galactic readiness of 50%. Now galactic readiness is how prepared the galaxy is for facing the reapers. HOWEVER, galactic readiness by itself DOES NOTHING.

What galactic readiness ACTUALLY does gameplay wise, is determine how useful your war assets are once you obtain them.

What you actually need to beat the game are war assets. Galactic readiness only modifies how much war assets are worth. Still following me?

Here is an example. War assets are worth a certain amount of points. In this random example, lets say we save a human fleet. Lets say that human fleet is worth 1000 points. Well this is where galactic readiness comes in. The game starts with 50% war readiness, and it stays that way if you don't touch multiplayer.

So we take the asset, which is 1000 points, and multiply it by the war readiness. (50% which =0.5)

So 1000 x 0.5 = 500. 

As such the war asset, since the galaxy is only 50% ready, cuts the worth of the asset in half. So the 1000 point.

YOU CAN BEAT THE GAME WITHOUT EVER TOUCHING MULTIPLAYER.

The only thing multiplayer does, is improve how many points war assets are earned. So lets say we play multiplayer and bump the readiness up to 75%...

1000 x .75 = 750

See?

What you wrote makes perfect sense... but it still suggests that you can't achieve 100% of the potential War Asset points unless you play the Multiplayer.

I know you can still beat the single player without touching anything else but aren't we still missing out on something that we were told we wouldn't if we only go down that route?

No.

[MJF JD]

you arent missing out on anything by not doing multiplayer. Readiness is a multiplier for the war assets. the war assets only have an effect on the last mission of the game and you can reach the amount required through single player content only.

Modifié par MJF JD, 06 mars 2012 - 03:49 .

[HydraNiel]

If you don't want to do MP, do all the sidequests for 100% GR. If you feel like playing MP, then you can skip some of the sidequests in SP to also achieve 100%.

No need to worry.

[SnowHeart1]

Thanks, Nashiktal. That helps to explain things in a bit better detail. As much as I enjoy the idea of jumping off a bridge just because everyone is doing it, it's nice to know that I don't have to.

[dw99027]

Just a numerical example to prove why this is a non issue:



Points needed for 'perfect' ending - 4000

Total points available in SP - 5000

Points required to fill your 'Readiness' bar - 7000

Total points available in both SP and MP - 10000

[drak4806.2]

You actually don't need 100% GR to get the best ending i think you only need 80%.

[lucidfox]

Preorder cancelled!

[HappyHappyJoyJoy]

Is it true the multiplier goes down over time?

[MrFob]

Ok, now let's turn this thing around. Let's say I want to do a "worst playthourgh" at some point but I already played multiplayer. Can I somehow start a n SP campaign where my MP GAW doesn't factor in? I think I remember reading ages ago that you could choose to have an MP unaffected SP playthrough when you start a new game. Is that accurate?
And is the GAW saved on your profile (in my case MrFob) or is it tied to a specific Shep (e.g. Cmdr. Wupdidoo Shepard)? I am guessing it's the profile but it would be nice if we had the choice to either tie every single Shep we have into that system or not.

[az350z]

HappyHappyJoyJoy wrote...

Is it true the multiplier goes down over time?

I watched a small amount of the IGN live stream today, and they did say your readiness goes down over time, and that you have to keep playing multiplayer to keep it at 100%.

Modifié par az350z, 06 mars 2012 - 04:01 .

[UKillMeLongTime]

I am going to save a lot and if I don't meet a timer I'll just replay it. I assume you can do that......lol
damn sure hope so

[Redcoat]

Dezu wrote...

If you don't want to do MP, do all the sidequests for 100% GR. If you feel like playing MP, then you can skip some of the sidequests in SP to also achieve 100%.

No need to worry.

Except for the slight problem that the sidequests have a time limit on them (which the game may or may not tell you about), so it's possible that you could wind up being unable to obtain a high enough score in SP to get the best ending. In that case you'd be forced to either play MP (bad news for people who bought the game used) or start a new play-through.

[Nashiktal]

az350z wrote...

HappyHappyJoyJoy wrote...

Is it true the multiplier goes down over time?

I watched a small amount of the IGN live stream today, and they did say your readiness goes down over time, and that you have to keep playing multiplayer to keep it at 100%.

This is true, but it never falls below 50%.

[MJF JD]

Redcoat wrote...

Dezu wrote...

If you don't want to do MP, do all the sidequests for 100% GR. If you feel like playing MP, then you can skip some of the sidequests in SP to also achieve 100%.

No need to worry.

Except for the slight problem that the sidequests have a time limit on them (which the game may or may not tell you about), so it's possible that you could wind up being unable to obtain a high enough score in SP to get the best ending. In that case you'd be forced to either play MP (bad news for people who bought the game used) or start a new play-through.

sidequests dont have some little hidden countdown timer.  Just do them before you do the next big main quest mission.  

