225 réponses à ce sujet

[ScotGaymer]

LinksOcarina wrote...

To be honest, if they follow some of the lessons from Mass Effect 3 and the multiplayer there, I think it would be a great addition to Dragon Age III. I would argue that the multiplayer in Mass Effect is more true to actual role-playing mechanics that people seem to be against because its a separate mode.

Take for example classes. Traditional stuff like say Call of Duty has everything loosey-goosey, where you can pick and choose from a bit of everything to customize classes. Mass Effect actually has roles per class, and each character career adds a new type of build that you can follow. It is different playing an Asari Justicar vs an Asari Adept, for example. Or a male and female quarian Infiltrator. And that really does show the kind of thought and balancing of numerous character jobs we can have with the six core classes.

Throw in power use, weapon mods, weapon choices, and the like, and it really is a good representation of a co-op RPG experience, like Dead Island and Borderlands have done, and Baldurs Gate in the past.

Yeah I think someone has missed the point of an RPG...

Multiplayer, CoD multiplayer, is NOT RPG.

[tishyw]

ediskrad327 wrote...

"oh ok le'ts just scrap all the progress we made there" yeah um it's not going to happen and ME3s Multiplayer was entirely optional after EC since they don't mean anything and i don't think they are going to pull a "play multiplayer for good ending" again

I'm sorry but I've seen you dismiss the ME3 problem with "they fixed with the EC" before and, frankly, it's no excuse.

Bioware's behaviour in regards to SP players not having access to enough points to get one of the endings was appalling, denial, misleading stickys, insulting posts, locking/moving/hiding threads about the problem, sulky silence and then finally, and very quietly, fixing it in the EC 6 months after it had initially been reported!

This treatment of it's fans is the main reason why I won't be pre-ordering another Bioware game again, I'm going to wait for player feedback before giving them my money.

[malfeischylde]

Adugan wrote...

I really dont want MP to be integrated like in ME3. I hated having to play a bunch of missions with random leechers just to get the best war assets. If DA3 absolutely has to have MP, make it a separate mode that is 100% optional and has no influence on the SP game. 

I agree 100%. I play games to unwind. I socialize to socialize. I don't really mix the two. I have no issue with those who enjoy mp, but I know many people who do not. Let mp afect the game, but not determine key aspects of it for single player heavy gamers, like me. 

Modifié par malfeischylde, 08 décembre 2012 - 11:35 .

[LinksOcarina]

FitScotGaymer wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

To be honest, if they follow some of the lessons from Mass Effect 3 and the multiplayer there, I think it would be a great addition to Dragon Age III. I would argue that the multiplayer in Mass Effect is more true to actual role-playing mechanics that people seem to be against because its a separate mode.

Take for example classes. Traditional stuff like say Call of Duty has everything loosey-goosey, where you can pick and choose from a bit of everything to customize classes. Mass Effect actually has roles per class, and each character career adds a new type of build that you can follow. It is different playing an Asari Justicar vs an Asari Adept, for example. Or a male and female quarian Infiltrator. And that really does show the kind of thought and balancing of numerous character jobs we can have with the six core classes.

Throw in power use, weapon mods, weapon choices, and the like, and it really is a good representation of a co-op RPG experience, like Dead Island and Borderlands have done, and Baldurs Gate in the past.

Yeah I think someone has missed the point of an RPG...

Multiplayer, CoD multiplayer, is NOT RPG.

Oh I know it's not.

Thats why I said it wasn't. In fact, the multiplayer of CoD is grossly generic in many respects when compared to Mass Effect 3, which involves specailized classifications and group dynamics to counter-act different threats. What makes Mass Effect 3's multiplayer more RPG like is through the mechanical aspects of it; the classes, specailizations, power distribution, guns and modifications through gear, ammo, and what not. Picking the right equipment for the right job in a given scenario, or ultilizing builds to great effect through practice, optimization and some subtle customization. 

