129 réponses à ce sujet

[Bungie]

Adding multiplayer to DA3 just doesn't seem what they're focusing on. They've been listening to us, no one mentioned multiplayer to a point where we need it.

If we do get it maybe it will be similar to the Fable games with the orbs in your world or something along those lines.
Doesn't have to be PVP. 

[DisturbedJim83]

Just hell no RPG's have been ruined enough by converting them for console-teenies and keyboardphobic adults MP in DA would be the Darkspawn that snaps the Archdemons spine in two

[addiction21]

Never understood the fear of a genre that was build on socializing in groups is so scared to do anything in a group.

[wsandista]

Multiplayer Romances?

[Maverick827]

I say RPGs need to get back to their roots. I remember some fun nights playing Dungeons & Dragons alone in my room.

[Conduit0]

Maverick827 wrote...

I say RPGs need to get back to their roots. I remember some fun nights playing Dungeons & Dragons alone in my room.

What you did there, I see it. 

[Iakus]

addiction21 wrote...

Never understood the fear of a genre that was build on socializing in groups is so scared to do anything in a group.

Yeah, because nothing says "roleplaying" like pwning n00bz

[Paul E Dangerously]

Generally, the more multiplayer focused a game is, the weaker the single-player element is. Not always true, but the rise in multiplayer focus has done terrible things to the Western RPG as a whole.

That's not the only reason, but it's a big one.

[Strik1101]

Why not? Worked well enough in Mass Effect to keep me playing for a year. Aside from some obvious mechanical differences with the way the two series play, I think it could work pretty much the same. Darkspawn or Werewolves or other such nastiness spawns, the group fights waves of them that get more difficult each time, get a reward, customize your character, get new weapons (and armor this time, plz bioware) and BAM, I'm hooked for another year.

Just please kill the RNG store system... its so painful... Maybe a crafting system?

Modifié par Strik1101, 07 mars 2013 - 06:24 .

[robertthebard]

Maverick827 wrote...

Janan Pacha wrote...

You mean look that thing I never touched? The thing that required time, money, effort and manpower that I always thought should have been filtered into giving the single player portion more polish and content?

Do you think EA writes BioWare a check for $50 million and says "gives us a game in two years?"  A certain amount of money was budgeted for multiplayer and for multiplayer only, which was developed by an entirely different studio, mind you.  You're not going to get all of those "resources" put into the single player experience if there is no multiplayer because it just won't even be included in the overall budget in the first place.  "We're going to pull the plug on that multiplayer idea.  Just take the $10 million we gave you for it and make, like, really kickass rock textures instead."

I couldn't stand it.

The thing that you never touched.  Right.

I Haven't touched it beyond the initial chance/benefit of the doubt I gave it. The time I spent on it wasn't fulfilling or engaging. If it winked out of existence I wouldn't bat an eyelash.

Oh, so you did try it for what sounds like literally the smallest amount of time possible.  Oh, that's better, then.

I tried it, I played more than a few hours of it during different "objectives" such as the one on the top of this page as I type this.  My opinion?  My SP game was affected by something that I didn't really care for.  Initially it was adversely affected by my not putting enough time into it to affect my Galaxy at War map.  So no, I don't think that any MP should be tied to the single player game.  If I want to play MP, I'll load up one of the 4 MMO's that I currently have on this rig, and go play MP.  If I want MP to affect what I'm doing, I'll play an MMO.  Because quite frankly, I can see Thedas at War coming with the Mage/Templar conflict.  I can see having a sage to replace the CIC, that gives you updates on how it's going, and if MP is going to affect that in any way, shape or form, I'll spend my money elsewhere.  I don't play FPS as a rule, I'm not a CoD fanboy, I have never played a single game in the franchise, and so, have no opinion either way.  However, if I were to be into shooters, there are some of them, like MMO's that I would give a wide berth.  I don't play WoW, and never have, due to the members of that community posting on other MMO forums, and the manner in which they "communicate" on these other forums.  You know exactly what I mean, based on the last line in your post, which reads, to me:  "So, you don't like my favorite part of the game, you're not entitled to have an opinion about it".

