171 réponses à ce sujet

[Lemina Ausa]

Elazul2k wrote...

Dragon Age has always been designed for a single player experience. For instance the pause function. Multiplayer would completely destroy that functionality since you cannot have one person pausing a multiperson game. This would in effect cause combat to have to be completely redone and would remove the tactical aspect of the game completely away.

Not sure if you have ever played baldur's gate. The pause combat and assign orders function originated FROM baldur's gate. In fact, DA's combat is almost exactly like BG, and BG was totally fine with MP - BG allowed the pause function in single player, and in multi player removed it.

Modifié par Lemina Ausa, 16 août 2012 - 08:05 .

[ladyofpayne]

Dragon age 3 multiplayer NO! NO! NO! And NOOOOOOOOOO!
Because I want very good single game. DA 3 don't need multiplayer- developers give him too much time and DA 3 will be short like ME 3.

[Beerfish]

Elazul2k wrote...

wonder mage wrote...
JUST WHY ARE PEOPLE AGAINST MULTIPLAYER? ITS NOT COMPULSORY BUT A CHOICE .

Because its been proven time and again game after game that splitting resources away from the development of a solid single player experience detracts from the main game. I for one would rather have a solid highly polished single player game with an excellent story and high replayability than say a mediocre story with rushed multiplayer added that serves no purpose but to appease those that must have multiplayer on every single game for no reason. It will detract from the development of the story and the gameplay on the single player side. Bethseda gets this but sadly almost every other game company does not. Bioware USED to get this until they released Mass Effect 3... which I never did buy because Bioware forced us to use Origin, added multiplayer, and overall just tanked the quality of the franchise. I don't really expect to be buying Dragon Age 3(or any other Bioware game ever again) either unless they get back to their roots.

Except this didnt happen in ME3, a whole other section of the compnay did multuiplayer essentially independantly.  Multiplayer had zero to do with the problems in ME3.

[Beerfish]

Elazul2k wrote...


I won't deny the fact that I hate the idea of Multiplayer in Dragon Age. In fact I would say if Dragon Age 3 has multiplayer its a no purchase for me instantly. Dragon Age has always been designed for a single player experience. For instance the pause function. Multiplayer would completely destroy that functionality since you cannot have one person pausing a multiperson game. This would in effect cause combat to have to be completely redone and would remove the tactical aspect of the game completely away. Instead of Dragon Age you would have Call of Ferelden: Modern Warfare. No thanks I will pass.

Not correct.  There is no pause in Me3 multiplayer.  I thought I would not be able to play me3 multiplayer because I am a serial pauser in single playr games.  I was wrong, after a fairly short period of time one gets used to having to pause.  Multiplayer is a surprsingly fun addtion to ME3 and I can see it happening for DA3 as well.  Multiplayer had nothing at all to do with some of the poor parts of ME3.

[EricHVela]

Resources were shared in ME3 between MP and SP.

ME3 multiplayer and ME3 single player were developed by two groups ... that closely coordinated with each other so that the controls, interface, pacing and all were shared with each other rather than design a game that was purely MP or purely SP. (In ME3, SP gameplay gave right-of-way to the MP style.) Yes. You can fault MP for ME3's SP shortfalls.

You can divide the workload all that you want, but you cannot divide the one game that they're developing together in the same manner.

[Beerfish]

ReggarBlane wrote...

Resources were shared in ME3 between MP and SP.

ME3 multiplayer and ME3 single player were developed by two groups ... that closely coordinated with each other so that the controls, interface, pacing and all were shared with each other rather than design a game that was purely MP or purely SP. (In ME3, SP gameplay gave right-of-way to the MP style.) Yes. You can fault MP for ME3's SP shortfalls.

You can divide the workload all that you want, but you cannot divide the one game that they're developing together in the same manner.

How can you make the claim that is in bold?  ME3 style of play was not much different than previous version of the game with no mp.  I can only assume that you are another membmer of the legion of people that the moment mp is mentioned they lump all the ills of a splayer game on the back of mp when it is far far from the truth.  There is no hard evidence I can see that mp negatively affected the sp game at all.  MP had nothing to do with the wriign at the end, with the random quest system, with the sections of the game that were poorly written vs the ones that were well written.

MP is a huge scapegoat for a lot of people.

[Elazul2k]

Beerfish wrote...

Elazul2k wrote...


I won't deny the fact that I hate the idea of Multiplayer in Dragon Age. In fact I would say if Dragon Age 3 has multiplayer its a no purchase for me instantly. Dragon Age has always been designed for a single player experience. For instance the pause function. Multiplayer would completely destroy that functionality since you cannot have one person pausing a multiperson game. This would in effect cause combat to have to be completely redone and would remove the tactical aspect of the game completely away. Instead of Dragon Age you would have Call of Ferelden: Modern Warfare. No thanks I will pass.