Plus the fact that there is no true deathmatch mode in Mass Effect 3 helps it. It is really co-op only which forces the team to work together, especially in harder difficulties.  So it has a lot more going for it to give this idea creedence.

Adugan wrote...

You completely missed the point of this thread

Not really, I just disagree with the thread and this is part of the reason why. The other part is because BioWare has done multiplayer before with Baldur's Gate in a fantasy setting, if that is integrated in some form to the main plot it should work wonders, I would think.

Rawgrim wrote...

Thats not roleplaying, man. thats just chosing how you do damage to your enemies.

Roleplaying has no concrete definition, since you can be story driven or system driven. The system implemented in the Mass Effect 3 multiplayer was implemented to the point where I would consider it a role-playing experience. System driven purely, but enough to be as valid as any other implementation in that same vein. 

And hell, we have been through this before. You actually think we will agree on this at all? 

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 08 décembre 2012 - 11:45 .

[TheJediSaint]

My ideal Dragon Age multiplayer would be a is a series of story-based cooperative multiplayer adventures similar to the Flashpoints in SWTOR. Not only could they expand on the single-player story, they could also increase the longevity of the game with release of DLC adventures.

[Lazengan]

don't automatically assume that EA and MP and Bioware in the same sentence equals a result that is a carbon hack of garbage hashed into the main release for monetary and marketing purposes.

I did, I groaned and rolled my eyes when they said ME3 would have multiplayer.

But then I played it, and honestly, ME3 multiplayer is the second best game in the series behind ME1. I said VIDEO GAME not INTERACTIVE MOVIE or STORY. Game as in gameplay. The devs behind ME3 multiplayer are very dedicated to creating a fun yet mechanically deep game This is probably because they aren't attached to the main derpfest that is the Main ME team, they are headquartered elsewhere

[Rawgrim]

LinksOcarina wrote...

FitScotGaymer wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

To be honest, if they follow some of the lessons from Mass Effect 3 and the multiplayer there, I think it would be a great addition to Dragon Age III. I would argue that the multiplayer in Mass Effect is more true to actual role-playing mechanics that people seem to be against because its a separate mode.

Take for example classes. Traditional stuff like say Call of Duty has everything loosey-goosey, where you can pick and choose from a bit of everything to customize classes. Mass Effect actually has roles per class, and each character career adds a new type of build that you can follow. It is different playing an Asari Justicar vs an Asari Adept, for example. Or a male and female quarian Infiltrator. And that really does show the kind of thought and balancing of numerous character jobs we can have with the six core classes.

Throw in power use, weapon mods, weapon choices, and the like, and it really is a good representation of a co-op RPG experience, like Dead Island and Borderlands have done, and Baldurs Gate in the past.

Yeah I think someone has missed the point of an RPG...

Multiplayer, CoD multiplayer, is NOT RPG.

Oh I know it's not.

Thats why I said it wasn't. In fact, the multiplayer of CoD is grossly generic in many respects when compared to Mass Effect 3, which involves specailized classifications and group dynamics to counter-act different threats. What makes Mass Effect 3's multiplayer more RPG like is through the mechanical aspects of it; the classes, specailizations, power distribution, guns and modifications through gear, ammo, and what not. Picking the right equipment for the right job in a given scenario, or ultilizing builds to great effect through practice, optimization and some subtle customization. 

Plus the fact that there is no true deathmatch mode in Mass Effect 3 helps it. It is really co-op only which forces the team to work together, especially in harder difficulties.  So it has a lot more going for it to give this idea creedence.

Adugan wrote...

You completely missed the point of this thread

Not really, I just disagree with the thread and this is part of the reason why. The other part is because BioWare has done multiplayer before with Baldur's Gate in a fantasy setting, if that is integrated in some form to the main plot it should work wonders, I would think.

Rawgrim wrote...

Thats not roleplaying, man. thats just chosing how you do damage to your enemies.

