219 réponses à ce sujet

[AngryFrozenWater]

Logan Cloud wrote...

It's good that companies are allowing other people to connect and have fun with each other. If that's not your thing, you're welcome not to do it.

If someone plays an RPG differently than you, do you hate them for it? It's the same thing. They enjoy the same game as you, but they enjoy it differently. Through MP. It's no reason to turn your back on gaming, or those people.

That's how I feel anyway.

No, you don't feel that way. You are trying to show that those who are opposed to it are unreasonable, because they somehow hate those who like MP. You are deliberately attaching a strong emotion like hate to those people in an attempt to invalidate their reasoning. It's a cheap trick. Next time use a real argument, instead of stirring up the place.

[AngryFrozenWater]

Logan Cloud wrote...

It's pretty narrow-minded to discount gaming as a whole because of this too. If you don't like MP, just don't play it. You can enjoy SP just fine without it.

In my honest opinion, a lot of you are acting like drama queens. Most games these days have MP anyway. It's nothing new.

You are doing it again. They are now narrow minded. Quit using that trick. It is getting old now.

[bleetman]

Good on you, Frank Gibeau. Be proud!

I'll be over here, being equally proud at not buying them. We'll both be happy.

[rak72]

The new "Sim City", of all things is going to force multiplayer . Shame, because it is one of my all time favorite games & now I won't be buying it.

[Chromie]

rak72 wrote...

The new "Sim City", of all things is going to force multiplayer . Shame, because it is one of my all time favorite games & now I won't be buying it.

You are now considered narrow minded by Logan Cloud. I'm fine with mutliplayer obviously some genres are better for mutliplayer than others. Sim City does not need it especially with always online DRM. 

[Addai]

Volus Warlord wrote...

C9316 wrote...

Time for a second gaming crash?

That'll be when they all switch over to F2P with slot machine unlock mechanics and realize how much the system blows.

Oh, you don't think there's a gold mine in making Farmville-quality games and waiting for people to throw money at them like gambling addicts at an online slot machine?

I'm shocked.  :happy:

[JasonDaPsycho]

You can't even take that quote out of context. Shows you how immature EA can be. *facepalm*

It's bad enough you're practicing this, but to blatantly admit it? Come on. There is a market for games with a great single player experience. You don't need to waste money on inserting an unnecessary game mode in some cases.

[TK Dude]

TK Dude: Proud not buying EA games.

[Lotion Soronarr]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

Logan Cloud wrote...

It's pretty narrow-minded to discount gaming as a whole because of this too. If you don't like MP, just don't play it. You can enjoy SP just fine without it.

In my honest opinion, a lot of you are acting like drama queens. Most games these days have MP anyway. It's nothing new.

You are doing it again. They are now narrow minded. Quit using that trick. It is getting old now.

Seconded.

There is nothing unreasonable about not wanting MP tacked on everywhere.

Suppoose you're a fan of Team Fortress and the devs decide it MUST have a singlepleyer, so they devote half their resrouces (which would normally go to MP) to it... and you get a worse MP experience because of it.

Would you be happy? No. Neither should you.
And neither should people who prefer SP be happy about this.

I play SP mostly and MP sometimes. I like MP. But it doesnt' fit everywhere nor do I want ti everywhere - especially not at the expense of things I like better.

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

I don't care if single player games have MP functionality, unless the MP imposes itself on the SP experience (as it apparently did in ME3). Heck, I've even used it in one or two games, and it was fun while it lasted.

What I can't stand is that EA is apparently demanding that their games must have this feature though. It's unnecessary bells and whistles that'll take resources away from the SP development, or even force the SP to redesign in order to accommodate the MP aspects.

Personally I'm hoping that games get around this not by trying to smush their SP world into some semblance of MP, but by more devious means. Say...oh...join a table in DA3 for some Wicked Grace with someone else connected to the server.

But I doubt it.

[FaWa]

CrustyBot wrote...

MarchWaltz wrote...

I want Bethesda to go and jump EA. Like, I want Todd Howard to go beat up these idiots.

