171 réponses à ce sujet

[BringSomeGoodCo-opRPGs]

http://www.youtube.c...feature=mh_lolz

And I think this would be great type of co-op (or something similar) for Dragon Age
Just see all videos to gain complex view
You should see that co-op is not worse then singleplayer/or singleplayer isn´t worse then co-op
And you don´t need any online registration or whatever-both in online and LAN
So this should be how it would be done-rather then generic horde mode of ME3 multiplayer
And in few last videos you can see two different resolve of very bad situation (diplomatic or aggresive way)
As somebody say that it don´t fit into Bioware games-remember Baldur´s Gate,NWN or you just know only Dragon Age or Dragon Age II?

Modifié par BringSomeGoodCo-opRPGs, 25 août 2012 - 08:03 .

[Overdosing]

If they're going to try and do this, they should worry a lot more about story and not: "Well...we're just going to **** over the ending like we did the last times. Hooray!"

*sarcastic clapping*

[ElvaliaRavenHart]

No; I don't want Dragon Age to be a multi-player game. I bought a single player game for a reason. No, just no.

[Linksys17]

No to MMO!!!
NO TO ANY MULTIPLAYER!!!!
GO BACK TO OPEN WORLD TACTICAL RPG plez!

unless of course it was for artistic integrity

Modifié par Linksys17, 26 août 2012 - 04:57 .

[Penarddun]

A multiplayer could work if they did it correctly, meaning the way they did it with Baldur's Gate. Where the players get to control how they use it and when. And it didn't affect the single player experience. But somehow I doubt that is what DA3 will be. At this point I don't actually trust them to make something that I will feel like playing if it has multiplayer in it. *shrugs* I don't want to deal with a crippled game that doesn't work half the time, has a subpar storyline, or requires me to make micro purchases.

Maybe it's just my tastes in games, but I think I'm done with the Dragon Age series in its current direction. I've played DA:O three complete times and working on a fourth. I played DA:2 once... and it doesn't look like I'll be getting DA3 if it's multiplayer. Oh well.

Modifié par Penarddun, 03 septembre 2012 - 07:26 .

[Mello]

Linksys17 wrote...

No to MMO!!!
NO TO ANY MULTIPLAYER!!!!
GO BACK TO OPEN WORLD TACTICAL RPG plez!

unless of course it was for artistic integrity

Dragon Age 3 is turning into a MMO?

[markeffect13]

http://www.vg247.com...yer-experience/

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but it seems that DA3 multi is all but confirmed.

[Lord Gremlin]

Hm, I predict a lame GoW clone then. The tactical pause gameplay just don't work that way. For multiplayer you need either Diablo/Sacred style, or go for action game.
I also predict microtransactions and critical story content cut out to be sold as DLC. I get it, it worked in Baldur's Gate too, I just don't think it will work same way now.
Look, right now EA made a half-broken multiplayer for ME3 that made piles of money via microtransactions despite them being bugged. If you do a Baldur's Gate type of MP you won't be able to milk customers like that. You need ME3 style thing, where you can sell health potions and swords for $0.99.

[Dendio1]

http://www.escapistm...le-Player-Games

Gonna just leave this right here

[jbrand2002uk]

Atakuma wrote...

Elazul2k wrote...
Thats just stupid. The splitting of funds caused by dividing efforts could easily cause a story to fail to meet expectations in any number of ways. Perhaps the writer wrote a masterful piece, but since they had to split the funds, they ended up cutting down a couple of minor scenes, causing plotholes. The same could easily happen with gameplay features watering down the entire game. To think otherwise is ignoring the business aspects of making a game. I cannot think of a single example of tacked on multiplayer enchancing a game in such a way I would be willing to overlook the flaws such a game would create.

"Because I say so" isn't proof of anything. You are just blindly assuming those flaws are directly related to the inclusion of multiplayer without anything to back it up.

Ok you want proof BF3 enough said the SP story while fairly well written clearly suffers because of the cash grab MP

Modifié par jbrand2002uk, 06 septembre 2012 - 11:24 .