Roleplaying has no concrete definition, since you can be story driven or system driven. The system implemented in the Mass Effect 3 multiplayer was implemented to the point where I would consider it a role-playing experience. System driven purely, but enough to be as valid as any other implementation in that same vein. 

And hell, we have been through this before. You actually think we will agree on this at all? 

I know. And by your reasoning Super Mario is a roleplaying game, since you play the role of a plumber. Any racing game is a roleplaying game, since you play the role of a driver, all fps games are roleplaying games as well.

And yes, there are some pretty concrete definitions about what roleplaying games are.

[LinksOcarina]

Rawgrim wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

FitScotGaymer wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

To be honest, if they follow some of the lessons from Mass Effect 3 and the multiplayer there, I think it would be a great addition to Dragon Age III. I would argue that the multiplayer in Mass Effect is more true to actual role-playing mechanics that people seem to be against because its a separate mode.

Take for example classes. Traditional stuff like say Call of Duty has everything loosey-goosey, where you can pick and choose from a bit of everything to customize classes. Mass Effect actually has roles per class, and each character career adds a new type of build that you can follow. It is different playing an Asari Justicar vs an Asari Adept, for example. Or a male and female quarian Infiltrator. And that really does show the kind of thought and balancing of numerous character jobs we can have with the six core classes.

Throw in power use, weapon mods, weapon choices, and the like, and it really is a good representation of a co-op RPG experience, like Dead Island and Borderlands have done, and Baldurs Gate in the past.

Yeah I think someone has missed the point of an RPG...

Multiplayer, CoD multiplayer, is NOT RPG.

Oh I know it's not.

Thats why I said it wasn't. In fact, the multiplayer of CoD is grossly generic in many respects when compared to Mass Effect 3, which involves specailized classifications and group dynamics to counter-act different threats. What makes Mass Effect 3's multiplayer more RPG like is through the mechanical aspects of it; the classes, specailizations, power distribution, guns and modifications through gear, ammo, and what not. Picking the right equipment for the right job in a given scenario, or ultilizing builds to great effect through practice, optimization and some subtle customization. 

Plus the fact that there is no true deathmatch mode in Mass Effect 3 helps it. It is really co-op only which forces the team to work together, especially in harder difficulties.  So it has a lot more going for it to give this idea creedence.

Adugan wrote...

You completely missed the point of this thread

Not really, I just disagree with the thread and this is part of the reason why. The other part is because BioWare has done multiplayer before with Baldur's Gate in a fantasy setting, if that is integrated in some form to the main plot it should work wonders, I would think.

Rawgrim wrote...

Thats not roleplaying, man. thats just chosing how you do damage to your enemies.

Roleplaying has no concrete definition, since you can be story driven or system driven. The system implemented in the Mass Effect 3 multiplayer was implemented to the point where I would consider it a role-playing experience. System driven purely, but enough to be as valid as any other implementation in that same vein. 

And hell, we have been through this before. You actually think we will agree on this at all? 

I know. And by your reasoning Super Mario is a roleplaying game, since you play the role of a plumber. Any racing game is a roleplaying game, since you play the role of a driver, all fps games are roleplaying games as well.

And yes, there are some pretty concrete definitions about what roleplaying games are.

No....my reasoning doesn't say that. In fact single player games never entered the conversation, nor do other genres.

Why bring it up when I am talking strictly about the multiplayer mode of an RPG game? 

[Elhanan]

What I would love is the m/p of NWN1; a small gathering of friends. What I do not wish to see is the chaos of an incoming horde of toons like in MMO's.

[Adugan]

Elhanan wrote...

What I would love is the m/p of NWN1; a small gathering of friends. What I do not wish to see is the chaos of an incoming horde of toons like in MMO's.

