Aller au contenu

Photo

Can We Agree That Multiplayer Shouldn't Be Linked To Singleplayer?


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
51 réponses à ce sujet

#26
MerchantGOL

MerchantGOL
  • Members
  • 2 316 messages

DJRackham wrote...

Bioware should have taken the resources they wasted on multiplayer and invested them in creating a more artistic ending.

i think  you mised the point of your  unfunny coment

Money has no effect ont he story written.

#27
Abraham_uk

Abraham_uk
  • Members
  • 11 713 messages
No here is an example of artistic integrity.

If your effective millitary strength is high enough,

Shepard breaths....

It's a breath of fresh air.

Multiplayer is not manditory. It never was, and it never will be.
It's a good fun addition to the game. Well fun is a matter of opinion, but I happened to like it.

#28
MerchantGOL

MerchantGOL
  • Members
  • 2 316 messages

Abraham_uk wrote...

No here is an example of artistic integrity.

If your effective millitary strength is high enough,

Shepard breaths....

It's a breath of fresh air.

Multiplayer is not manditory. It never was, and it never will be.
It's a good fun addition to the game. Well fun is a matter of opinion, but I happened to like it.

allot of people liked it.

#29
D1ck1e

D1ck1e
  • Members
  • 737 messages
I like MP, but I agree with the OP.

#30
CommanderVyse

CommanderVyse
  • Members
  • 521 messages
Multiplayer is better than the single player. There is no terrible ending in multiplayer.

#31
Hudathan

Hudathan
  • Members
  • 2 144 messages
No, I thought it was a clever way to have some different experiences in the game that still felt relevant and connected to the main story.

#32
AresKeith

AresKeith
  • Members
  • 34 128 messages

Hudathan wrote...

No, I thought it was a clever way to have some different experiences in the game that still felt relevant and connected to the main story.


I didn't know Horde mode was connected to the main story

#33
PuppiesOfDeath2

PuppiesOfDeath2
  • Members
  • 308 messages

LiarasShield wrote...

I have two issues that I'm miffed about so I will state them


1. What is the point of galactic readiness I mean me and my n7 forces could be kicking the reapers ass in every location across the galaxy beating their ass back and have 100 percent at all locations but in the end were still getting completely destroyed or our forces are not shown truely giving the reapers a good fight despite having 100 readiness at all locations and the n7 forces giving them hell


2. How does more n7 soldiers on the battlefield or readiness effect what kind of ending options their are espically when alot of them are not scientists but soldiers on the battlefield why would this change or alter what the crucible does?


Agreed.  Play MP.  Forget SP and SP DLC.

#34
Senior Cinco

Senior Cinco
  • Members
  • 709 messages
.

Modifié par Senior Cinco, 31 août 2012 - 09:12 .


#35
Hydralysk

Hydralysk
  • Members
  • 1 090 messages

AresKeith wrote...

Hudathan wrote...

No, I thought it was a clever way to have some different experiences in the game that still felt relevant and connected to the main story.


I didn't know Horde mode was connected to the main story


I think 'felt' was the operative word there. I don't think anyone actually believes what happens in multiplayer has any effect on the story. It's just a framing device for the combat.

Modifié par Hydralysk, 31 août 2012 - 09:14 .


#36
Jadebaby

Jadebaby
  • Members
  • 13 229 messages

AresKeith wrote...

Hudathan wrote...

No, I thought it was a clever way to have some different experiences in the game that still felt relevant and connected to the main story.


I didn't know Horde mode was connected to the main story


It follows the timeline, this much is known by Hacket's speeches. Once their dlc schedule is finished, they are stopping MP operations.

Also, as for other game modes other than horde. I don't think so, take a look at SWTOR to see how many people care for good story multiplayer games. The resources they'd need to make it happen wouldn't be worth the cost. Unless you paid for the game mode maybe.

MerchantGOL wrote...

DJRackham wrote...

Bioware should have taken the resources they wasted on multiplayer and invested them in creating a more artistic ending.

i think you mised the point of your unfunny coment

Money has no effect ont he story written.


It actually does, you can't tell a story about fires and explosions if you don't have the money to pay for cinematics of fires and explosions.
Instead, show something symbolic of total destruction... Like shooting a tube.

Maybe we didn't get a victory through conventional means because they didn't have the time or resources to create one... *shrug*

#37
Asari Goddess

Asari Goddess
  • Members
  • 1 075 messages
Lol i get 100% by using my iphone data pad lol i get 3.17% when i do the deploy mission thing LOL

#38
MerchantGOL

MerchantGOL
  • Members
  • 2 316 messages

Jade8aby88 wrote...

