138 réponses à ce sujet

[Scottus4]

Seriously.

Something like Spartan Ops but with Mass Effect level story telling and combat would be amazing, AMAZING. Level up and get guns through the standard MP combat missions, and take those characters, mods, and consumables into a episodic story. Each season would be ten 1-hour episodes released each week, full of dialogue, set piece moments, achievements, etc. First season would come free with a new copy of the game, and each season afterward Bioware could charge 20-25$ for. Each episode could have Bronze through Platinum challenge levels, allowing the player to potentially solo each episode or providing a serious challenge for a group of elite players. The episodes could also be setup for Challenge support if such a system exists in ME4.

I think it would be brilliant, so why the hate? Is it just because a number of single players don't have friends? Or is there something else?

[Astralify]

Because it means weaker RPG story experience and dumbed down character interactions and dialogue-wheel unfriendly. And it's completely UNNECESSARY, out of place and immersion breaking.

If you want CO-OP, play something else.

[Scottus4]

Astralify wrote...

Because it means weaker RPG story experience and dumbed down character interactions and dialogue-wheel unfriendly. And it's completely UNNECESSARY, out of place and immersion breaking.

If you want CO-OP, play something else.

Yes, the Co-Op campaign would likely not have as much character interaction, dialogue wheel choices if they even existed, and the story wouldn't be the primary backbone of the experience, but then it would be separate from the SP. It isn't like you get dialogue wheels when you're reading through Mass Effect books or comics either.

And don't give me the "it takes resources away from SP" crap. ME3 has solid SP and MP, that's the end of that argument.

[Guanxii]

Astralify wrote...

Because it means weaker RPG story experience and dumbed down character interactions and dialogue-wheel unfriendly. And it's completely UNNECESSARY, out of place and immersion breaking.

If you want CO-OP, play something else.

It doesn't have to be that way. Just imagine if ME3 had jump-in co-op where you press start on another controller and assume control of one of the other two squadmates or jump-in during the squad selection screen? That would be amazing.

Modifié par Guanxii, 30 novembre 2012 - 11:03 .

[BlacJAC74]

i'm against it because friends tend to play different games at different times. It's not an issue when any given title is new on the market, however, it becomes an issue a month or 2 down the line when your friends have moved onto something else. I don't want to spend my time listening to some jumped up whiny kid or a complete idiot just so i can play a game the way it was intended to be played.

Believe it or not, some people aren't able to connect to LIVE or the internet each and every time they wish to play a game. If i've learnt one thing over the years, it's MP and co-op, when properly implemented, tend to be added at the expense of story related content. After all, just look at FPS, the SP campaign now seems to be an after thought. Whilst the likes of Gearbox [BL2] tend to strike a happy medium, the majority of devs flesh out what SP content they can.

Last but certainly not least, there's already a huge selection of co-op and MP games out there that cater for this market.

Modifié par BlacJAC74, 30 novembre 2012 - 11:04 .

[Scottus4]

Last but certainly not least, there's already a huge selection of co-op and MP games out there that cater for this market.

AAA Sci-fi/space fantasy 3rd person squad co-op shooters with compelling universes? I'm having trouble thinking about what games you're talking about.

Modifié par Scottus4, 30 novembre 2012 - 11:10 .

[FlamingBoy]

because it will take resources away from the main experience, instead of putting it within a game that people value within mass effect;

a particular ending comes to mind

[BlacJAC74]

Also, I'm happy Dishonored did well as it shows there's still a huge market for SP games if they're of a good standard. It would have been so easy for them to shoehorn co-op into the game, especially at this late stage into the current cycle of consoles, but they showed it can be done.

[FlamingBoy]

Scottus4 wrote...
I think it would be brilliant, so why the hate? Is it just because a number of single players don't have friends? Or is there something else?

forget my orginal statement, after posting your orginal statement I thought OP wanted a serious discussion on the issues, but after re-reading I now relize his ways and opinion is set and the question was just rhetorical

[Scottus4]

i'm against it because friends tend to play different games at different times. It's not an issue when any given title is new on the market, however, it becomes an issue a month or 2 down the line when your friends have moved onto something else.