Not correct.  There is no pause in Me3 multiplayer.  I thought I would not be able to play me3 multiplayer because I am a serial pauser in single playr games.  I was wrong, after a fairly short period of time one gets used to having to pause.  Multiplayer is a surprsingly fun addtion to ME3 and I can see it happening for DA3 as well.  Multiplayer had nothing at all to do with some of the poor parts of ME3.

And that is a completely different problem all together. Dragon Age is NOT Mass Effect. Mass Effect is a shooter/rpg game and Dragon Age is SUPPOSED to be just an RPG game. Shooters and multiplayer work together really well.

I never purchased ME3 due to Multiplayer, requiring Origin, and the dumbing down of the franchise so I will not coment much on its actual gameplay. However, the different between combat in ME1 and ME2 was obvious. ME1 was a far superior game in just about every way to ME2 when looking from an RPG perspective. The same can be said between Dragon Age Origins and Dragon Age 2. The original was the better in every way when looking at it from an RPG perspective.

And you can see they tried it with Dragon Age 2 and it didnt work out. They tried making Dragon Age 2 more like Mass Effect 2 and it turned out to be the worst game in the franchise thus far. Bioware needs to get it out of their heads that Dragon Age 3 needs to be like Mass Effect because the gameplay is not supposed to be the same. Dragon Age is supposed to be more tactical instead of bum rushing the 100 waves of enemies as Commander She.... Hawke.

[Boss Fog]

Elazul2k wrote...

Beerfish wrote...

Elazul2k wrote...


I won't deny the fact that I hate the idea of Multiplayer in Dragon Age. In fact I would say if Dragon Age 3 has multiplayer its a no purchase for me instantly. Dragon Age has always been designed for a single player experience. For instance the pause function. Multiplayer would completely destroy that functionality since you cannot have one person pausing a multiperson game. This would in effect cause combat to have to be completely redone and would remove the tactical aspect of the game completely away. Instead of Dragon Age you would have Call of Ferelden: Modern Warfare. No thanks I will pass.

Not correct.  There is no pause in Me3 multiplayer.  I thought I would not be able to play me3 multiplayer because I am a serial pauser in single playr games.  I was wrong, after a fairly short period of time one gets used to having to pause.  Multiplayer is a surprsingly fun addtion to ME3 and I can see it happening for DA3 as well.  Multiplayer had nothing at all to do with some of the poor parts of ME3.

And that is a completely different problem all together. Dragon Age is NOT Mass Effect. Mass Effect is a shooter/rpg game and Dragon Age is SUPPOSED to be just an RPG game. Shooters and multiplayer work together really well.

I never purchased ME3 due to Multiplayer, requiring Origin, and the dumbing down of the franchise so I will not coment much on its actual gameplay. However, the different between combat in ME1 and ME2 was obvious. ME1 was a far superior game in just about every way to ME2 when looking from an RPG perspective. The same can be said between Dragon Age Origins and Dragon Age 2. The original was the better in every way when looking at it from an RPG perspective.

And you can see they tried it with Dragon Age 2 and it didnt work out. They tried making Dragon Age 2 more like Mass Effect 2 and it turned out to be the worst game in the franchise thus far. Bioware needs to get it out of their heads that Dragon Age 3 needs to be like Mass Effect because the gameplay is not supposed to be the same. Dragon Age is supposed to be more tactical instead of bum rushing the 100 waves of enemies as Commander She.... Hawke.

Yet again, you're falsely assuming the MP would be a reskin of the ME3 multiplayer.  If you're simply assuming this because DA2 borrowed a few features from ME...  then you're just flat out wrong.  Laidlaw already stated that if they were to pursue a MP function for DA3, they would base it off of the Baldur's Gate system, NOT the ME franchise.  So again, I don't understand why you keep bringing up ME; despite what you think DA2 still has MUCH more in common with DA:O than it does ME.

Modifié par TelvanniWarlord, 16 août 2012 - 09:13 .

[Iakus]

TelvanniWarlord wrote...

Yet again, you're falsely assuming the MP would be a reskin of the ME3 multiplayer.  If you're simply assuming this because DA2 borrowed a few features from ME...  then you're just flat out wrong.  Laidlaw already stated that if they were to pursue a MP function for DA3, they would base it off of the Baldur's Gate system, NOT the ME franchise.  So again, I don't understand why you keep bringing up ME; despite what you think DA2 still has MUCH more in common with DA:O than it does ME.

Out of curiosity, where did he say that?

[Boss Fog]

iakus wrote...

TelvanniWarlord wrote...

Yet again, you're falsely assuming the MP would be a reskin of the ME3 multiplayer.  If you're simply assuming this because DA2 borrowed a few features from ME...  then you're just flat out wrong.  Laidlaw already stated that if they were to pursue a MP function for DA3, they would base it off of the Baldur's Gate system, NOT the ME franchise.  So again, I don't understand why you keep bringing up ME; despite what you think DA2 still has MUCH more in common with DA:O than it does ME.