Frankly, I could have done w/out Origin spying on my gaming habits by assigning a value to my GaW map.  I could do without the extra load time while it determines if the DLC I purchased was actually purchased, despite checking it 500 times already.  So no.  If it's going to affect the SP game at all, MP needs to stay out, and they can make a seperate game for it, and the people that may be interested.  Having said that, if it includes a toolset, and a server where worlds you build could be hosted online for play in whatever way the designer deems fit, such as was done with NWN's.  I'd probably buy it, and play it.  If it's got a little shallower learning curve than the DA O toolset, I may even attempt to build in it.  I played NWN's for 5 years, but it wasn't the SP campaign that kept me coming back.  I played that MP, and what do you know, playing for 3 hours a day, 7 days a week didn't affect how the SP campaign played out.

[Althix]

Strik1101 wrote...
Just please kill the RNG store system... its so painful... Maybe a crafting system?

oh please. 44kk of credits and you are good.

lack of personalization on the other hand is rather frustrating.

[Zkyire]

Volus Warlord wrote...

It WILL happen.

The questions are..

1.) What will it be like

2.) How will SP/MP integration be handled

CO-OP campaign.

I don't see how the ME3 MP model could fit into the DA universe. There's no fast-travel or teleportation or anything, so you wouldn't have any rapid-response teams. And save for some special occasions the different species don't really fight alongside each other in combat, so the teams, realistically would be one species or another.

[Althix]

realistically? are you serious about this?

Modifié par secretsandlies, 07 mars 2013 - 03:01 .

[Volus Warlord]

Zkyire wrote...

Volus Warlord wrote...

It WILL happen.

The questions are..

1.) What will it be like

2.) How will SP/MP integration be handled

CO-OP campaign.

I don't see how the ME3 MP model could fit into the DA universe. There's no fast-travel or teleportation or anything, so you wouldn't have any rapid-response teams. And save for some special occasions the different species don't really fight alongside each other in combat, so the teams, realistically would be one species or another.

I don't see how they wouldn't do something along the lines of the ME3 MP model. The whole "rapid response" thing is a lore-based justification for something that otherwise has next to nothing to do with lore. As per species fighting alongside one another, was that the case in ME universe either? No. But your outfit is something special. 

Lore aside, they have the technical background from ME3's MP now. I don't see them making an MP that does not at least superficially resemble ME3's MP, as it'd be throwing all they "learned" out the window. I am just hoping it doesn't come across as a blatantly half-baked rehash.

As per a CO-OP campaign, call me pessimistic, but I don't see it happening, or if it happens I don't see it done well. The only game that I can think of that nailed the co-op campaign was Borderlands. All other games with optional co-op that I can think of (Dead Island, AoE:O, etc.) mucked it up in one way or another on the technical side.

That and I am not entirely convinced that a CO-OP campaign would be a good thing vs a normal CO-OP game. It would be highly dependant on whether or not the campaign was good, which sadly is not a given. So, if they nail all the technical stuff but botch the nature of the campaign itself? Tis all as nothing. Or if only a few parts of the campaign was good, replayability would suffer, as you'd get tired of hearing the same lines over and over again. Or if the campaign was on the short side replayability would suffer for the same reason. Too many variables.

So they go with the basically lore-free CO-OP that we saw in ME3 and make MP virtually independant of SP. Choose your stuff, here's the map, kill the enemies. Have an occasional objective round.  While ME3's MP was better than I expected it to be, there was TREMENDOUS room for improvement (slot machine unlocks, few enemy factions, generally buggy, yadda yadda) so if they take it a few solid steps forward and give it a Dragon Age feel, I'd be content with it.

[BouncyFrag]

wsandista wrote...

Multiplayer Romances?

There are some things in this world that shouldn't be thought, let alone spoken. Then again, 99% of those against MP would have a change of heart if such an atrocity occured.