NWN1 also didnt try to steal COD's fanbase by making everything shooty shooty boom boom

[Solmanian]

I actually wouldn't mind if DA3 MP gave you gold for the SP campaign. There's allways enough loot laying around to keep your party geared up, but there's never enough money to buy the real good stuff that vendors sell. They should probably add some way to add revenue in SP anyway (something like AC2, where you bought stores and got discounts and hourly income), so the only source of cash won't be just killing people and rumaging through their belongings for spare change. Unlocking items for SP is also fine by me, since DLC item packs are usually OP anyway, might aswell have variety. Just don't mess with the plot. And just avoid the whole war asset system (though I did love the lore tidbits that came with it)

[Savber100]

Basically the concern can be summed up as this:

With MP in Dragon Age 3, make it good and fun without sacrificing resources or significant time that will in any way detract from the SP campaign.

In even shorter terms:

Less:
SP-MP

More:
SP+MP

or if not achievable

Just SP

All of which I think are concerns that have been addressed.

Modifié par Savber100, 09 décembre 2012 - 05:13 .

[Adugan]

Savber100 wrote...

Basically the concern can be summed up as this:

With MP in Dragon Age 3, make it good and fun without sacrificing resources or significant time that will in any way detract from the SP campaign.

In even shorter terms:

Less:
SP-MP

More:
SP+MP

or if not achievable

Just SP

All of which I think are concerns that have been addressed.

What are you talking about? You make no sense.

[Elhanan]

Adugan wrote...

NWN1 also didnt try to steal COD's fanbase by making everything shooty shooty boom boom

As I do not play CoD or other like games, cannot speak to them.

NWN1 is still enjoyable after all these years, and I would enjoy seeing such gatherings again.

[Necrotron]

Mass Effect 3 Multiplayer is a blast, but the integration into the single player experience was definetly not fun for me. I didn't even play any multiplayer until after I beat the campaign, and for many games I have no intention of ever playing multiplayer.

I really hope that DA III, which I know will have multiplayer, doesn't force it into the single player campaign in any way to achieve certain elements of the story. I hope that I can achieve everything I want to storywise and achievement wise in DA III without ever having to play multiplayer.

And I say all of this while simultaneously really looking forward to the multiplayer aspect, because ME3's multiplayer is fantastic. But the way it was integrated into the story and achieving a 'better' ending really didn't feel right when I, like many, came into ME3 hoping for a purely single player experience.

[Xiltas]

Personally, I don't mind playing Multiplayer, as long as it's well done and OPTIONAL.
Though, to be honest, I can't imagine a Multipayer that would work with DA, at least with the vast maps they're going for in DA3...

[Adugan]

Xiltas wrote...

Personally, I don't mind playing Multiplayer, as long as it's well done and OPTIONAL.
Though, to be honest, I can't imagine a Multipayer that would work with DA, at least with the vast maps they're going for in DA3...

There is no way for MP to exist with the Origins combat system, which means we will get more DA2 button mashing garbage

[Rawgrim]

Lathrim wrote...

Please do integrate multiplayer, BioWare. I would actually love that. Also,

hoorayforicecream wrote...

It really is a fallacy to think that they take away from single player in order to make multiplayer. Those resources that went into multiplayer wouldn't have been spent to make the single player better. They would have been spent on another project instead.

I agree with this.

Rawgrim wrote...

I know. And by your reasoning Super Mario is a roleplaying game, since you play the role of a plumber. Any racing game is a roleplaying game, since you play the role of a driver, all fps games are roleplaying games as well.

And yes, there are some pretty concrete definitions about what roleplaying games are.

Sometimes I wonder if you even know how to read. What Ocarina said has nothing to do with what you typed here at all.

He said the mp in ME3 was roleplaying. I used ad absurdium to point out how that is just plain wrong.

[Kangaxx628]

Well, a concern that tying multi-player into single-player is one of balance. Imagine if DA:O had multi-player. After one week every one and their brother would be screaming about Arcane Warriors are too OP nerf them! Nerf them Now! I expect something similar would occur in DAIII. I really don't appreciate someone deciding after I've spent my money and started to play a game, that I was playing the wrong way and they need to change the damage my char does or how effect a piece of equipment is to satisfy the mobile vulgus in multiplayer. If the two can remain separate, all the better, if not I'd rather they didn't do multiplayer.