This is a fair point though. Coming back to ME3's MP, most of the people on my friends list and in real life are playing Halo 4 or COD Black Ops. I'd have a hard time convincing them to come back. Unless the first season was incredibly compelling, I think most people wouldn't be willing to wait for the second season and would move onto the next game, as high quality games hit the market more often than high quality TV shows, which is why the episodic and seasonal structures works for TV but is only starting to attract attention on the video game scene, as retention for most games is generally much lower. 

Modifié par Scottus4, 30 novembre 2012 - 11:17 .

[BlacJAC74]

Scottus4 wrote...

Last but certainly not least, there's already a huge selection of co-op and MP games out there that cater for this market.

AAA Sci-fi/space fantasy 3rd person squad co-op shooters with compelling universes? I'm having trouble thinking about what games you're talking about.

You've proved my point.  There aren't many because the ones that have been done, haven't been compelling due to MP and co-op being implimented.  It's one or the other.  Otherwise, it would have been done to death.  There's the likes of GoW, Crysis, Star Craft etc that somewhat cater to the sc-fi hordes.

[melbye90]

Because co-op destroy games, just look at Resident Evil 5 and 6. Awful, awful games

[oldag07]

TOR somewhat successfully did it. I am not necessarily saying you should make it an MMORPG, but a coop RPG campaign is possible.

[Astralify]

Scottus4 wrote...

Astralify wrote...

Because it means weaker RPG story experience and dumbed down character interactions and dialogue-wheel unfriendly. And it's completely UNNECESSARY, out of place and immersion breaking.

If you want CO-OP, play something else.

Yes, the Co-Op campaign would likely not have as much character interaction, dialogue wheel choices if they even existed, and the story wouldn't be the primary backbone of the experience, but then it would be separate from the SP. It isn't like you get dialogue wheels when you're reading through Mass Effect books or comics either.

And don't give me the "it takes resources away from SP" crap. ME3 has solid SP and MP, that's the end of that argument.

1st. I don't read ME books and comics. And yes - Dialogue wheel, story and character Interactions are (were) the most important things in Mass Effect. 


2nd. The majority of ME fanbase (Which were at least %30 women) are not interested in MP or other online ****. So by including CO-OP that takes away from the main experience since they're probably not gonna play it. So they are not going to get the full story. And that is BAD! We are already getting less and less with each game.


3rd.  The Inclusion of MP or CO-OP or other **** like that will in fact ALWAYS take away from the SP one way or another. (This has being discussed to death and I'm not gonna discuss it here) And not just because of the budget that can be spend on more dialogue and interesting scenes instead of MP. 
In ME3's case the inclusion of MP leaded to reducing every choice to pointless numbers so the MP can be somehow unnecessarily connected to the SP. (And there are actually people that play the MP who want the "special ops" war asset removed, so they can experience bad outcomes too. That's another indicator of why this whole concept doesn't have a place in ME game).


And again if you don't see this points as problems, ME is not the type of game for you. There are other games out there that will satisfy your gaming needs. 

 

Modifié par Astralify, 30 novembre 2012 - 11:37 .

[MassStorm]

Astralify wrote...

Scottus4 wrote...

Astralify wrote...

Because it means weaker RPG story experience and dumbed down character interactions and dialogue-wheel unfriendly. And it's completely UNNECESSARY, out of place and immersion breaking.

If you want CO-OP, play something else.

Yes, the Co-Op campaign would likely not have as much character interaction, dialogue wheel choices if they even existed, and the story wouldn't be the primary backbone of the experience, but then it would be separate from the SP. It isn't like you get dialogue wheels when you're reading through Mass Effect books or comics either.

And don't give me the "it takes resources away from SP" crap. ME3 has solid SP and MP, that's the end of that argument.

1st. I don't read ME books and comics. And yes - Dialogue wheel, story and character Interactions are (were) the most important things in Mass Effect. 


