162 réponses à ce sujet

[BonFire5]

MGS4 had Multiplayer. 'Course, that was some kind of reward for the 20+ hour sellout cutscene we had to endure.

About 1/4 of my woes in ME3 come from Multiplayer. Weak AR's, Too much armour/barriers/shields, Earth system gets +% for playing it for some reason, Turians can't barrel roll, Galactic readiness goes down about 8% if you don't touch it for a few days (makes getting the Defender trophy a rolling the boulder up the mountain situation), and I get disconnected every second game or so (always at FRICKIN' ROUND 9-11).

It feels like a very forced experience, and a task. Like Prestiging in CoD.

Wouldn't mind if BioWare went their separate ways. But EA is one of the better companies out there. Or at least, less evil than Activision.

[LilyasAvalon]

****, that's the first time I've heard that, you serious?

...Wait, **** that means DA3 is gonna be multiplayer. MAKER NO!

While I'm not necessarily against Multiplayer/Co-Op, the fact that some companies feel it NEEDS to be implimented or forced into games where it is not necessary is... pathetic. And look at SWTOR, there is NOTHING in that game that makes me feel like it's a multiplayer game aside from the random other people in the game. Hell, do you think something like Dragon Age would be better would forced Co-Op or Multiplayer?

Modifié par LilyasAvalon, 07 septembre 2012 - 07:12 .

[Captain_Obvious_au]

Chris Priestly wrote...

Mass Effect 3 has multiplayer.

Good point - I mean it's not like it's the most criticised game of the series or the one that arguably lacks the most variety in terms of story.

[Siran]

Captain_Obvious_au wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

Mass Effect 3 has multiplayer.

Good point - I mean it's not like it's the most criticised game of the series or the one that arguably lacks the most variety in terms of story.

Nothing of which has anything to do with Multiplayer...

[ENAKTSB]

Chris Priestly wrote...

Mass Effect 3 has multiplayer.

Yes it does... yes it does. But... was it needed? Does Dead Space need multiplayer? Will we get Dragon Age 3 with multiplayer?

Or to put it in business terms - would the game (ie. ME3) sell less without the multiplayer part? Because if it would not sell less - then it seems a wasted effort. And all that effort could have gone instead into more single player DLCs, or maybe a more choice-oriented storyline with more obscure outcomes. After all, up to ME3 - it was a 100% SP experience.

Anyway, I am looking forward to Dragon Age 3 or maybe... Jade Empire 2? That would be awesome. I will most likely P-O those as usual. But I do feel that - despite MP additions - these games are somehow becoming... lesser.

[Siran]

ENAKTSB wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

Mass Effect 3 has multiplayer.

Or to put it in business terms - would the game (ie. ME3) sell less without the multiplayer part? Because if it would not sell less - then it seems a wasted effort. And all that effort could have gone instead into more single player DLCs, or maybe a more choice-oriented storyline with more obscure outcomes. After all, up to ME3 - it was a 100% SP experience.

I don't think it sold that much more copies. But given the fact, that the Reinforcement Packs can be purchased with real money, it makes ME3's revenue stream after the game has been sold that much higher. We wouldn't have the free DLCs we have now without the revenue from MP (imho Extended Cut included)

Modifié par Siran, 07 septembre 2012 - 09:33 .

[Ryan1337l33t]

The general consensus towards the alteration and addition of multiplayer in single-player 'exclusive' games, has always been somewhat like this; 'Said game ruins the very message and meaning of the work-effort placed onto the single player, thus apparently; undermining the quality of the game overall.'

For some gamers, yes, this is true concern and is merely understandable, albeit I never usually worry about such trivial matters. To digress onto my point though, some games in the past have actually managed to create a decent online community (although this may never be the best self-sustaining community as; for example Call of Duty and many others), as well as having a great, captivating story for the player to be immersed in, merely this is my view upon a game I believe to be exactly that, and it still lives up to that meaning from this day.

(In regards to other opinions). Have we simply forgotten the great-single-player experience that was Deus Ex? -- I speak of the original, not the prequel nor sequel, but this game had multiplayer, and for some; it was referred to as the greatest game ever for having such an immersive story and decent RPG features.

Multiplayer is by far not the worst thing to happen to a single-player focussed game, there could be much worse issues and ramifications from the actual game itself, for example; the gameplay mechanics might be too tedious, levels could be bland, or the game could just cimply be too short and unappealing, merely a short list of examples.