[
It actually does, you can't tell a story about fires and explosions if you don't have the money to pay for cinematics of fires and explosions.
Instead, show something symbolic of total destruction... Like shooting a tube.

Maybe we didn't get a victory through conventional means because they didn't have the time or resources to create one... *shrug*



Except they did have the money then had the money to creat an EC.

you din't get a conventional victory cause they made it clear in the first game their is no conventinal victory.

But  i Am not, Absloutley am not having that discussion here

Modifié par MerchantGOL, 31 août 2012 - 09:18 .


#39
LiarasShield

LiarasShield
  • Members
  • 6 924 messages

MerchantGOL wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...

[
It actually does, you can't tell a story about fires and explosions if you don't have the money to pay for cinematics of fires and explosions.
Instead, show something symbolic of total destruction... Like shooting a tube.

Maybe we didn't get a victory through conventional means because they didn't have the time or resources to create one... *shrug*



Except they did have the money then had the money to creat an EC.

you din't get a conventional victory cause they made it clear in the first game their is no conventinal victory.

But  i Am not, Absloutley am not having that discussion here


Perhaps that is how you feel

#40
xsdob

xsdob
  • Members
  • 8 575 messages
It shouldn't be linked but it should still be in the game, and having missions at areas that will be multiplayer maps was enjoyable to me.

#41
Master Xanthan

Master Xanthan
  • Members
  • 1 218 messages

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

I have like 10,000 EMS, we still lose :(


If over 9,000 war assets doesn't get you conventional victory then I guess nothing will......

#42
Jadebaby

Jadebaby
  • Members
  • 13 229 messages

MerchantGOL wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...

[
It actually does, you can't tell a story about fires and explosions if you don't have the money to pay for cinematics of fires and explosions.
Instead, show something symbolic of total destruction... Like shooting a tube.

Maybe we didn't get a victory through conventional means because they didn't have the time or resources to create one... *shrug*



Except they did have the money then had the money to creat an EC.

you din't get a conventional victory cause they made it clear in the first game their is no conventinal victory.

But  i Am not, Absloutley am not having that discussion here


Who said anything about conventional victory?

Image IPB

#43
AresKeith

AresKeith
  • Members
  • 34 128 messages

LiarasShield wrote...

Perhaps that is how you feel


what if the MP had other game modes than Gears of War horde mode and actual story-based missions?

#44
Apocaleepse360

Apocaleepse360
  • Members
  • 788 messages
I don't even know why a story driven game like Mass Effect needs multiplayer, to be honest.

#45
LiarasShield

LiarasShield
  • Members
  • 6 924 messages

AresKeith wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

Perhaps that is how you feel


what if the MP had other game modes than Gears of War horde mode and actual story-based missions?


Would be Extremely happy

#46
Master Xanthan

Master Xanthan
  • Members
  • 1 218 messages

Apocaleepse360 wrote...

I don't even know why a story driven game like Mass Effect needs multiplayer, to be honest.


I think its because EA wants to attract FPS players by adding multiplayer to all of their games. Dead Space 2 got multiplayer, ME3 has it, and I heard a rumor that Dragon Age 3 might have it but idk. I'm not saying I agree with it, but I think that's the reason. 

#47
TheCrazyHobo

TheCrazyHobo
  • Members
  • 611 messages
While I believe they should have never been tied in together, there is nothing to do about it now.

However, I do disagree with the fact that one N7 officer is worth more than the Destiny Ascension and her 10,000 member crew of the finest Asari officers in the galaxy.....

#48
AresKeith

AresKeith
  • Members
  • 34 128 messages

LiarasShield wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

Perhaps that is how you feel


what if the MP had other game modes than Gears of War horde mode and actual story-based missions?


Would be Extremely happy


then it would be tied into the SP

#49
Aaleel

Aaleel
  • Members
  • 4 427 messages
I wouldn't have minded if the MP unlocked a weapon, or a side mission in the SP game, but it should have no affect whatsoever on the main story line, and it was just absurd to make in necessary to get the 'best' ending.

Luckily you could just edit the war assets on PC, Krogan Clans worth 3000 EMS ftw.

Modifié par Aaleel, 01 septembre 2012 - 01:05 .


#50
Someone With Mass

Someone With Mass
  • Members
  • 38 553 messages
I'm questioning the point of galactic readiness and EMS in general.

Because if I can skip all those boring and repetitive fetch quests, I don't really care if the whole thing is linked to the multiplayer.

They should have made those things a little more than just numbers.