Aller au contenu

Photo

How would you like the multiplayer to influence the game and why?


313 réponses à ce sujet

#51
Rawgrim

Rawgrim
  • Members
  • 11 524 messages

robertthebard wrote...

TheJediSaint wrote...

It would be interesting if they had cooperative multiplayer that worked something like the flaspoints in SWTOR, where the players participate in a story-based adventure. Especially if the mutliplayer allowed the players to see the single player story from a different perspective. 

Of course, a Coop mode for the main game, like in Baldur's Gate, would be cool to.

NWN's is my favorite example of this.  Some of the people on my "home" server in the MP game got together and ran some of the content in coop MP.  It was quite fun.  It was not required to complete the game, nor did it add or take away from the SP experience.  This is the whole point, so far as I can see, of people that are against it; it shouldn't affect SP at all.


NWN was pretty much made for multiplayer. They called it a "Multiplayer Revolution" in the trailer, even. And the game itself was pretty much hack and slash. You hacked your way through an area. Entered building or dungeon. Hacked your way from A to B. Killed a boss. Looted the chest next to him. Returned to Aribeth . If you died you respawned.

#52
coldSnap

coldSnap
  • Members
  • 113 messages
i dont mind having multiplayer, but i'd rather it not effect my campaign game

#53
robertthebard

robertthebard
  • Members
  • 6 108 messages

Rawgrim wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

TheJediSaint wrote...

It would be interesting if they had cooperative multiplayer that worked something like the flaspoints in SWTOR, where the players participate in a story-based adventure. Especially if the mutliplayer allowed the players to see the single player story from a different perspective. 

Of course, a Coop mode for the main game, like in Baldur's Gate, would be cool to.

NWN's is my favorite example of this.  Some of the people on my "home" server in the MP game got together and ran some of the content in coop MP.  It was quite fun.  It was not required to complete the game, nor did it add or take away from the SP experience.  This is the whole point, so far as I can see, of people that are against it; it shouldn't affect SP at all.


NWN was pretty much made for multiplayer. They called it a "Multiplayer Revolution" in the trailer, even. And the game itself was pretty much hack and slash. You hacked your way through an area. Entered building or dungeon. Hacked your way from A to B. Killed a boss. Looted the chest next to him. Returned to Aribeth . If you died you respawned.

I played, wrote scripts, and designed areas/plots for individual online servers.  These servers all had one thing in common:  there was no Aribeth.  If we can get MP similar to that, I'd gladly play, and maybe even try to work with the tools to develop my own stories.  The theme here?  They would have no affect whatsoever on the SP campaign.  I didn't play the campaigns from NWN's for 5 years.  I played online servers.  Sometimes a group from one of these would either play in the campaigns together, or server hop for an evening to see what other people were doing.  None of this, however, affected how our SP games went, and, in fact, the owner of one of the servers I played on never finished any of the SP campaigns, preferring instead to simply build in the toolset.  The two were very seperate entities, and that's the way it should be.

#54
Wotannanow

Wotannanow
  • Members
  • 310 messages
Multiplayer having any effect -- any at all -- be it experience, wealth, items or anything. That is the worst and stupidest thing that could be done. Just look at the totally stupid way the had MP affect SP in ME 3!!

#55
Blastback

Blastback
  • Members
  • 2 723 messages
Please, for the love of gaming, do not make any aspect of single player dependent on multiplayer.  Do not make any content, no matter how insignifigant, dependent on multiplayer to access. 

#56
PsychoBlonde

PsychoBlonde
  • Members
  • 5 129 messages

Inprea wrote...

In my case they're two things I would like to see multi player allow us to do. First I would like it if we could earn wealth via multi player for the single player game. Secondly I would like it if we could gain experience points for our character. The reason for this due to bioware's typical game style.


I could put up with this.  I also wouldn't mind being able to unlock stuff for new characters like bonus stat points, gear, etc--basically, the stuff they put in DLC item packs.  It'd be 100% optional so the people who like it can go after it and the people who don't can ignore it.  That would be fine with me.

I do NOT want an ending that depends on the MP in some way.

#57
Patchwork

Patchwork
  • Members
  • 2 585 messages
None, absolutely no effect what so ever.

#58
Vicious

Vicious
  • Members
  • 3 221 messages
Unlock assets, a la ME3, items and bonuses. Neat stuff but by no means required.

Do NOT remotely require it to getting the 'best' ending.

Modifié par Vicious, 21 octobre 2012 - 07:17 .


#59
Allan Schumacher

Allan Schumacher
  • BioWare Employees
  • 7 640 messages
Based on ME3 I think the only way we could use MP in a way that "relates to the SP story" is either co-op campaign or having a hook in MP that relates it back to the SP (kind of like how MP in ME3 is playing the N7 squads that Hackett talks about).