[Volus Warlord]

BouncyFrag wrote...

wsandista wrote...

Multiplayer Romances?

There are some things in this world that shouldn't be thought, let alone spoken. Then again, 99% of those against MP would have a change of heart if such an atrocity occured.

Lol, don't get me started on my Orgie Simulator MP theory.

[Vortex13]

Well I had a couple of ideas for MP that I would like to see for DA:I, in a topic K made some time ago. Here let me paste in my OP.

P.S. Very big wall of text incoming, you get an Internet cookie if you can read all of it

P.P.S most of my ideas are based on the assumption that DA MP will be building off the ME MP formula.

Vortex13 wrote...

With the new Dragon Age slowly approaching completion, I thought I would post some ideas that I would love to see implemented into Inquisition's multiplayer mode. And, since no specifics have been announced, hopefully the Dragon Age team could incorporate some of my ideas.

But before I launch into my long list of ideas, I would first like to point out some things about myself and my opinion of Bioware's use of multiplayer in a formerly single player only game.

First of all I would like to state that I am for the idea of multiplayer (incase the thread title didn't get that across). I know some of the Dragon Age fans would argue that the inclusion of multiplayer cheapens/hinders the single player, but I disagree (and no I am not a twelve year old COD fanboy, as some of the more harsh comments around the web have painted us multiplayer fans).

I love a good story, I love interesting characters, and I love the universes that Bioware creates. I don't know why there is this assumption that multiplayer = terible single player. Sure in a fixed budget, more money towards one area is less towards another, but more money thrown at a project does not instantly make said project better, and in Bioware's case they are receiving funds specifically intended for multiplayer by EA, so single player wouldn't have been financially affected.

Obviously, people feel different about the inclusion of multiplayer, and I don't want to spend this entire topic debating that point. I just want people to know where I stand on the issue. I am not some multiplayer fan that has discovered Bioware, I am a Bioware fan that has enjoyed many of their games (Knights of the Old Republic, Jade Empire, Mass Effect 1, 2, and 3, Dragon Age: Origins, ect.) with the thought of "This is awesome, but it would be even cooler if I could play with my brothers." always in the back of my mind. Maybe it is because I grew up with two brothers as into games as much as me, but I always found myself imagining playing Dragon Age, and Mass Effect with my brothers as my squad mates.

Mass Effect 3 saw the addition of multiplayer, and while it is not the co-op campaign that I envisioned (yet), it still offers massive replay value, and has kept me interested in the game long after I beat the single player (My opinion of the Single Player ending would be the topic of another debate.)

TL;DR Version: I love Bioware's single player stories, but I also welcome the addition of multiplayer. Even if you don't typically like multiplayer at least wait and see what this mode will offer before you shoot it down.

Now that I have that wall-o-text out of the way I can get to the true purpose of this topic: My ideas/opinions of what I would like to see added to the Dragon Age: Inquisition multiplayer.

I wanted to make a post here, compiling all of my ideas/opinions about DA:I's multiplayer so other players could make more sense out of what I want for the game.

CO-OP CAMPAIGN


My chief desire is for a fully implemented Co-op Campaign, one where the host plays as the Inquisitor (The Warden, Hawke, ect) and the other players control the partymembers. I use the LucasArts game Gladius as an example of this. In that game you could have other players drop-in, or drop-out as your part members and play the game alongside you. Granted Gladius was a turn based RPG, but the co-op features I would like still stand. The host player would still have control over who s/he talks to, what items they purchase from stores, what quests to take, and who to side with; the other players are just along for the ride.

The ability to play the entire story with your friends filling the roles of party members would be my ideal version of how the multiplayer should affect DA:I; having a local/split screen option would be even more awesome. Also if the DA team would like to have the player controlled party members have some input into how the story unfolds, why not give the person controlling the party member the option to coment on the Inquisitor's decisions. If DA 2 had this mode, picture the person controlling Fenris recieving a list of responses based on how the host player (Hawke) deals with the mages. Or it could even be a more evolved version of the system used by The Old Republic; where players pick how they want to respond to a situation and whoever wins the roll gets to reply.