[BlenderisedMind]

This is depressing. It's obvious DA3 will have some sort of MP attached, I just personally won't touch it. Sad thing is if DA3 now does have MP attached, the SP will most likely be much shorter than the previous games. I guess we'll just have to wait and see what happens

[Heimdall]

BlenderisedMind wrote...

This is depressing. It's obvious DA3 will have some sort of MP attached, I just personally won't touch it. Sad thing is if DA3 now does have MP attached, the SP will most likely be much shorter than the previous games. I guess we'll just have to wait and see what happens

Oh, I don't know.  The development cycle for this game has been longer than the last at least.

[ZeshinX]

I will say simply that if Dragon Age 3 (assuming there is indeed a DA3 in the works) contains a multiplayer element of any sort, I will not purchase it.

I have no desire or intent to wish anything but success for EA and Bioware, but I will not support an ideology that MP content is necessary for a game to be financially successful with my money.

Designers and devs will regularly point out that its foolish to start speaking of such things before a title is even announced. I agree to a point, but here's the thing: by the time said title is announced, there's not a darn thing that could conceivably be changed at that point. So it's not completely foolish to voice concerns now, before a title is announced.

You can't kill the idea that MP content is required for a successful game, but you sure don't have to support it.

[terdferguson123]

I really cannot understand why people are so upset about the possible announcement of multiplayer. Bioware already stated that if multiplayer were to be in a future DA game it would be done in the same way that MP was done in BG2. Which was perfectly fine.

Modifié par terdferguson123, 06 septembre 2012 - 04:05 .

[terdferguson123]

BlenderisedMind wrote...

This is depressing. It's obvious DA3 will have some sort of MP attached, I just personally won't touch it. Sad thing is if DA3 now does have MP attached, the SP will most likely be much shorter than the previous games. I guess we'll just have to wait and see what happens

No idea where this is coming from. ME3 has a fun MP game that I played for a good chunk of time and the SP game was longer than both 1 and 2. So no, adding MP does not affect the length of the game.

[Atakuma]

jbrand2002uk wrote...

Atakuma wrote...

Elazul2k wrote...
Thats just stupid. The splitting of funds caused by dividing efforts could easily cause a story to fail to meet expectations in any number of ways. Perhaps the writer wrote a masterful piece, but since they had to split the funds, they ended up cutting down a couple of minor scenes, causing plotholes. The same could easily happen with gameplay features watering down the entire game. To think otherwise is ignoring the business aspects of making a game. I cannot think of a single example of tacked on multiplayer enchancing a game in such a way I would be willing to overlook the flaws such a game would create.

"Because I say so" isn't proof of anything. You are just blindly assuming those flaws are directly related to the inclusion of multiplayer without anything to back it up.

Ok you want proof BF3 enough said the SP story while fairly well written clearly suffers because of the cash grab MP

The previous games in that series didn't even have single player campaigns, it was just shoehorned into BF3 to appeal to COD fans. Calling the multiplayer in BF3 a cash grab clearly shows that you have no idea what you're talking about.

[BlenderisedMind]

terdferguson123 wrote...

BlenderisedMind wrote...

This is depressing. It's obvious DA3 will have some sort of MP attached, I just personally won't touch it. Sad thing is if DA3 now does have MP attached, the SP will most likely be much shorter than the previous games. I guess we'll just have to wait and see what happens

No idea where this is coming from. ME3 has a fun MP game that I played for a good chunk of time and the SP game was longer than both 1 and 2. So no, adding MP does not affect the length of the game.

ME3 felt much more compact and shorter than the previous games, well at least that's how it felt for me. I can just imagine that a game like DA with MP added would make the SP a bit shorter. It's obvious if you think about it like this, the content that would be used for the MP could have been used for the SP. That's just my opinion mate. In any case, I'm not really a multiplayer guy so yeah.

[EricHVela]

What I suspect:
The Mage-Templar War intended to set the stage for battle-ground co-op and possibly PvP.

What I hope:
The numerous polls not favoring such showed them how that would be a mistake. I would actually enjoy a co-op campaign mode, but having a singular hero makes that difficult (but not impossible).

Why:
Regardless if different teams work on the SP and MP, it is one game that will share the UI, AI and other mechanics between them as all single games with SP and MP components do. (Otherwise, they would actually make two games and sell them separately.) The MP components offer longevity of income in microtransactions. They will focus on its gameplay over SP gameplay, applying MP restrictions to SP opportunities.

