109 réponses à ce sujet

[Rpgfantasyplayer]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Rpgfantasyplayer wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

So uh, isn't the point of an RPG to play with friends in some form?

I have been playing RPG's for a long time (I am talking the old school ones).  And I have never played an RPG that I have had to play with other people.  That to me is an MMORPG.  That is where you get your multiplayer.  If I wanted that I would play such games.  I am not saying that people can't have that in their RPG, all I am stating is not to force me, the singleplayer, to have to play it in order to play the game.  I don't want that to be placed in my singleplayer game.

Baldurs Gate?  Or IceWind Dale? I mean, thats off the top of my head but both had multiplayer modes that allowed for party play.

I mean, lets be honest, the point of a RPG is to tell a story and have interaction with people. Most old school pen and paper guys do that a lot, its why they hate video game RPGs. 

So really, saying no to multiplayer is a bit ironic, considering the function of an RPG is to be social interaction by design, which is something most RPG's never do. Just pointing this out really. 

If you read my post I state that it is fine if you want it there, just don't force me as a singleplayer to have to play multiplayer.  That is why MMORPG's are around.  For playing with other players.

[LinksOcarina]

Rpgfantasyplayer wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

Rpgfantasyplayer wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

So uh, isn't the point of an RPG to play with friends in some form?

I have been playing RPG's for a long time (I am talking the old school ones).  And I have never played an RPG that I have had to play with other people.  That to me is an MMORPG.  That is where you get your multiplayer.  If I wanted that I would play such games.  I am not saying that people can't have that in their RPG, all I am stating is not to force me, the singleplayer, to have to play it in order to play the game.  I don't want that to be placed in my singleplayer game.

Baldurs Gate?  Or IceWind Dale? I mean, thats off the top of my head but both had multiplayer modes that allowed for party play.

I mean, lets be honest, the point of a RPG is to tell a story and have interaction with people. Most old school pen and paper guys do that a lot, its why they hate video game RPGs. 

So really, saying no to multiplayer is a bit ironic, considering the function of an RPG is to be social interaction by design, which is something most RPG's never do. Just pointing this out really. 

If you read my post I state that it is fine if you want it there, just don't force me as a singleplayer to have to play multiplayer.  That is why MMORPG's are around.  For playing with other players.

No one said anything about forcing it. That is just a myth at this moment since we are dealing with the possibility of an unknown mode. 

[dancarrero]

If they try to force players to play on line and that affects the single player game like in ME3 I will not buy this game period.

[Rpgfantasyplayer]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Rpgfantasyplayer wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

Rpgfantasyplayer wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

So uh, isn't the point of an RPG to play with friends in some form?

I have been playing RPG's for a long time (I am talking the old school ones).  And I have never played an RPG that I have had to play with other people.  That to me is an MMORPG.  That is where you get your multiplayer.  If I wanted that I would play such games.  I am not saying that people can't have that in their RPG, all I am stating is not to force me, the singleplayer, to have to play it in order to play the game.  I don't want that to be placed in my singleplayer game.

Baldurs Gate?  Or IceWind Dale? I mean, thats off the top of my head but both had multiplayer modes that allowed for party play.

I mean, lets be honest, the point of a RPG is to tell a story and have interaction with people. Most old school pen and paper guys do that a lot, its why they hate video game RPGs. 

So really, saying no to multiplayer is a bit ironic, considering the function of an RPG is to be social interaction by design, which is something most RPG's never do. Just pointing this out really. 

If you read my post I state that it is fine if you want it there, just don't force me as a singleplayer to have to play multiplayer.  That is why MMORPG's are around.  For playing with other players.

No one said anything about forcing it. That is just a myth at this moment since we are dealing with the possibility of an unknown mode. 

You are right in stating that we don't know how multiplayer will fit in, but EA has and continues to state, that multiplayer is going to be in their games.  I just don't want the story or my experience to be hindered by the inclusion of multiplayer.

Modifié par Rpgfantasyplayer, 27 septembre 2012 - 05:56 .

[hussey 92]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Rpgfantasyplayer wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

So uh, isn't the point of an RPG to play with friends in some form?

I have been playing RPG's for a long time (I am talking the old school ones).  And I have never played an RPG that I have had to play with other people.  That to me is an MMORPG.  That is where you get your multiplayer.  If I wanted that I would play such games.  I am not saying that people can't have that in their RPG, all I am stating is not to force me, the singleplayer, to have to play it in order to play the game.  I don't want that to be placed in my singleplayer game.

Baldurs Gate?  Or IceWind Dale? I mean, thats off the top of my head but both had multiplayer modes that allowed for party play.

I mean, lets be honest, the point of a RPG is to tell a story and have interaction with people. Most old school pen and paper guys do that a lot, its why they hate video game RPGs. 