I would say that such a feature would cause the least amount of discord among the single player only fans seeing as how there would be no rewriting of the main plot required, and the implimtaion of such a mode wouldn't hampper the story of the game since everything is using the same assets.


NO MULTIPLAYER BASED CAMPAIGNS (SPARTAN OPS)

This might sound like a contradiction to what I said above, but allow me to explain. Having a: "Battles During the (Mage/Templar) War" would (IMO) be the worst possible use of multiplayer in DA:I. Look at the other games that have tried to have a multplayer story; completly seperate from the main narrative; they have had several issues.

Such game modes are shallow/watered down versions of the main game. The invetory, character customization, length and plot are all cheap knock offs compared to the actual story. The length of such campaigns are lucky to add four to five hours of play time using reused scections of single player maps filled with enemies and the only objectives being action oriented: KILL ALL THE BAD GUYS!

The characters in such game modes are mostly non-existant, and faceles;, and even when the characters do have a face they are mostly bland and generalized charactacatures of the races they represent. The dwarf would be a gruff fighter, the elf would be the wise mage, and the human would be the cocky rogue; there would be no real depth to the characters, and the plot would be mostly non existant. What little story there is given in a few lines of dialouge between killing mobs of bad guys.

The DA team could break convention and give us a truely unique multiplayer based campaign, but going by the trend of such modes I wouldn't be too confident of such a success. I hate it when devlopers (not Bioware but others who have done such game modes) say: "Engage in a rich multiplayer storyline that follows the events of the main game." when those "rich" stories are no more than scripted deathmatchs against AI bots.

Its all or nothing IMO, either give us a fully implemented co-op campaign or give us a ME 3 style Horde Mode; going the middle ground will just cheapen the experience.

CO-OP SURVIVAL (HORDE MODE)

Now I am all for a co-op story, don't get me wrong, but a Horde Mode offers somethings that the main game couldn't.

Before I go further on that point let me stop for a moment and tell you all about my stance on the DA and ME universes and the races/creatures that inhabit them. I am drawn to the non-human, alien characters in the two respective settings. Shale in DA:O, Legion in ME 2 hold more appeal to me than Alistar, or Miranda, not to say that I think the human characters are poorly done, just; I am a human in real life 24/7, so anything that is not human I find interesting.

I don't want to play only as a human, a human with pointy ears, or a short human with a beard, I want to play as the more exotic fantasy creatures; things such as Werevwolves, Golems, Malibari, Sylvans, Disciples, ect. And while it would be supremely awesome to play as such things in a co-op campaign, I wouldn't want the DA team have to write the story around why a Werewolf is in the Inquisitor's party. Horde mode allows me to play as these creatures alongside those people that like to play as human, dwarves, and elves.

Sure there would be (pretty much) no story involved with such a mode, but the ME 3 multiplayer is pretty successful at what it offers, and unlike the multiplayer based campaign mentioned above, this mode offers increased replayability and customization. Once you beat the five hour multiplayer story, what point is there in playing it again?

Okay, now that that is out of the way I can know get down to the specifics of what I would like to see in DA:I's Horde Mode. Most of these ideas are extentions of what is offered in ME3's game mode but I do have some notable improvements (IMO) that I would like to see added.

- GIVE US AN ACTUAL STORE -

The store in ME3's multiplayer is very fickle in how it treats the players, someone who sinks 5 million credits into the thing is given only ammo consumables and avengers; while another player would buy a PSP and recieve a Harrier, and Typhoon in the same pack.

Now I understand Bioware / EA's reasoning behind making the store a virtual slot machine; the drive and desire to keep playing and (according to them) hopfully spend real world money on the packs in an attempt to unlock something of value. I am not against such a business model; especially when it means that all multiplayer DLC is free; but I would like to ask for (some) control on how things are unlocked given to the player.