None-the-less, there is some companies which do, and I exclude Bioware from that list -- these companies sacrifice the very soul of story for the sake of 'replay value' and mere online connectivity with others.

But, lets take the fact that a game like Deus Ex, even now so more than ever -- it stands out as a brilliant game in the minds of some, and that game had multiplayer built into it, the story was not; undermined for a multiplayer hell-bent on dying eventually, but it had the very idea and usage of multiplayer for people to use, it was an option. Lets take this into consideration.

[Captain_Obvious_au]

Siran wrote...

Captain_Obvious_au wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

Mass Effect 3 has multiplayer.

Good point - I mean it's not like it's the most criticised game of the series or the one that arguably lacks the most variety in terms of story.

Nothing of which has anything to do with Multiplayer...

Yes it does - it relates to the idea that online/multiplayer content diminishes the single-player narrative experience.

[Icinix]

Captain_Obvious_au wrote...

Siran wrote...

Captain_Obvious_au wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

Mass Effect 3 has multiplayer.

Good point - I mean it's not like it's the most criticised game of the series or the one that arguably lacks the most variety in terms of story.

Nothing of which has anything to do with Multiplayer...

Yes it does - it relates to the idea that online/multiplayer content diminishes the single-player narrative experience.

There is certainly enough single player experiences that have gone multiplayer and the single player has certainly suffered.

...but there is definitely a disconnect between an online component, and an online focus.

Where there is the focus, the single player definitely suffers. Where there is a component - its just another feature.

EA can't NOT make everything an online focus - and their games have been suffering for it.

[-Skorpious-]

Chris Priestly wrote...

Mass Effect 3 has multiplayer.

Yet, it is the most critically received Bioware game to date. It may be a coincidence, but it is an interesting observation nonetheless. 

[BatmanPWNS]

Bioware doesn't exist anymore. Theirs only now EA.

[Siran]

Captain_Obvious_au wrote...

Yes it does - it relates to the idea that online/multiplayer content diminishes the single-player narrative experience.

Which ME3 Multiplayer does not.

[BatmanPWNS]

Siran wrote...

Captain_Obvious_au wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

Mass Effect 3 has multiplayer.

Good point - I mean it's not like it's the most criticised game of the series or the one that arguably lacks the most variety in terms of story.

Nothing of which has anything to do with Multiplayer...

The majority of side missions are blantant copy and paste of MP missions.

Modifié par BatmanPWNS, 07 septembre 2012 - 01:24 .

[Siran]

BatmanPWNS wrote...

The majority of side missions are blantant copy and paste of MP missions.

So? They reused existing maps from MP for SP. Why not? It gives people the chance to familiarize them in SP and for those who don't play MP to experience them at all. There are enough people here who'd like even more MP maps be included as side-missions in ME3. Most side-missions in ME2 weren't even as large as ME3's. And don't forget ME1, where each side-mission was a blatant copy of... itself.

Modifié par Siran, 07 septembre 2012 - 01:28 .

[BatmanPWNS]

Siran wrote...

BatmanPWNS wrote...

The majority of side missions are blantant copy and paste of MP missions.

So? They reused existing maps from MP for SP. Why not? It gives people the chance to familiarize them in SP and for those who don't play MP to experience them at all. There are enough people here who'd like even more MP maps be included as side-missions in ME3. Most side-missions in ME2 weren't even as large as ME3's. And don't forget ME1, where each side-mission was a blatant copy of... itself.

Because now all the side missions suck and are chore to do.

And yes ME1 side missions sucked too (well the majority) but at least they had more than just shooting lots of henchmen.

[Siran]

BatmanPWNS wrote...

Because now all the side missions suck and are chore to do.

I disagree. ME1's side missions were a chore as each compund looked identical, and the endless driving... In ME3 you had to save civilians, vent deadly gas from a reactor, arm defence batteries and all that in distinct surroundings.

And yes ME1 side missions sucked too (well the majority) but at least they had more than just shooting lots of henchmen.

Yeah, like doing the same mini-game of "mineral-scanning" or "artefact-scanning" over and over again - those really were the pinnacle of interactive gameplay.

Modifié par Siran, 07 septembre 2012 - 02:12 .

[NKKKK]

Chris Priestly wrote...

Mass Effect 3 has multiplayer.