2nd. The majority of ME fanbase (Which were at least %30 women) are not interested in MP or other online ****. So by including CO-OP that takes away from the main experience since they're probably not gonna play it. So they are not going to get the full story. And that is BAD! We are already getting less and less with each game.


3rd.  The Inclusion of MP or CO-OP or other **** like that will in fact ALWAYS take away from the SP one way or another. (This has being discussed to death and I'm not gonna discuss it here) And not just because of the budget that can be spend on more dialogue and interesting scenes instead of MP. 
In ME3's case the inclusion of MP leaded to reducing every choice to pointless numbers so the MP can be somehow unnecessarily connected to the SP. (And there are actually people that play the MP who want the "special ops" war asset removed, so they can experience bad outcomes too. That's another indicator of why this whole concept doesn't have a place in ME game).


And again if you don't see this points as problems, ME is not the type of game for you. There are other games out there that will satisfy your gaming needs. 

 

This so much. I agree with these points.

Saying that MP/Co-op has any effect on SP is just being naive. Why ME cannot be a in depth singleplayer experience?? Why every game should have an online function?? Why every game should offer the same thing??

Modifié par MassStorm, 30 novembre 2012 - 11:41 .

[Astralify]

Guanxii wrote...

Astralify wrote...

Because it means weaker RPG story experience and dumbed down character interactions and dialogue-wheel unfriendly. And it's completely UNNECESSARY, out of place and immersion breaking.

If you want CO-OP, play something else.

It doesn't have to be that way. Just imagine if ME3 had jump-in co-op where you press start on another controller and assume control of one of the other two squadmates or jump-in during the squad selection screen? That would be amazing.

No, that would be bad. The point of role playing is to enter the  role of your character (Shepard), not switch between other characters that have their own personalities. That would totaly defeat the purpose and the dept of every character which would reduce the game to... nothing...  just another co-op game that is nothing special. Don't you understand how bad this sounds? Or you never looked it from this point of view?

Modifié par Astralify, 30 novembre 2012 - 11:44 .

[Rosstoration]

Scottus4 wrote...

Seriously.

Something like Spartan Ops but with Mass Effect level story telling and combat would be amazing, AMAZING. Level up and get guns through the standard MP combat missions, and take those characters, mods, and consumables into a episodic story. Each season would be ten 1-hour episodes released each week, full of dialogue, set piece moments, achievements, etc. First season would come free with a new copy of the game, and each season afterward Bioware could charge 20-25$ for. Each episode could have Bronze through Platinum challenge levels, allowing the player to potentially solo each episode or providing a serious challenge for a group of elite players. The episodes could also be setup for Challenge support if such a system exists in ME4.

I think it would be brilliant, so why the hate? Is it just because a number of single players don't have friends? Or is there something else?

I underlined what made me feel like this is someone deliberately trying to antagonise and get a rise out of people.

If this is serious then, I would have to state that people who play BioWare games are not made up of the standard 13 year-old CoD brats. I saw what "episodic story" did to "Alone in the Dark" and what contrived co-op implimentation did to "Resident Evil". If you want to just mong out with your friends and do the pew-pew, there is plenty of great co-op games out there, Left 4 Dead, Borderlands, MGS: Peace Walker, Portal 2, Dead Island, etc.
First and foremost Mass Effect is about the rich story and characters, not running-and-gunning (this 'aint Contra!) trying to blast through levels and get a good score.
Or maybe I'm just from a dying breed of people, the ones who remember when LucasArts made some of the most amazing story-driven, adventure games out there. Maybe it is all about the "AMAZIN EXPLOTIONS!!", like some cheap 80's action film.

Modifié par Rosstoration, 30 novembre 2012 - 11:55 .

[Scottus4]

Astralify wrote...

Guanxii wrote...

Astralify wrote...

Because it means weaker RPG story experience and dumbed down character interactions and dialogue-wheel unfriendly. And it's completely UNNECESSARY, out of place and immersion breaking.

If you want CO-OP, play something else.