One idea I had was that the store would contain two seperate lists of purchasable items. One list would contain the random packs that we all love to hate from ME3, and the other list would contain specific items that could be purchased but at an increased cost (say 300 to 500% more expensive) then the random packs. Each of the two lists would be broken down into catagories: Weapons, Armor, Relics/Accesories, and Races/Characters and then further broken down by rareity (Common, Uncommon, Rare, Ultra Rare ect). The random packs would obviously only contain random elements of the given category; no more hoping and praying for a Dwarf and getting a shield; but only would give one item per pack. The specific packs would allow you to pick any one of the items within each catagory but at an increased cost to the player.

Another idea would be to incorporate previous save files into the unlock system. What I mean by this is that when you log into the multiplayer for the first time, and you have a save from one of the previous DA games you are presented with a choice of "first dibs" unlocks based on the choices you made with that save. Did you side with the Werewolves? Well then you get the Werewolf class unlocked from the start. Did you side with the Mages in Kirkwall? Then you have you pick of mage specializations to choose from. For balancing issues only the first import used would grant the bonus unlocks; subsequent imports would grant small XP or gold rewards to the player. Granted this particular idea would require a huge (non-bugged) flag import system, but if it could be done not only would it allow the players to have control over what they unlock but also would be an interesting way IMO to allow single player to affect multiplayer.

NO CHARACTER KITS

ME3 multiplayer suffers extensivly from this particual feature IMO, restricting players to only specific race and power combinations is not something I want to see for DA:I. The way I see it, classes and specializations should be unlocks, but not the available powers within each race and class; with the exception of the unique classes (Werewolves, Golems, Sylvans, ect).

For example, if I unlock the Templar specialization for my warrior class, then that specialization should be fully available to all other warriors regardless of the race you are playing as. If the Templar spec was unlocked while I was playing as a human, but I decide to roll up a dwarf warrior, I want the Templar specialization available to pick. Don't limit the game down to ulocking seperate classes for each race: Human Templar, Dwarf Templar, and Elf Templar, and please do NOT limit the available powers of a specialization based on race either. When I unlock a specialization I don't want Holy Smite to ONLY be accesable by the Human Templars; I want any race that become a Templar to be able to use Holy Smite.

Secondly, I would like to be able to customize what powers I bring into battle, and were on the face buttons (Xbox 360 player here) I want the powers to go. ME3 is maddening on certain characters with this issue; I want to have Hunter Mode for my Geth Infiltrator to be on the LEFT BUMMPER DANGIT, the limited powers available to each KIT is a hinderance especially if you have a group with all of the same class. I picture the multiplayer giving us six slots for powers (based off of DA's X, Y, B and RT X, Y, B layout) so I would like to determine were my six powers go, and I would like the ability to "swap out" powers in between games for some other power. I don't like Holy Smite so I will remove that and subsitute Mana Burn for example.

But if we are able to have a complete list of abilities to chose from (Warrior/Templar trees) then we could customize our classes to suit individual playstyles and have variety between same classes. If I put all of my points into magic resistance and debuffing, but hardly any into basic warrior talents then I would be awesome at combating mages and demons but suck against phyisical attacks. Likewise another Templar on my team could evenly divide his points into both warrior and templar powers and is a more balanced fighter.

Essentially, I am asking for Bioware to allow us to make mistakes. Give us the freedom to customize our class in how we see fit; my full on Templar would rock against any magicial enemies but get destroyed by anything else; but it would be something that I as a player choose to do, not because of some artificial limitation placed on my class so that we could have more unlocks for the store.

* I'm going to stop here for now, getting late, but I will be adding to this in the future. Please let me know what you all think.

VERSUS MODE

I would be fine with a PvP game mode, but not if it was the only multiplayer option available (I preffer co-op over vs) and not if this was the only way to play as the more exotic/ non-human characters. I don't want such a mode to be the only way to play as an awakened Darkspawn, or a Sylvan, espcially when there are precidents set by lore that say that such creatures can work with the player (Warden, Hawke, Inquisitor) for a common goal. As long as I can play as these fantatasy creatures in a co-operative setting then I am perfectly fine with any PvP modes that Bioware includes.