So really, saying no to multiplayer is a bit ironic, considering the function of an RPG is to be social interaction by design, which is something most RPG's never do. Just pointing this out really. 

If we're talking old school, Arena and Daggerfall didn't have multiplayer.

[Battlebloodmage]

Hopefully there is no gold trade. It would turn into another Diablo 3 debacle.

[QueenPurpleScrap]

I voted no and added my reasonings to a comment in the poll. If Bioware/EA is determined to include some component, why not have it be as a DLC? Those who want it can pay for it and resources don't have to be redirected away from the single player experience.

This of course assumes that it is a separate experience from the game itself.

[Atalanta]

dancarrero wrote...

If they try to force players to play on line and that affects the single player game like in ME3 I will not buy this game period.

That has to do with DRM, not multiplayer or co-op. It forces you online in order to check/authenticate your DLC ... repeatedly. Unless you mean like the war assets part, and I think - hope -  they've learned their lesson to make MP optional for something like that.

Modifié par Atalanta, 27 septembre 2012 - 06:48 .

[Bekkael]

Much like with ME3, I don't mind either way. If DA3 has it, I'm sure I'll enjoy it (just like ME3 MP). If not, then it is no different from the other Dragon Age titles.  It's win/win for me.

[EricHVela]

DA3:I will have MP. It was confirmed. As far as I know, nobody has said just what MP will be in DA3:I.

There was a thread somewhere for putting up ideas on ways to implement MP in DA3:I, but that quickly turned into another (now pointless) "I don't want MP thread".

[phimseto]

Kingroxas wrote...

Small Co-op campaigns? (Made for co-op, but maybe you get some goodies to use in Singel player?) Maybe like swtor instances/raids? But if it is like the multiplayer would in some way reduce the awesomeness of DA3s campaign then it can stay away.

Ehh, both Two Worlds games did this and it wasn't that great.  Again, like ME3 multiplayer, it was this separate thing that just took away from the single player experience.   Any kind of separate mode is just going to thin out content from the SP experience.  

Main campaign co-op would be the most acceptable for me...but I worry that their going the route just means the game gets overrun with monotonous combat, like ME3 and DA2.  I'm honestly hoping they scale back on the amount of combat in the game.  I enjoyed DA2, but the constant respawning enemies and "wave after wave" bugged me the whole way through.  The pacing and scale of DA is faster/smaller than that of its isometric ancestors.  I'm not sure there is as much there for co-op as we might think.  

And I disagree that saying "we don't want MP" is pointless.  Even if some kind of mode is mandated, this kind of feedback could shape what kind of MP gets implemented and how much.  

[KingRoxas]

phimseto wrote...
And I disagree that saying "we don't want MP" is pointless.  Even if some kind of mode is mandated, this kind of feedback could shape what kind of MP gets implemented and how much.  

Is that targeted to me or just towards the general opinion of the fans? Because i didn't say i don't want MP. 

Modifié par Kingroxas, 27 septembre 2012 - 08:26 .

[Bourne Endeavor]

Beerfish wrote...

Separate multiplayer like ME3's which is aleardy co-op, works pretty well and is a lot of fun. Just make sure MP has no effect on the SP story, unlike the mild ME3 blunder.

It always will because BioWare has a finite budget. If there is a multi-player, it inevitably means funds were redirected from the single player.

[Tpiom]

Let multiplayer remain (and die! ?) with the FPS games... They don't need to waste resources on it for Dragon Age - it doesn't need it and it wouldn't make the game better.

Modifié par Tpiom, 27 septembre 2012 - 08:06 .

[CuriousArtemis]

I am against multiplayer just b/c of what they did with ME3... how they made it so that you had to play multiplayer just to get the "perfect" ending, or to even get the third option (synthesis). Man, I had a guide and everything, mined every planet, completed every mission, made the "correct" decisions to get the most points... and still didn't have enough "points" to get that third ending.

[phimseto]

Kingroxas wrote...

phimseto wrote...
And I disagree that saying "we don't want MP" is pointless.  Even if some kind of mode is mandated, this kind of feedback could shape what kind of MP gets implemented and how much.  

Is that targeted to me or just towards the general opinion of the fans? Because i didn't say i don't want MP. 

LOL, no, toward the post above me at the time!  Sorry.

Also, props for the Littlefinger avatar pic. :-)

[Todd23]

How is Light interactivity with other players the minority? That's ideal!

[Maverick827]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

It always will because BioWare has a finite budget. If there is a multi-player, it inevitably means funds were redirected from the single player.

Not at all.

The budget given to BioWare to develop a single player game and the budget given to develop a multiplayer portion may be mutually exclusive.