What I expect:
EA's demands and vicious political competition among developer studios will push the MP aspect on a game that hasn't lent itself to perform well in a MP environment beyond a co-op campaign mode (which is very different from battle-ground multiplayer).

Of course, we can guess what will happen all that we want to do. The tell-tale signs of who was right by how much accuracy only come from the game itself.

EDIT: The important thing to remember: Dragon Age has a style that will change to something completely different if it has to work within MP contrainsts, which it must if the game shares UI, AI and other mechanics, which it will or else they would make and release two separate games.

Modifié par ReggarBlane, 06 septembre 2012 - 07:38 .

[Reznik23]

Well, I won't be pre-ordering it. I'm going to wait & check these, and other forums before I buy (I just don't trust magazines & gaming sites anymore after the Skyrim PS3 mess). If it seems that the singleplayer game is affected or compromised in any way by the multiplayer then I simply won't buy it.

People can tell me I'm jumping the gun or whatever, but that's just the way it is I'm afraid. I'm not going to waste my money on a product if it focuses on and emphasises features I'll never use.

[labargegrrrl]

Dendio1 wrote...

http://www.escapistm...le-Player-Games

Gonna just leave this right here

they've doomed the franchise in my book.  my only two big complaints about DA2 were the lack of race option and the lack of closure.  i gave up on race being key to the game, though did my share of b*tching about it.  lack of closure i wept bitter, bitter tears over when they cancelled Exalted March.

still, i've been quick to defend the direction they've been going, especially when the other DLC leaned in the direction of attempting to fix some of the lesser promlems the game had (dungeons, combat waves, etc) 

now they've decided to just ruin everything, in spite of all their progress.

i now won't preorder (though i usually let "demo the wise" decide such things for me) out of pure spite.

they'll be lucky if i buy the game at all.  even a year or so after release when the price goes down.

and while i tried to reserve my judgements about such things before, i am now an official EA hater, since it's obvious this was their d@mned pet monkey to stroke.

[Merlex]

terdferguson123 wrote...

I really cannot understand why people are so upset about the possible announcement of multiplayer. Bioware already stated that if multiplayer were to be in a future DA game it would be done in the same way that MP was done in BG2. Which was perfectly fine.

Just like they said DA was the spiritual successor to Balder's Gate. DA2 has as much in common with Balder's Gate as Super Mario Brothers. It just comes down to whether we believe them or not. Companies will claim almost anything to sell their product.

If it's like BG2 or NWN2's multi-player, fine. But i don't have that much confidence in Bioware anymore. It seems to me they just want to make Action RPG's now, to appeal to the COD crowd.

Modifié par Merlex, 09 septembre 2012 - 11:34 .

[formaristarry]

MP? No, just, no. Not in any kind of form whatsoever. They should be putting all their effort and focus into making DA3 the best SP game that they can rather than dicking around with this ridiculousness.

[Linksys17]

iPoohCupCakes wrote...

Linksys17 wrote...

No to MMO!!!
NO TO ANY MULTIPLAYER!!!!
GO BACK TO OPEN WORLD TACTICAL RPG plez!

unless of course it was for artistic integrity

Dragon Age 3 is turning into a MMO?

No it's turning into a fps mp game where you choose either an elf dwarf or human and use balistic bows to kill people on EAs server.  There will be no SP and no Characters  only create your own MP characters and youll have to purchase
new characters with MS Points, Bioware Points or whatthe****ever

[JellyBean28]

randomlycosmic wrote...

MP? No, just, no. Not in any kind of form whatsoever. They should be putting all their effort and focus into making DA3 the best SP game that they can rather than dicking around with this ridiculousness.

^ Completely agree. Why waste the time? To me, DA3 seems to be a sort of "last chance" for a lot of Bioware's customers. If they mess it up, I know many gamers who will finally say "I give up on them." Because of this, as randomlycosmic said, "They should be putting all their effort and focus into making DA3 the best SP game that they can"

[Todd23]

I am one such player. This is their last chance, if mp messes up the game. Good bye Bioware. I'm willing to see what they do with it.