Todd Howard is an Ancient Alien and would not resort to such primitive acts.

lol @ Todd "Horse Armor" Howard looking like jesus compared to the rest of these goons. 
Is it sad I kinda with we had more people like him though? With the ability to make games that sell that are actually good?

[Brockololly]

Skelter192 wrote...
You are now considered narrow minded by Logan Cloud. I'm fine with mutliplayer obviously some genres are better for mutliplayer than others. Sim City does not need it especially with always online DRM.

Yeah...SimCIty's always online MP aspects, just like Diablo 3 being always online might have some gameplay grounding behind them, but it still reaks of a way to have those games more difficult to pirate and difficult to mod and thus stay leashed to an internet connection. I think one of the Diablo 3 designers said not too long ago that most people aren't even playing Diablo with MP.

I imagine more EA games end up doing stuff like that- force some always online component into the game under the guise of it being some key gameplay element.

FaWa wrote...
lol @ Todd "Horse Armor" Howard looking like jesus compared to the rest of these goons. 
Is it sad I kinda with we had more people like him though? With the ability to make games that sell that are actually good?

Well, for all the crap Bethesda got with horse armor DLC, they seem to have actually learned from it. You don't see them coming out with junky item DLC- they pretty much exclusively come out with more significant DLC. And I give Bethesda a lot of credit in keeping their games SP and not trying to cram in some forced MP aspects.


I don't dislike MP games though- I love Battlefield. But more often than not, I enjoy MP games whose existence is purely as a MP game, not as some tacked on mode to a SP campaign. Games should focus on something and do it well and stop trying to be all things to all people. Hell, I thought Battlefield 3 shouldn't have bothered with their single player campaign- BF is multiplayer and the crappy SP there hurt people's perceptions of the game.

Modifié par Brockololly, 06 septembre 2012 - 03:55 .

[Rockworm503]

Horse Armor was one of the first DLC ever made. It was new concept. Look at Dawnguard. Tell me they haven't learned their lesson about that.

For every time someone wants to force MP onto everything there is just as many Todd Howards refusing to even consider it.

[Costin_Razvan]

 
Yeah...SimCIty's always online MP aspects, just like Diablo 3 being always online might have some gameplay grounding behind them, but it still reaks of a way to have those games more difficult to pirate and difficult to mod and thus stay leashed to an internet connection. 

In regards to Diablo 3 I think the reason they did it was that they knew a lot of people would play MP and thus they made the engine work as it does in WoW, as in the online server renders stuff not your PC. I guess they didn't want to have to change that for the SP for various reason. 

I am not blind to the fact they likely did it in another idiotic attempt to fight piracy but it might have also been because of time and money.

Brockololly wrote...

I don't dislike MP games though- I love Battlefield. But more often than not, I enjoy MP games whose existence is purely as a MP game, not as some tacked on mode to a SP campaign. Games should focus on something and do it well and stop trying to be all things to all people. 

Look at Starcraft and Warcraft however, two series that have very good singleplayer and multiplayer besides WC1. Yes there are major issues with SC2s story but it's gameplay is superb. Then there's Red Alert 2, Tiberium Wars, Battle for Middle Earth I and so on. Hell Dark Souls has a MP component and apparently it's pretty damned good ( I refuse to play online in that game personally ).

Good MP and SP can exist in a single game. 

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 06 septembre 2012 - 05:20 .

[Brockololly]

Costin_Razvan wrote...
Look at Starcraft and Warcraft however, two series that have very good singleplayer and multiplayer besides WC1. Yes there are major issues with SC2s story but it's gameplay is superb.

Good MP and SP can exist in a single game.

Thats true. But even with something like Starcraft, they've been doing the whole single player campaign and MP from the beginning. And like you said, between Diablo 3 and Starcraft 2, its up for debate how well Blizzard is doing wth SP stuff right now.

I just question the need to mandate some kind of MP into every game. Maybe some developers can get that to work, but mandating that kind of thing isn't some cure all for a game's potential problems.

