82 réponses à ce sujet

[BlueEyes_Austin]

Stefan.Stege613 wrote...

I think it would be great. If they could make the multiplayer work like the Baldurs Gate series then they wouldn't have to change the game radically. Yes, you would lose the interaction to the NPCs, but replacing that with interaction with real human being would't be that much of a disaster

I agree that DA:O should never turn into say Diablo2, og even WOW. But it would be awesome to play the game 2-4 frends together.

You do realize that BG was 2D, right?

[Du Uncanny]

DM Veil wrote...

I understand the fun of multiplayer games, I enjoy them too, but I don't understand why people can't be content anymore when a single player game comes out and there is no multiplayer option. I'm glad there are still some single player only games coming out for the PC.

Because the idea of playing alone does not appeal to most people.  Being able to play with one's friends gives a game life for a long time, way over when it should have been buried.

It's a human thing: we like to share things we love with people we enjoy spending time with.  It's why NWN1 is STILL being sold new in the shops today (conversely, if you do it badly, you kill the game - aka NWN2).

[Immandel]

Just adding my thoughts to the discussion here,

From a Systems designer prospective, I would say it is possible to extend the DA engine (by the Devs) to include multiplayer support using a Client / Server Architecture.

I wouldnt think a component as such would be built from Scratch, it can be Based on NWN's Client / Server model so it will not take aeons to complete.

With that in mind I wouldn't expect the DA:O campaign to support multi-player unless it was radically modified to do so, so if there is ever to be multiplayer support it would work with upcoming content or user generated content.

For those who are complaining about multi-player balance etc, it all comes down to those who design the worlds, I have yet to look at the DA toolset but I would guess that you can change enough with it to adjust the class balance.

Also, I would say that if you do not want to play in multiplayer then you can simply stick to single player content since no one is forcing you to do otherwise.

Personally speaking I would love to see Mutli-player support added in a content patch.

[casadechrisso]

Add me to the list who'd love some NWN-style multiplayer. It's what extended the life of NWN1 and 2 for years on my comp, while otherwise great games like Witcher, Mass Effect and probably DA will last for two months, then collect dust.

And no, I don't care for MMOs, people should really learn to distinguish different styles of multiplayer.

[Immandel]

Agreed, the current main stream MMO play style is vastly different to what a traditional mutliplayer RPG is (read small group(s) Role playing games which are not necessarily played on your PC / Xbox / PS3 etc etc).



I would guess that the Bio-Devs have plans to extend the life of DA:O (or the DA franchise for that matter) , just hope that the addition of mutli-player support for DA:O is on the list =)

[Aidunno]

If this game was multiplayer I wouldn't have brought it and I'm sure some other people feel the same way..



GHL_Soul_Reaver ... Do you know what issues are involved and what coding you would need to turn a single player game into multiplayer and I assume you are talking about co-operative multiplayer not a "persistant world".



The decision was made for a single player game. DA:O2 may not be but a single player game was designed as it could reach a market not tapped for a long time and I think they were very successful. They now have a new IP which they can expand. Giving away a tool to effectively reduce the potential for further IP development as whole new campaign worlds could be created isn't something which would make good business sense.

[casadechrisso]

Aidunno wrote...

If this game was multiplayer I wouldn't have brought it and I'm sure some other people feel the same way..

See, and that's something I totally don't get... did you also decide not to play Baldur's Gate, because it had multiplayer? NWN? Seriously, if you're not interested in multiplayer, just don't play it, but did the Co-op mode of Baldur's Gate really ruin the game? You can't be serious.

[Immandel]

Aidunno wrote...

If this game was multiplayer I wouldn't have brought it and I'm sure some other people feel the same way..

Are you talking about the game in general here or just the campaign?  if its the campaign then please read what I mentioned earlier and keep that in mind when talking about multiplayer.

The decision was made for a single player game. DA:O2 may not be but a single player game was designed as it could reach a market not tapped for a long time and I think they were very successful. They now have a new IP which they can expand. Giving away a tool to effectively reduce the potential for further IP development as whole new campaign worlds could be created isn't something which would make good business sense.

I partially agree with what you're saying here, having said that you need to consider the DA Engine as a platform rather than an application, the more accessible and feature rich a development platform is the higher the chance people are going to use it (be it builders or end users) which means more sales at the end.

Read this when you get the chance you might find some interesting information regarding the above =)
www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/Platforms.html

Edit: By feature rich I meant DA having a mutli-player component.

Modifié par Immandel, 16 décembre 2009 - 11:54 .