Out of curiosity, where did he say that?

Here.

[labargegrrrl]

multiplayer sooooo shouldn't be done. i've said it before and i'll say it again. i don't play games to f*ing socialize. if they want to make a separate DA game that can do that crap for those who are into it then fine. but don't drag DA3 into it. it's going to have enough trouble as it is.

[Huntress]

Bioware servers are terrible... with the forced connection it make the singleplayer game lag's so much.. DA2 was the worst until they patched the game to not log when you said: DO NOT log to their crappy server. meh

gosh I should stop right here because I really don't give a goat crap about multiplayers.
hmmm
Well I suppose thats what this company wants.. here is a hint bioware, get a better server or better yet get multiples servers and read the players posts of getting disconnected from the multiplayer games from yesterday and today that will give you a hint of how bad you're server is.

[subtle kirjava]

Yeah, let's have multiplayer for Dragon Age too because it went so well for ME.

It was fun in ME for like a day and then got old real quick.

[BatmanPWNS]

Hopefully the DA3 MP won't be as boring and dull as the ME3 one.

[Cartims]

Rawgrim wrote...

wonder mage wrote...

well after DA2's ending its obvious that DA3 is coming and also the teasers on youtube confirm it. As for the game is concerned i think DA3 is on the right track. what i really want from DA3 is multiple talents, attributes and weapons to choose from and especially customization. i think DAO and DA2 are fairly simple to play with not so may talents and weapons that differ to choose from. Also the tactics and positioning are quite simple. it would be awesome if there are tons of new companions so there are more dialogue choices and the more the companions the more the fun it is to play the game again. The most shocking thing would be if there is multiplayer and you can play along with your friends in your own house.

i think for now customization, multiplayer and story with decisions that matter should be bioware's main aim.

JUST WHY ARE PEOPLE AGAINST MULTIPLAYER? ITS NOT COMPULSORY BUT A CHOICE .

Its not a choice. Try getting the perfect ending in ME3 without playing multiplayer...

Lets say DA3 has multiplayer. i run into an elf named 1ownZU-93...Yeah...good for immersion that. Immersion is kind of important in rpgs.

I played MP numerous times and I haved failed to get the "perfect ending", what is that again?

Modifié par Cartims, 20 août 2012 - 02:46 .

[Arch1eviathan]

CrustyBot wrote...

Filament wrote...

I want to be able to trade my companions with a link cable.

"It's super effective! blood mage fainted."

[Ravensword]

More people are worried about DA3 having MP than if DA3 will actually be a good game or not.

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

Ravensword wrote...

More people are worried about DA3 having MP than if DA3 will actually be a good game or not.

But always MP = bad SP

[Ravensword]

DinoSteve wrote...

Ravensword wrote...

More people are worried about DA3 having MP than if DA3 will actually be a good game or not.

But always MP = bad SP

Why do you think so? MP didn't kill ME3's SP. The writing did.

[Little Princess Peach]

Arch1eviathan wrote...

CrustyBot wrote...

Filament wrote...

I want to be able to trade my companions with a link cable.

"It's super effective! blood mage fainted."

I can really see that happining throwing a mage ball and fenris attacking a blood mage then the pokemon theme song will stat toplay in the background o.O

[Giltspur]

Assuming you don't use your single-player characters, they could put in lots of races and factions to choose from and have differing talent trees for all of them:

Races: Elves, Dwarves, Humans, Kossith
Factions: Seekers, Templars, Grey Wardens, Circle Mages, Tevinter Mages, Tal'Vashoth, Antivan Crows, etc.

[Huntress]

Ravensword wrote...

More people are worried about DA3 having MP than if DA3 will actually be a good game or not.

Where did you read that? link please.

I am more worried of bioware pushing something like inquisitor as main character to tell the truth... I rather play a dalish Elf than a human-inquistor. I have no hopes that this DA3 would be good at all, many of DA the lore has been trashed out.
But I do want to be mistaken thats why am here and because I want to see how bad Hawke ends in Bioware story.
I must face the crude truth that Hawke will end up  same way as Shepard.

[Ravensword]

Huntress wrote...

Ravensword wrote...

More people are worried about DA3 having MP than if DA3 will actually be a good game or not.

Where did you read that? link please.

I am more worried of bioware pushing something like inquisitor as main character to tell the truth... I rather play a dalish Elf than a human-inquistor. I have no hopes that this DA3 would be good at all, many of DA the lore has been trashed out.
But I do want to be mistaken thats why am here and because I want to see how bad Hawke ends in Bioware story.
I must face the crude truth that Hawke will end up  same way as Shepard.

I didn't read it anywhere. I was just making an observation that people seem to care more about whether or not DA3 is gonna have MP, rather than caring about whether or not the game is gonna actually be good regardless of whether or not it has MP.