[Lord_Valandil]

I'd say, without wanting to sound melodramatic, that WoW effectively killed Warcraft.
It's been years since Warcraft III and I'm still waiting for another RTS in the world of Warcraft, which probably won't arrive anytime soon, if ever.

[Alex524]

BatmanPWNS wrote...

EA thinks stuffing MP in everything is going to save them but it's just building them a bigger hole to fall in.

yeah, look at what happened to zynga. their microtransactions grew to critical mass then collasped into a financial black hole.

[Chromie]

Costin_Razvan wrote...
In regards to Diablo 3 I think the reason they did it was that they knew a lot of people would play MP and thus they made the engine work as it does in WoW, as in the online server renders stuff not your PC. I guess they didn't want to have to change that for the SP for various reason. 

Except they prefer single player

Modifié par Skelter192, 06 septembre 2012 - 09:31 .

[Addai]

Alex524 wrote...

BatmanPWNS wrote...

EA thinks stuffing MP in everything is going to save them but it's just building them a bigger hole to fall in.

yeah, look at what happened to zynga. their microtransactions grew to critical mass then collasped into a financial black hole.

It does remind me of the dotcom boom.  You'd think companies would have learned that people don't want to pay for little timewasters.  I love Popcap's Bookworm game but I'd never pay for it.  I almost always refuse paywalls- the internet is too full of free shiny.  If I'm going to pay for a game, I want it to be something deeply involving, and not have an open-ended price tag.

[Gatt9]

Addai67 wrote...

Alex524 wrote...

BatmanPWNS wrote...

EA thinks stuffing MP in everything is going to save them but it's just building them a bigger hole to fall in.

yeah, look at what happened to zynga. their microtransactions grew to critical mass then collasped into a financial black hole.

It does remind me of the dotcom boom.  You'd think companies would have learned that people don't want to pay for little timewasters.  I love Popcap's Bookworm game but I'd never pay for it.  I almost always refuse paywalls- the internet is too full of free shiny.  If I'm going to pay for a game, I want it to be something deeply involving, and not have an open-ended price tag.

The Verge has a good 5 part article up on the state of the Industry that gives alot of clues why,  the first article really explains it,  early on it states that most of the Industry is losing money,  and they don't understand why.

These efforts are just ways to try to squeeze gamers for more money so they can go back to 2008's revenues,  rather than actually taking a look at themselves and saying "What are we doing that consumers don't like?".

Instead it's "Everything's great,  we don't need to change anything,  it's the consumers that are the problem!".  My personal favorite:

"New IP's can't be released late in a console cycle"

While ignoring that there's no evidence of this since there's only been three times in history that a console has replaced a older version:  NES/Master System -> SNES/Genesis,  PSx -> PS2,  X-box/PS2 -> 360/PS3.  In every one of those instances,  new IP's were launched late and sold extremely well.

It's amazing the excuses they make up for the decisions they make for revenue reason.  None of it has any truth,  and this is all going to backfire on them hugely when Gamers refuse to accept their efforts to gouge them.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Buddy McFlurry wrote...
Look at Dishonored for example. I still believe it's gonna be a great game. Then there's Watch Dogs, Remeber Me, X: Rebirth,....
Also new Hitman and Assassins Creed are looking good. I hope they keep the stealth gameplay.
And Deus Ex: HR was pretty damn good.

Really? To me they look like brainless cash-ins'.

[Naughty Bear]

Hitman. When i heard that tool so you can predict the paths of enemies and see through walls. I nearly had a stroke.

[Buddy McFlurry]

Naughty Bear wrote...

Hitman. When i heard that tool so you can predict the paths of enemies and see through walls. I nearly had a stroke.

Yes it's very sad, but I'm hoping that we will not be forced to use it. I definitely wont use it. But I really don't understand why is this ability in every stealth game today.

[BatmanPWNS]

Buddy McFlurry wrote...

Naughty Bear wrote...

Hitman. When i heard that tool so you can predict the paths of enemies and see through walls. I nearly had a stroke.

Yes it's very sad, but I'm hoping that we will not be forced to use it. I definitely wont use it. But I really don't understand why is this ability in every stealth game today.

So the noobs don't mess up, of course.