242 réponses à ce sujet

[nicethugbert]

Rubios wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Nightdragon8 wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

Viidicus wrote...

 why in the world is this even needed?

To make money and extend the life of the product, which also leads to more money.

You also know what leads to extend of life of a product?? Mods... Look at DA:1 look at all the mods on there...

oh and look at Skyrim, look at the TONS of mods that are out there. And people are still playing it. And buying DLC for it.

So while multiplayer does extend the life. So do other things... I mean really Skyrim released and Creation kit to ALLOW the users to make Mods for the game.... and look what it has been able to do.

While those games( neverwinter nights and baulder gate2) had multiplayer... really honestly how many people played it?? during that era of internet it was on dail-up and what not.

so while it could be done.. I just dont think its worth it... I mean I dont play ME3 for the multiplayer... its boring, and without a good kick system for those that just sit in a corner and do nothing the whole game

You missed the first part of Maria's statement: the multiplayer system also exists to make money, which mods do not.

Indeed, just look at how much money Bohemia Interactive or Valve are not making thanks to the modding commmunity.

Oh wait...

Celene II wrote...

To try to replicate the success of other games with MP that sell a ton of copies.

That's because following the market leaders is the best way to lead a market, business 101 

You criticize attempting to replicate the success of other games with MP that sell a ton of copies yet you offer Bohemia Interactive or Valve as examples of companies that have had success with moddables games.

[nicethugbert]

Rubios wrote...

nicethugbert wrote...

You criticize attempting to replicate the success of other games with MP that sell a ton of copies yet you offer Bohemia Interactive or Valve as examples of companies that have had success with moddables games.

Yes.

(?)

Therefore you have contradicted yourself and in the process shown your bias, your lack of objectivety, and lack of consideration for other people.  So, why should we pay any attention to you?

[Darth Death]

Multiplayer seems to be the new requirement nowadays.

[mmarty]

It seems a bit harsh to outright rubbish the MP when we don't even know what's involved. I could personally do without it, but if it doesn't look good I just won't play it.

[stormhit]

To be fair, Valve's not making lots of money due to any video game they made, they're making lots of money because they have a near monopoly on digital distribution.

[Fiddles dee dee]

OP, the managing director of EA stated he was overjoyed that he had not published any game without an online multiplayer component. I'm guess that's at least a supporting factor.

For the record though, I'm interested to try DA multiplayer.

[Twisted Path]

Fiddles dee dee wrote...

OP, the managing director of EA stated he was overjoyed that he had not published any game without an online multiplayer component. I'm guess that's at least a supporting factor.

For the record though, I'm interested to try DA multiplayer.

There's also that clip floating around Youtube where the CEO of EA is talking to shareholders and tells them what a great cash-cow micro-transfers (especially in multiplayer games,) are because people aren't thinking clearly in the middle of the game. You don't realize how silly it is to pay $1.99 or whatever for some slight statistical advantage when you're in the game and loosing.

Honestly I think it's the general public's fault for falling for that sort of marketing ploy, and it's similar to the reason we have impulse-buy items in the checkout line at supermarkets. If people didn't pay money for that sort of thing it wouldn't exist. But it's also making games less and less fun for us folks who don't buy the extra DLC bells and whistles, since we're forking over $60 for games that are increasingly incomplete.

[Robhuzz]

Twisted Path wrote...

Fiddles dee dee wrote...

OP, the managing director of EA stated he was overjoyed that he had not published any game without an online multiplayer component. I'm guess that's at least a supporting factor.

For the record though, I'm interested to try DA multiplayer.

There's also that clip floating around Youtube where the CEO of EA is talking to shareholders and tells them what a great cash-cow micro-transfers (especially in multiplayer games,) are because people aren't thinking clearly in the middle of the game. You don't realize how silly it is to pay $1.99 or whatever for some slight statistical advantage when you're in the game and loosing.

Honestly I think it's the general public's fault for falling for that sort of marketing ploy, and it's similar to the reason we have impulse-buy items in the checkout line at supermarkets. If people didn't pay money for that sort of thing it wouldn't exist. But it's also making games less and less fun for us folks who don't buy the extra DLC bells and whistles, since we're forking over $60 for games that are increasingly incomplete.

To be perfectly honest I think the bolded part is your own fault, you can always choose not to fork out 60 bucks for a game that isn't complete. You can always wait for a price drop or buy a used copy if the quality and quantity offered isn't worth the price they're asking.

Take first day dlc for example. Bioware seems to be developing a nasty habit of cutting content then selling it seperately for extra money. A truly dispicable business practice. Which is why if a game has day 1 dlc that comes at extra cost, I won't buy the game.

I hate the current multiplayer and microtransaction trend. And I mean I REALLY hate it, but churning out money for something you don't think is worth it is still your own responsibility...

Modifié par Robhuzz, 19 janvier 2013 - 09:27 .

[Uccio]

Never played MP in fantasy games and never will.

[XX-Pyro]

Don't see why people dismiss it when there is almost no reason to. Haven't played ME MP but heard it was really good. Assassin's Creed was a purely SP game that was praised for a great storyline, and they added in MP that was incredibly successful and very entertaining. I don't see why DA can't do the same as these games have.

Oh wait, it's the stubborn "I don't want adolescent teenage trolls in my games" who are acting like adolescent teenagers about the inclusion of a feature they don't want in a game.