[StElmo]

If they force MP, It will not stop me buying the game, but I won't be quiet about complaining. I'll be ropable and I will ensure others are too. Uproar makes share prices drop. So you can get a company like EA by the ear with outrage.

Modifié par StElmo, 10 décembre 2012 - 02:53 .

[Allan Schumacher]

Uproar makes share prices drop.

To borrow from others, don't conjure up economical motivations for being upset. Just be upset and talk about why you don't like stuff.

I have seen enough misunderstanding of what a company's share price even represents the past year that I encourage people to not use it as a meaningful metric of "getting back at the company."


Share price has very little to do with what Electronic Arts would or would not be able to do. The only people that care about a dwindling stock price are shareholders, of which the overwhelming majority of EA's stock belongs to mutual funds.

Now dwindling stock price will present some pressure to the executives, as the Board of Directors will look at the price and act on behalf of the investors and inquire as to what the problem is, and how to remedy a downward price.

So if you think that removing the executives from EA is a worthy goal, then I suppose downward pressure by the stock will help, though it's not a guarantee either.


What a low stock price does is increase the likelihood of some sort of a takeover. So someone like Activision, or some private equity firm, could come along and purchase all the outstanding stock at a particular price point (typically above what it's being traded for). From there, a whole bunch of question marks happens, as some divisions and brands would remain intact, stuff seen as not worth the time would get axed, a decent chunk of people would likely lose their jobs, while perhaps some other people will come in and fill the void.

Investors will typically agree to such a buyout if they don't believe that a recovery in the stock price is likely.


So EA being bought out means that Dragon Age becomes a question mark, with the entity that purchased it being free to determine if it should be pursued further, or if it should just be mothballed.

[FaWa]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Uproar makes share prices drop.

What a low stock price does is increase the likelihood of some sort of a takeover. So someone like Activision, or some private equity firm, could come along and purchase all the outstanding stock at a particular price point (typically above what it's being traded for). From there, a whole bunch of question marks happens, as some divisions and brands would remain intact, stuff seen as not worth the time would get axed, a decent chunk of people would likely lose their jobs, while perhaps some other people will come in and fill the void.

Investors will typically agree to such a buyout if they don't believe that a recovery in the stock price is likely.


So EA being bought out means that Dragon Age becomes a question mark, with the entity that purchased it being free to determine if it should be pursued further, or if it should just be mothballed.

Would Activision be better than EA for Bioware?

[FaWa]

The best way to make sure DA3 won't suck is to make sure Bioware closes down before it happens

Modifié par FaWa, 10 décembre 2012 - 03:32 .

[LinksOcarina]

Rawgrim wrote...

Lathrim wrote...

Please do integrate multiplayer, BioWare. I would actually love that. Also,

hoorayforicecream wrote...

It really is a fallacy to think that they take away from single player in order to make multiplayer. Those resources that went into multiplayer wouldn't have been spent to make the single player better. They would have been spent on another project instead.

I agree with this.

Rawgrim wrote...

I know. And by your reasoning Super Mario is a roleplaying game, since you play the role of a plumber. Any racing game is a roleplaying game, since you play the role of a driver, all fps games are roleplaying games as well.

And yes, there are some pretty concrete definitions about what roleplaying games are.

Sometimes I wonder if you even know how to read. What Ocarina said has nothing to do with what you typed here at all.

He said the mp in ME3 was roleplaying. I used ad absurdium to point out how that is just plain wrong.

I did say that.

Mass Effect 3 is also an exception to the rule of typical MP standards. That was my point, and that does not necessarily make it right or wrong. It just makes it debatable. 

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 10 décembre 2012 - 03:35 .