It doesn't have to be that way. Just imagine if ME3 had jump-in co-op where you press start on another controller and assume control of one of the other two squadmates or jump-in during the squad selection screen? That would be amazing.

No, that would be bad. The point of role playing is to enter the  role of your character (Shepard), not switch between other characters that have their own personalities. That would totaly defeat the purpose and the dept of every character which would reduce the game to... nothing...  just another co-op game that is nothing special. Don't you understand how bad this sounds? Or you never looked it from this point of view?

I don't... what?

I have no idea what you're trying to say. I personally don't like the idea of drop-in co-op for the SP campaign because SP is meant to be able to be played at your own pace - pausing the game, considering dialogue choices, etc all would become awkward when your buddy is impatiently waiting for you to make a decision. Saying that somehow the experience is degraded because Thane is being controlled by your buddy instead of  bad AI... I don't follow your logic in the slightest.

If you want to just mong out with your friends and do the pew-pew,
there is plenty of great co-op games out there, Left 4 Dead,
Borderlands, MGS: Peace Walker, Portal 2, Dead Island, etc.

I would have thrown a fit about someone saying a Metal Gear game was mindless co-op shooter... if it weren't true for Peace Walker's case. I'll give you that one, they done goofed there. Problem was that the co-op campaign was meant to also be the SP campaign. If you make a clear distinction and deliver an awesome SP campaign, and then have a separate but still awesome co-op campaign, I feel like you avoid that issue.

Modifié par Scottus4, 30 novembre 2012 - 12:05 .

[Astralify]

Scottus4 wrote...

I don't... what?

I have no idea what you're trying to say. I personally don't like the idea of drop-in co-op for the SP campaign because SP is meant to be able to be played at your own pace - pausing the game, considering dialogue choices, etc all would become awkward when your buddy is impatiently waiting for you to make a decision. Saying that somehow the experience is degraded because Thane is being controlled by your buddy instead of  bad AI... I don't follow your logic in the slightest.

I've already explained. And there are many other complications, (like your friend is playing what exactly? Mass Effect or is just there to shoot things. Who's story is this? Who's experience?) These things will have to be addressed by the devs in a way that makes sense.  Which will inevitably butcher the SP experience for those (like me) who won't play the CO-OP and don't want dumbed down experience.
And finally what's the f***ing point for one of you to be the main PC and the other one to be just a pawn? *Isn't it better each of you to have your own personal unique experience?
CO-OP is pointless, it's unnecessary and a really bad idea. Neither you or me or your friend will be completely satisfied with it.

*[edit: added]

Modifié par Astralify, 30 novembre 2012 - 12:29 .

[Scottus4]

And finally what's the f***ing point for one of you to be the main PC and the other one to be just a pawn?

Fun. When people play Halo, one guy is Master Chief and the rest are just along for the ride, but people don't mind because they enjoy playing with their buddies. Same with New Super Mario Bros, one guy is Mario, another is Luigi, the others are generic Toads who are just there for fun.

I see it more of a matter of pacing issues, trying to integrate co-op into the SP causes either the SP to feel rushed or the co-op feels too slow.

However, if the co-op is its own experience and the pacing is designed with co-op in mind, well then you have something that can work much better.

[Astralify]

Scottus4 wrote...

And finally what's the f***ing point for one of you to be the main PC and the other one to be just a pawn?

Fun. When people play Halo, one guy is Master Chief and the rest are just along for the ride, but people don't mind because they enjoy playing with their buddies. Same with New Super Mario Bros, one guy is Mario, another is Luigi, the others are generic Toads who are just there for fun.

I see it more of a matter of pacing issues, trying to integrate co-op into the SP causes either the SP to feel rushed or the co-op feels too slow.

However, if the co-op is its own experience and the pacing is designed with co-op in mind, well then you have something that can work much better.

Mass Effect doesn't need that kind of fun.  And read the 2nd. point from my previous post because I hate to repeat myself.