If EA set out to spend, say, $30 million on DA3 as a single player game, then you would get a $30 million single player experience. If EA then increases that budget to $35 million or $40 million, but says that the extra money was only greenlit because of and may only be spent on mutliplayer, then you're not losing anything from the single player experience, because they wouldn't have gotten that extra money just for single player development in the first place.

[dancarrero]

Atalanta wrote...

dancarrero wrote...

If they try to force players to play on line and that affects the single player game like in ME3 I will not buy this game period.

That has to do with DRM, not multiplayer or co-op. It forces you online in order to check/authenticate your DLC ... repeatedly. Unless you mean like the war assets part, and I think - hope -  they've learned their lesson to make MP optional for something like that.

No,ME3 forces you to play multiplayer online.If you don't your Galactic Readiness remains low along with your EMS.If you stop playing multiplayer your GR and your EMS actually go down.This affects your endings negatively as the lower your EMS the worse your ending.I will not accept being railroaded into playing multiplayer.If Bioware tries this stunt with DA3 they won't get my 60 bucks.

[Ravenmyste]

not against it at all, i would rather the MP try to be more like a Bl MP where you help with sp quests thru mp{ saw video of mp bl and was actually good to see that SP/mp blending can do wonders when you need help with certain quest }i would love to see are sp character become mp that which we can level up and help others and please no horde mode or pvp mode

Modifié par Ravenmyste, 27 septembre 2012 - 09:32 .

[deuce985]

Co-op like Baldur's Gate please.

Or anything co-op. I don't want competitive MP, just co-op. I want to share experiences with my friends. I'm loving Borderlands 2 with my buds currently. Most RPGs are anti-social. The genre has so much potential with MP. I wish games like Skyrim had a free roam with buddies...

And only MP if it doesn't cut into the SP budget and resources. Which I think Bioware already talked about that. So yea.

Modifié par deuce985, 27 septembre 2012 - 09:42 .

[deuce985]

Maverick827 wrote...

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

It always will because BioWare has a finite budget. If there is a multi-player, it inevitably means funds were redirected from the single player.

Not at all.

The budget given to BioWare to develop a single player game and the budget given to develop a multiplayer portion may be mutually exclusive.

If EA set out to spend, say, $30 million on DA3 as a single player game, then you would get a $30 million single player experience. If EA then increases that budget to $35 million or $40 million, but says that the extra money was only greenlit because of and may only be spent on mutliplayer, then you're not losing anything from the single player experience, because they wouldn't have gotten that extra money just for single player development in the first place.

This. I don't get the mentality that just because it has MP, resources are stripped from SP. Doesn't necessarily have to work like that...

Just because they granted MP an extra $10 million on the budget doesn't mean it took away from SP. If the game ended up with no MP, EA wasn't going to extend budget. It could be an entirely different team doing it too. Why is that so hard to see?

Already several games you can use as an example with great SP+MP. So, it can be done. Bioware did it once already. Considering $60 games need to be beefier and more attractive with the emergence of the indie/mobile/f2p market, this is one way to make products more attractive.

Modifié par deuce985, 27 septembre 2012 - 09:48 .

[Cutlass Jack]

Co-Op romances will be awk-ward....

[Wolfspawn]

Apparently everybody's forgotten about NWN, a game that Bioware made that was acclaimed ONLY for its multiplayer and modding community (and third expansion, but that's beside the point). I think, personally, co-op would be fun IF it's a totally seperate campaign, which isn't far-fetched, considering it's made by a different team. I don't want it to be the SAME campaign, because, if there is anything we learned from NWN, it's when a game is optimized for single AND multiplayer, the story and characters kinda suck. Combine this with modding tools AND a good story and characters, and we have the game that might just save Bioware from worldwide critical failure.
But that's just MY opinion.

[deuce985]

bob_20000 wrote...

Apparently everybody's forgotten about NWN, a game that Bioware made that was acclaimed ONLY for its multiplayer and modding community (and third expansion, but that's beside the point). I think, personally, co-op would be fun IF it's a totally seperate campaign, which isn't far-fetched, considering it's made by a different team. I don't want it to be the SAME campaign, because, if there is anything we learned from NWN, it's when a game is optimized for single AND multiplayer, the story and characters kinda suck. Combine this with modding tools AND a good story and characters, and we have the game that might just save Bioware from worldwide critical failure.
But that's just MY opinion.

Since DA3 should primarily be about SP, Baldur's Gate is probably a better example. BG was the complete package. It had great SP AND MP. So, Bioware already proved they can do both just fine. And I personally think ME3 does both very well too. ME3's MP actually caught me by surprise. I never thought something so simple and repetitive would get me addicted.

Modifié par deuce985, 27 septembre 2012 - 10:31 .