Aside from that, I think we'd be treading on thin ice with a lot of weight on our shoulders. I'd be open to SP making an influence on MP, but not the other way around.

#60
DarkKnightHolmes

DarkKnightHolmes
  • Members
  • 3 602 messages
MP should influence SP in NO WAY.

#61
Il Divo

Il Divo
  • Members
  • 9 752 messages

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Based on ME3 I think the only way we could use MP in a way that "relates to the SP story" is either co-op campaign or having a hook in MP that relates it back to the SP (kind of like how MP in ME3 is playing the N7 squads that Hackett talks about).

Aside from that, I think we'd be treading on thin ice with a lot of weight on our shoulders. I'd be open to SP making an influence on MP, but not the other way around.


The problem with the ME3 multiplayer is that their premise doesn't really amount to much. Bioware has been well-known for their stories, so the idea of relating all MP content to the SP is great in theory. But in-game it doesns't do a great job of reinforcing the main game. My mentality/approach to the MP content is too different. Bioware might be better off at looking towards games like Portal 2 or even Dark Souls if we really have to go down that road. .

#62
mousestalker

mousestalker
  • Members
  • 16 945 messages
It's my understanding that the introduction of multipony means that we will finally see horses in Thedas. So, yay?

#63
Inprea

Inprea
  • Members
  • 1 048 messages

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Based on ME3 I think the only way we could use MP in a way that "relates to the SP story" is either co-op campaign or having a hook in MP that relates it back to the SP (kind of like how MP in ME3 is playing the N7 squads that Hackett talks about).

Aside from that, I think we'd be treading on thin ice with a lot of weight on our shoulders. I'd be open to SP making an influence on MP, but not the other way around.


I'm a bit surprised to read that actually but that does seem to be what the majority desires. Well if only looking at this thread I can't say I've created an indepth poll with random sampling after all. With nothing to be gained in single player multi player just becomes wasted resources to me. I stopped even thinking of dragon age legends once I was certain there would be no more gear gained from it. Of course, that's partly because it's a facebook game which tends to be rather lacking in fun without lots of friends or spending far more money then it's worth in my opinion.

Hopefully the developers can make it into something enjoyable even to those who focus only on the single player aspect and not wasted disc space.

#64
garrusfan1

garrusfan1
  • Members
  • 8 047 messages
NO I know they are gonna add it but I don't want it to affect SP at all. They can have it but it needs to completely seperate from SP which given the uproar about ME3 MP I don't think it will matter

#65
Guest_sjpelkessjpeler_*

Guest_sjpelkessjpeler_*
  • Guests

Il Divo wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Based on ME3 I think the only way we could use MP in a way that "relates to the SP story" is either co-op campaign or having a hook in MP that relates it back to the SP (kind of like how MP in ME3 is playing the N7 squads that Hackett talks about).

Aside from that, I think we'd be treading on thin ice with a lot of weight on our shoulders. I'd be open to SP making an influence on MP, but not the other way around.


The problem with the ME3 multiplayer is that their premise doesn't really amount to much. Bioware has been well-known for their stories, so the idea of relating all MP content to the SP is great in theory. But in-game it doesns't do a great job of reinforcing the main game. My mentality/approach to the MP content is too different. Bioware might be better off at looking towards games like Portal 2 or even Dark Souls if we really have to go down that road. .


I never played any mp but imagine that story and rp are things that are not important. As I see it you hack and slash yourself with the ppl you team up with through certain levels. Which is great if you do it as a team and can complete a level together if one enjoys it.

Did play co-op in Portal2 which I really enjoyed. Portal though is a very different game than DA (as Portal co-op means solving puzzels from going from point A to B) and I have difficulty imagioning a co-op feature in the DA franchise......

The mp feature should not have an effect on the sp campaign because the way I see it they cannot be combined in terms of the story.

#66
Guest_franciscoamell_*

Guest_franciscoamell_*
  • Guests
I wouldn't.

#67
challenger18

challenger18
  • Members
  • 715 messages
I would be down for a co-op experience that actually had a story to it. Since DA has so many side projects expanding on things (books, comics, movies, etc) then I would like the same thing in multiplayer. Something that is related and can even explain some things that happen in the SP mode, but does not directly effect the SP experience.

#68
Vandicus

Vandicus
  • Members
  • 2 426 messages

robertthebard wrote...

Vandicus wrote...

HeriocGreyWarden wrote...

Inprea wrote...

In my case they're two things I would like to see multi player allow us to do. First I would like it if we could earn wealth via multi player for the single player game. Secondly I would like it if we could gain experience points for our character.


NO! I don't want to be forced to play MP becouse i would be more powerfull in SP if i play MP,this is BAD


And I don't want to be "forced" to do fetch quests and exploration in order to maximize loot or gain the most powerful weapons in the game which are entirely unavailable through non-fetch quest means.