One small caveat I would like to squeze in here is; I would love to see a meta RISK-like strategy game overlaying the PvP (and maybe even the CO-OP mode as well). This strategy game would consist of the continent of theadas broken into territories, and depending on which side was winning in the "war" the ownership of the sections would go towards the respective side. Owning a territory would conffer bonuses to the side that has control of it; bonuses like increased mana/stamina regeneration in combat, more XP earned, ect. If a side wins all territories they are declared the winner and the map would reset (Think Chromehounds for what I am driving at here).

1. Customizable weapons and armor for our multiplayer avatar.

- This is pretty self explanatory, bring the customization from single player into multiplayer. Mass Effect 3 MP lets you swap weapons, and armor colors around but for Dragon Age I would like to see interchangeable armor pieces, complete with different stats for said armor, and the ability to color those armor pieces.

- I would love to see the ability to wear mismatched armor pieces not just full armor sets. That rouge, you just leveled up is finally able to wear that dragon scale breastplate, but you still don't have enough coin to get a full set so you make due with the banded leather leggings, and simple cloth gloves.

- I would like to see the ability to customize what powers you bring into battle, let us the players decide how we want to spec our power sets. This way you can have greater potential variety of teams, even if every one is using the same class.

5. Let us combine powers (specifically magic powers) into the deadly "super powers" like we could in Dragon Age: Origins.

- Mass Effect lets you chain together tech bursts and biotic explosions, which while helpful in dealing a little extra damage lack the awe inspiring epic-ness of Storm of the Century for example.

- Allow players to chain these powers amongst themselves or with other players. Give the classes an incentive to work together, as well as a reward for using a diverse power selection.

6. Playable races (something other than humans).
- I understand that in the Single Player side of Dragon Age: Inquisition that players will be using only a human character, but the fantasy universe that Bioware has created is far to vast to only let humees have all the fun.

- Let us play as dwarves and elves again, each race having specific pros and cons associated with it (rather than just a reskin). Allow these differing stats to bleed over into the classes we play as: An Elf Mage would naturally have more spell power then a a Human Mage, but less health.

7. Bring in the "non-human" races as well.

- While this may seem like a repeat of item #6 allow me to explain. All of the previously playable races (human, dwarves, and elves) have all been human-like in appearance. Elves are humans with pointy ears, Dwarves are short bearded humans; each got different stats of course, but other than that the similarities were meager.

- I would like to see playable Golems, and Werewolves, ect. added to the MP roster. We already have a set pecident of both Golems and Werewolves working with the player in Dragon Age: Origins so having a playable Golem would not be lore breaking. I picture these non-human classes as being specifically effective in one area at the cost of less customization compared to the vanellia races.

- Werewolves could be extremely deadly at close range, but would suffer from missile attacks, and would not have the flexibility of a melee specced human rogue. Golems would be effective tanks/support units but would be slow and an easy target.

- With that being said, I would still like for the specialty races to be able to purchase and equip armor and weapons; nothing as varied as the original races but enough to let these classes survive on harder difficulties.

Well that is all I can think of at the moment, I will add more ideas as they come to me but, I will stop here for now. Please let me know what you think.

Edited for formating.

[Plaintiff]

Volus Warlord wrote...

BouncyFrag wrote...

wsandista wrote...

Multiplayer Romances?

There are some things in this world that shouldn't be thought, let alone spoken. Then again, 99% of those against MP would have a change of heart if such an atrocity occured.

Lol, don't get me started on my Orgie Simulator MP theory.

Well it would be nice if more multiplayer games focussed on the co-operative aspect, rather than have everybody competing to make the biggest splash.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

"We're checking Skyrim out aggressively." - Ray Muzyka.

*Adds multiplayer.*

The world reacts.