[NeecHMonkeY]

MJF JD wrote...

Redcoat wrote...

Dezu wrote...

If you don't want to do MP, do all the sidequests for 100% GR. If you feel like playing MP, then you can skip some of the sidequests in SP to also achieve 100%.

No need to worry.

Except for the slight problem that the sidequests have a time limit on them (which the game may or may not tell you about), so it's possible that you could wind up being unable to obtain a high enough score in SP to get the best ending. In that case you'd be forced to either play MP (bad news for people who bought the game used) or start a new play-through.

sidequests dont have some little hidden countdown timer.  Just do them before you do the next big main quest mission.  

But unfortunately, you aren't even notified when receiving some side-quests (according to the IGN Review in Progress) as you get them just by overhearing someone's conversation when you walk past them.

This system is very much a subtle way of forcing people to play the Multiplayer if they want to achieve the best ending... at least on the first playthrough where people are bound to miss things while trying to understand how everything works and plays in ME3.

Even though I don't like the system and how it works at all, in a way, it's quite clever.

[AlanC9]

You hold a very low opinion of ME players, NeecHMonkeY.

[NeecHMonkeY]

AlanC9 wrote...

You hold a very low opinion of ME players, NeecHMonkeY.

Remember... it's all about the CoD audience and mass market appeal now. Bioware doesn't have much concern for RPG fans anymore.

Modifié par NeecHMonkeY, 06 mars 2012 - 04:32 .

[graciegrace]

Readiness is averaged with another score, which is single player, and you can get the score to reach the average necessary just by doing the other score

[lrrose]

It's been said already, but Readiness just reduces the amount of war assets you need to get the best ending. There are more than enough war assets to get the best ending without using mulitplayer.

Modifié par lrrose, 06 mars 2012 - 04:34 .

[AlanC9]

NeecHMonkeY wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

You hold a very low opinion of ME players, NeecHMonkeY.

Remember... it's all about the CoD audience and mass market appeal now. Bioware doesn't have much concern for RPG fans anymore.

I thought RPG fans weren't supposed to be stupid, though. Aren't we supposed to be the smart ones? You'd have to be pretty stupid to miss more than a couple sidequests this way. Unless you're rushing, like that IGN reviewer presumably was.

Edit: Oh, who am I kidding? RPG players are stupid, on average. The quality of play in RPGs is really awful, judging from  BG, NWN, and DAO gameplay threads. Maybe this genre attracts people who can't hack the competitive genres.

So I guess you're right after all.

Modifié par AlanC9, 06 mars 2012 - 04:38 .

[HairyMadDog1010]

Readyness and war assets are 2 diffrent things readyness is a multiplayer that increaces war assets earned. You can still get the best ending with no multiplayer.

[HydraNiel]

NeecHMonkeY wrote...

MJF JD wrote...

Redcoat wrote...

Dezu wrote...

If you don't want to do MP, do all the sidequests for 100% GR. If you feel like playing MP, then you can skip some of the sidequests in SP to also achieve 100%.

No need to worry.

Except for the slight problem that the sidequests have a time limit on them (which the game may or may not tell you about), so it's possible that you could wind up being unable to obtain a high enough score in SP to get the best ending. In that case you'd be forced to either play MP (bad news for people who bought the game used) or start a new play-through.

sidequests dont have some little hidden countdown timer.  Just do them before you do the next big main quest mission.  

But unfortunately, you aren't even notified when receiving some side-quests (according to the IGN Review in Progress) as you get them just by overhearing someone's conversation when you walk past them.

This system is very much a subtle way of forcing people to play the Multiplayer if they want to achieve the best ending... at least on the first playthrough where people are bound to miss things while trying to understand how everything works and plays in ME3.

Even though I don't like the system and how it works at all, in a way, it's quite clever.

I don't like the system either but you have a point there, making players explore every aspect of the game. The timing on the side quests does suck, and I highly doubt people will be getting a side quest and proceeding to do it asap, there's a reason they're called "side", do on your own time.

But anyways, I will play the MP because frankly I loved it, but the reduction of your War Assets as time passes is pure bull.

[Sonintega]

How are people still freaking about this? Multiplayer adds, not detracts, from the main game. People don't care about diplomacy or completionism can compensate for their losses in the main game from multiplayer play and still finish the game optimally. It's inclusivity. It's not that scary. And making the N7 missions time-out is logical. War time setting. If you're informed of calamity in progress and you wait around, it should stop being in progress at some point. Reapers have better things to do than wait on your lazy ass to show up. Makes total sense. So, prioritize side missions, act efficiently, and don't spew unrelenting hate for the multiplayer mode just for the sake of being righteously pissed off. The multiplayer's fun. Try it, Mikey. You just might like it.