Then maybe these aren't the right kinds of games for you?  The whole idea of an RPG is to develop the character and grow.  You do this by obtaining xp/levels and wealth/items.  XP is gained, unlike in MMOs where you can farm it, by doing jobs(aka quests) to earn it, sort of like real life.  This "Do quest a, get paid, do quest b etc etc" scenario isn't unique to the DA series.  In recent memory, it's happening in every RPG on the shelves, and, to some extent, even happens in FPS style games, where you can find that BFG if you get to the right place at the right time.

This is also where your reputation/influence is determined:  Protag gets the job done, or Protag bails in the middle of missions, etc etc.  I've been spending a lot of time playing Assassin's Creed, and in all of the variants out so far, you advance the same way.  It's part of what makes these games what they are.  If you don't want to do the jobs to earn the money/items, then you shouldn't have the items just because you played MP.  The EMS snafu mentioned earlier is a perfect example of why optional MP affecting a SP campaign is bad.  I know people that have enough EMS after the Mars mission in ME 3 that they could get the best endings you can get, not saying a lot, right then, w/out having to play the rest of the game, while I, on the other hand, prior to Leviathan's release, had to spend several hours of game time doing scanning missions/other quests that I might just as soon skip, to get enough EMS.  This imbalance should not exist.

I am, however, almost willing to take bets that it will affect the castle.  This is bad, and shouldn't happen.  Not that it matters what happens in your version of the universe, but because what happens in your version of the universe shouldn't affect what happens in mine.  So, MP should have absolutely no affect on SP.


Fetch quests and exploration quests are not the main point of the DA series. Having an alternative to doing these particular quests aren't an inherently bad thing. It doesn't take away from your ability to do those exploration or fetch quests. The people who played multiplayer for hours in order to avoid having to play through the "exploration" of dropping scans on planets in ME3(which I enjoyed actually because of the codex like info tied to them) did not prevent you from doing so.

I am not a fan of the exploration aspect of having to find items X,Y, and Z so that the crafter can make my weapon. This makes up about 1% or less of any given DA game, and having an alternative to get the weapon hardly changes a fundamental aspect of the game. Even more so the fetch quests in DA2. Finding a pair of trousers or a portrait and turning it in to someone for 50 silvers is not a fundamental part of the DA2 experience, and adding in an alternative is hardly punishing for those people who enjoy doing them.

I'm not saying MP should replace questing(and the DA series does not appear to be a loot+dungeon delving centric RPG in the first place, story is the main focus), but I would like to have some sort've alternative to getting the rewards available from fetch and exploration quests, and MP is just one feature that could possibly address it. Fetch quests weren't as problematic in DA:O because of the abundance of coin. However, the only way to get the strongest gear in the game was either exploration, or buying DLC.

Modifié par Vandicus, 21 octobre 2012 - 08:00 .


#69
Genshie

Genshie
  • Members
  • 1 404 messages
Who is to say that there is only one Inquisitor running around? I think a selection of co-op missions would work well as long as I can attain everything on my own even with out said other player. Something like how Borderlands drop-in drop-out co-op can work.

#70
Estelindis

Estelindis
  • Members
  • 3 699 messages

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Based on ME3 I think the only way we could use MP in a way that "relates to the SP story" is either co-op campaign or having a hook in MP that relates it back to the SP (kind of like how MP in ME3 is playing the N7 squads that Hackett talks about).

Aside from that, I think we'd be treading on thin ice with a lot of weight on our shoulders. I'd be open to SP making an influence on MP, but not the other way around.

Allan, that's very reassuring.  Thanks a lot for posting!  :wizard:

#71
RandomSyhn

RandomSyhn
  • Members
  • 341 messages
Was multiplayer ever confirmed? I understand how it was worked into ME but it doesn't seem as practical for DA. As for one affecting the other I don't really want my multiplayer to affect my campaign. I'll admit relating it storywise (ie the N7 mercs int he war) is appreciated, but I'm not sure I like the idea of integrating multiplayer into dragonage at all.

#72
TheJediSaint

TheJediSaint
  • Members
  • 6 637 messages
For me, the ideal MP would be a co-op campaign that cover a part of the story that the single player protagonist is not directly involved in. So the value of mutliplayer wold be to give the players a different perspective on the game's events.

Modifié par TheJediSaint, 21 octobre 2012 - 08:27 .


#73
JamieCOTC

JamieCOTC
  • Members
  • 6 341 messages
How would you like the multiplayer to influence the game? In no way whatsoever.

Why? ME3.

#74
CrazyRah

CrazyRah
  • Members
  • 13 280 messages

JamieCOTC wrote...

How would you like the multiplayer to influence the game? In no way whatsoever.

Why? ME3.



#75
devSin

devSin
  • Members
  • 8 929 messages
Multiplayer should have no effect on single-player whatsoever, unless they offer a campaign co-op (in which case, they have to deal with multiplayer vs. single-player characters and games, however they choose to do so).