[BatmanPWNS]

Siran wrote...

BatmanPWNS wrote...

Because now all the side missions suck and are chore to do.

I disagree. ME1's side missions were a chore as each compund looked identical, and the endless driving... In ME3 you had to save civilians, vent deadly gas from a reactor, arm defence batteries and all that in distinct surroundings.

And yes ME1 side missions sucked too (well the majority) but at least they had more than just shooting lots of henchmen.

Yeah, like doing the same mini-game of "mineral-scanning" or "artefact-scanning" over and over again - those really were the pinnacle of interactive gameplay.

Lol, are you serious? You thought that ME1 side misisons were all about scanning, really? Did you forgot Luna, the side missions involving your past histories, finding a rachni hive, going after cerberus for the first time, Wrex/Garrus personal misisons and dozens more. ME1 might be bad but there more than just get out their and shoot stuff. Oh and what do you when you save civilians or vent or defend something? You just shoot at incoming henchmen! There's nothing special about ME3's side mission at all.

[LilyasAvalon]

I liked ME1's side missions...

[Siran]

BatmanPWNS wrote...

Siran wrote...

BatmanPWNS wrote...

Because now all the side missions suck and are chore to do.

I disagree. ME1's side missions were a chore as each compund looked identical, and the endless driving... In ME3 you had to save civilians, vent deadly gas from a reactor, arm defence batteries and all that in distinct surroundings.

And yes ME1 side missions sucked too (well the majority) but at least they had more than just shooting lots of henchmen.

Yeah, like doing the same mini-game of "mineral-scanning" or "artefact-scanning" over and over again - those really were the pinnacle of interactive gameplay.

Lol, are you serious? You thought that ME1 side misisons were all about scanning, really? Did you forgot Luna, the side missions involving your past histories, finding a rachni hive, going after cerberus for the first time, Wrex/Garrus personal misisons and dozens more. ME1 might be bad but there more than just get out their and shoot stuff. Oh and what do you when you save civilians or vent or defend something? You just shoot at incoming henchmen! There's nothing special about ME3's side mission at all.

If you count the Cerberus missions or personal missions in ME1, then you have to count Grissom Academy, the Admiral on Rannoch, Eden Prime, Tuchanka Bomb etc in ME3 as well and those surely weren't copy / paste. There are many repetitive side-missions in ME1 where you basically have to find a compund, that has the exact same layout and kill something, click another thing and get a text of what you found. Or the Geth Incursion missions which were basically find a geth nest, destroy it and fly to the next system, rince repeat.

In Firebase Ghost you have to save civilians and Firebase Reactor vent toxic gases. You should play ME3 again I guess. And all those "copy / paste" MP missions had an accompanying story-line.

[sheppard7]

Seeing how TOR is failing... Bioware would be better to reboot.

[Arppis]

Mass Effect 3 multiplayer = brilliant. So nope, it doesn't always ruin the game, sometimes it adds to it.

[Seanomatic]

It depends who you're asking, BioWare or us. I think for the fans it would be welcome to most (not all ofcourse) but I expect BioWare financially is doing better than ever before (correct me if I'm wrong it's just a guess as I don't pay much attention to the financial side of gaming) and as a business it would be stupid to walk away from that.

As to the multiplayer issue, well I stand by my belief that multiplayer should enhance the enjoyment of the game, not make it (why I dislike CoD) and personally I feel ME3s multiplayer does this well. If there is a game developer I trust to make a game that can incorporate a fascinating story with solid gameplay and in addition a interesting and enjoyable multiplayer in one game, I'd trust BioWare to do it.

I'm yet to play a game of theirs I dislike, but I could say the same about a lot of developers.

[Lionel Ou]

Siran wrote...
In Firebase Ghost you have to save civilians and Firebase Reactor vent toxic gases. You should play ME3 again I guess. And all those "copy / paste" MP missions had an accompanying story-line.

There's 30+ "ping-the-planet-to-gather-war-assets" missions in ME3, they're far worse than anything that ME1 ever had. Mineral scanning? You could skip that completely without affecting anything (well, you got less credits). Turian insignias? Skip it. Salarians? Skip it. Asari Writings? Skip it. The only reason anyone did them after the first play through were because they thought it would be important in the second or third game. That worked out very well.

They had a small storyline before and a minimal one afterwards. The missions themselves were a slight variation of a horde mode game with a couple of buttons to press.