Seriously. How do you go from checking out Skyrim (A single-player-only game that sold A LOT more than yours because it's better) to then adding multiplayer? As if people needed another reason to doubt this company actually listens to it's core fanbase or even says anything that's remotely ture anymore.

This fanbase didn't look at the Dragon Age games and think to themselves, "You know what this series needs? Multiplayer!" They play games like Dragon Age because they're not multiplayer.

And look at what Bethesda is doing. They're making a multiplayer version of the Elder Scrolls. However, future main installments of the franchise will continue to remain single-player-only experiences.

See? That's how you do it, Bioware/EA. You don't turn KOTOR 3 into a MMO or add a lame multiplayer component to Dragon Age and expect the fans to love you for it. If Bethesda did that with Elder Scrolls, people would lose their ****, and rightly so.

Modifié par EpicBoot2daFace, 07 mars 2013 - 06:48 .

[Droma]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

"We're checking Skyrim out aggressively." - Ray Muzyka.

*Adds multiplayer.*

The world reacts.

Seriously. How do you go from checking out Skyrim (A single-player-only game that sold A LOT more than yours because it's better) to then adding multiplayer? As if people needed another reason to doubt this company actually listens to it's core fanbase or even says anything that's remotely ture anymore.

This fanbase didn't look at the Dragon Age games and think to themselves, "You know what this series needs? Multiplayer!" They play games like Dragon Age because they're not multiplayer.

And look at what Bethesda is doing. They're making a multiplayer version of the Elder Scrolls. However, future main installments of the franchise will continue to remain single-player-only experiences.

See? That's how you do it, Bioware/EA. You don't turn KOTOR 3 into a MMO or add a lame multiplayer component to Dragon Age and expect the fans to love you for it. If Bethesda did that with Elder Scrolls, people would lose their ****, and rightly so.

the huge success of ME3 MP (off which was said exactly the same before release) kind off disproves your whole point.

I never tought I would even touch ME3 MP, but it was great and I'm still playing it. If they just "copypaste" the ME3 MP formula into the DA universe, I will be very pleased and play the heck out of it.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

Droma wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

"We're checking Skyrim out aggressively." - Ray Muzyka.

*Adds multiplayer.*

The world reacts.

Seriously. How do you go from checking out Skyrim (A single-player-only game that sold A LOT more than yours because it's better) to then adding multiplayer? As if people needed another reason to doubt this company actually listens to it's core fanbase or even says anything that's remotely ture anymore.

This fanbase didn't look at the Dragon Age games and think to themselves, "You know what this series needs? Multiplayer!" They play games like Dragon Age because they're not multiplayer.

And look at what Bethesda is doing. They're making a multiplayer version of the Elder Scrolls. However, future main installments of the franchise will continue to remain single-player-only experiences.

See? That's how you do it, Bioware/EA. You don't turn KOTOR 3 into a MMO or add a lame multiplayer component to Dragon Age and expect the fans to love you for it. If Bethesda did that with Elder Scrolls, people would lose their ****, and rightly so.

the huge success of ME3 MP (off which was said exactly the same before release) kind off disproves your whole point.

I never tought I would even touch ME3 MP, but it was great and I'm still playing it. If they just "copypaste" the ME3 MP formula into the DA universe, I will be very pleased and play the heck out of it.

Mass Effect is a shooter with lite-RPG elements. Multiplayer has always made sense in that game. Even then it was just a copy/paste of Gears of War's Horde mode.

[Althix]

what? you think DA2 combat style will not fit for mp?

[Volus Warlord]

Plaintiff wrote...

Volus Warlord wrote...

BouncyFrag wrote...

wsandista wrote...

Multiplayer Romances?

There are some things in this world that shouldn't be thought, let alone spoken. Then again, 99% of those against MP would have a change of heart if such an atrocity occured.

Lol, don't get me started on my Orgie Simulator MP theory.

Well it would be nice if more multiplayer games focussed on the co-operative aspect, rather than have everybody competing to make the biggest splash.

Wait, is this supporting MP romance or against it? I can't tell.