And finally - YOU HAVE HALO! Why do you want halo experience in Mass Effect again? I might want HALO to be Deep story and character driven 3rd person shooter without MP or CO-OP. Wouldn't that defeat the purpose of the HALO franchise? 

Here is an advice - you play your HALO and I'll play my Mass Effect. Everyone happy! 

[Corvus Black]

Scottus4 wrote...

Seriously.

Something like Spartan Ops but with Mass Effect level story telling and combat would be amazing, AMAZING. Level up and get guns through the standard MP combat missions, and take those characters, mods, and consumables into a episodic story. Each season would be ten 1-hour episodes released each week, full of dialogue, set piece moments, achievements, etc. First season would come free with a new copy of the game, and each season afterward Bioware could charge 20-25$ for. Each episode could have Bronze through Platinum challenge levels, allowing the player to potentially solo each episode or providing a serious challenge for a group of elite players. The episodes could also be setup for Challenge support if such a system exists in ME4.

I think it would be brilliant, so why the hate? Is it just because a number of single players don't have friends? Or is there something else?

this is why we can't have nice things

[Laforgus]

MssStorm wrote...

Astralify wrote...

Scottus4 wrote...

Astralify wrote...

Because it means weaker RPG story experience and dumbed down character interactions and dialogue-wheel unfriendly. And it's completely UNNECESSARY, out of place and immersion breaking.

If you want CO-OP, play something else.

Yes, the Co-Op campaign would likely not have as much character interaction, dialogue wheel choices if they even existed, and the story wouldn't be the primary backbone of the experience, but then it would be separate from the SP. It isn't like you get dialogue wheels when you're reading through Mass Effect books or comics either.

And don't give me the "it takes resources away from SP" crap. ME3 has solid SP and MP, that's the end of that argument.

1st. I don't read ME books and comics. And yes - Dialogue wheel, story and character Interactions are (were) the most important things in Mass Effect. 


2nd. The majority of ME fanbase (Which were at least %30 women) are not interested in MP or other online ****. So by including CO-OP that takes away from the main experience since they're probably not gonna play it. So they are not going to get the full story. And that is BAD! We are already getting less and less with each game.


3rd.  The Inclusion of MP or CO-OP or other **** like that will in fact ALWAYS take away from the SP one way or another. (This has being discussed to death and I'm not gonna discuss it here) And not just because of the budget that can be spend on more dialogue and interesting scenes instead of MP. 
In ME3's case the inclusion of MP leaded to reducing every choice to pointless numbers so the MP can be somehow unnecessarily connected to the SP. (And there are actually people that play the MP who want the "special ops" war asset removed, so they can experience bad outcomes too. That's another indicator of why this whole concept doesn't have a place in ME game).


And again if you don't see this points as problems, ME is not the type of game for you. There are other games out there that will satisfy your gaming needs. 

 

This so much. I agree with these points.

Saying that MP/Co-op has any effect on SP is just being naive. Why ME cannot be a in depth singleplayer experience?? Why every game should have an online function?? Why every game should offer the same thing??

All games SHOULD have an Online funtion, without Multiplayer ME3 would be a dumped game in a closet already. Online Play is the best way development have to control the piracy, if ME3 were just an offline SP game, i swear you for GOD that i would have Torrent it and Cracked it, and yes DLC can be added too. 8 of every 10 games i have is Pirated for that reason.

Now back to OP, a full campaign wouldn,t be necesary as stated previously the best part of ME is the inmersive history, but more flavour to the Multiplayer Gameplay would be great. Besides the already existing Battle arena missions, the Devs could add some other modes, like survival, or some midle distance maps filled with strategies, like protecting something that can be destroyed by the enemy.

The Operations is a great asset, they should add a weekly Hard Allied Challenge besides the weekend one, who would be personal. and of course keep updating, because withotu the Onlien funtion, ME3 would be just simply a game where peopel only complain about endings they do not understand.

Modifié par Laforgus, 30 novembre 2012 - 02:07 .

[wolfsite]

It would hurt the Roleplay aspect of the game especially if you get in a co-op that can't agree on which way the story should go.