The irony is laughable.

[Realmzmaster]

The funny or maybe tragic point is that a lot of those so-called "adolescent teenagers" are well into their twenties and up. Competition can bring out the best and worst in gamers. Trash talking is nothing new. Athletes have done it for years as a way of getting into their opponents heads. Muhammad Ali promoted the sport of Boxing through trash talking. Competitive gamers do the same thing.

Times have changed and games that do not have a social component are going to be in the minority. As long as MP does not affect SP I could care less. I see no reason to deprive those who wish to have Dragon Age MP.

[Conduit0]

Robhuzz wrote...

Twisted Path wrote...

Fiddles dee dee wrote...

OP, the managing director of EA stated he was overjoyed that he had not published any game without an online multiplayer component. I'm guess that's at least a supporting factor.

For the record though, I'm interested to try DA multiplayer.

There's also that clip floating around Youtube where the CEO of EA is talking to shareholders and tells them what a great cash-cow micro-transfers (especially in multiplayer games,) are because people aren't thinking clearly in the middle of the game. You don't realize how silly it is to pay $1.99 or whatever for some slight statistical advantage when you're in the game and loosing.

Honestly I think it's the general public's fault for falling for that sort of marketing ploy, and it's similar to the reason we have impulse-buy items in the checkout line at supermarkets. If people didn't pay money for that sort of thing it wouldn't exist. But it's also making games less and less fun for us folks who don't buy the extra DLC bells and whistles, since we're forking over $60 for games that are increasingly incomplete.

To be perfectly honest I think the bolded part is your own fault, you can always choose not to fork out 60 bucks for a game that isn't complete. You can always wait for a price drop or buy a used copy if the quality and quantity offered isn't worth the price they're asking.

Take first day dlc for example. Bioware seems to be developing a nasty habit of cutting content then selling it seperately for extra money. A truly dispicable business practice. Which is why if a game has day 1 dlc that comes at extra cost, I won't buy the game.

I hate the current multiplayer and microtransaction trend. And I mean I REALLY hate it, but churning out money for something you don't think is worth it is still your own responsibility...

And you're exactly the kind of people that will be getting the finger of blame when the industry reaches the breaking point and is forced to raise the price tag on games. DLC/micro-transactions/etc are the industries way of trying to offset the astronomical increase in development costs that games have gone through over the last 10-15 years.

Its no wonder that entitlement has become synonomous with gamers, we keep getting more and more for our gaming dollar, but its never enough, and worse yet, when the industry comes up to us like Oliver saying, "Please, sir, I want some more" we bawk at the mere notion of paying even a few dollars more for all that content we're constantly demanding.

[samgurl775]

Ninja Stan wrote...

There was a lot of resistance to ME3 multiplayer before that game's release, largely for the same reasons in the OP, yet ME3 MP is insanely popular. That's not to say that DA3 MP will necessarily be equally as popular, but to dismiss it out of hand now, when we have no information about it, is a little premature, in my opinion.

As long as multiplayer isn't connected to single player, and you guys don't lie about it like the Mass Effect team did, I don't mind it. I still think it's just another way for Bioware to suck even more money out of its customers, but I won't mind it.

[Twisted Path]

Robhuzz wrote...

To be perfectly honest I think the bolded part is your own fault, you can always choose not to fork out 60 bucks for a game that isn't complete. You can always wait for a price drop or buy a used copy if the quality and quantity offered isn't worth the price they're asking.

Take first day dlc for example. Bioware seems to be developing a nasty habit of cutting content then selling it seperately for extra money. A truly dispicable business practice. Which is why if a game has day 1 dlc that comes at extra cost, I won't buy the game.

I hate the current multiplayer and microtransaction trend. And I mean I REALLY hate it, but churning out money for something you don't think is worth it is still your own responsibility...

Oh, I completely agree. Heck I actually waited for the price to come down before getting DA2 since it didn't look very promising. After DA2, Mass Effect 3 and what I've heard so far about Inquisition I'm getting the impression that Bioware just isn't making the sort of games I enjoy anymore. It's a shame since I really liked all of their games up until DA2, but ah well. 

And of course if Inquisition turns out to be a great Origins style RPG and multiplayer is just fun co-op dungeon crawling then I'll be pleasantly surprised.

[AppealToReason]

Realmzmaster wrote...

The funny or maybe tragic point is that a lot of those so-called "adolescent teenagers" are well into their twenties and up. Competition can bring out the best and worst in gamers. Trash talking is nothing new. Athletes have done it for years as a way of getting into their opponents heads. Muhammad Ali promoted the sport of Boxing through trash talking. Competitive gamers do the same thing.

Times have changed and games that do not have a social component are going to be in the minority. As long as MP does not affect SP I could care less. I see no reason to deprive those who wish to have Dragon Age MP.

Screaming teenagers generally stick to their point-and-shoot PVP games. I've ran into a few dicks on ME but most people either don't use a mic and the ones that do are well mannered. Probably like a 200:1 good guy to dick ratio.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

Chris Priestly wrote...

freche wrote...

Aolbain wrote...

Have they even hinted for MP? I more got the implication that it would be some online-integration, like a place where you could show of your characters and your progress through the game.

I don't think BW has, but I think EA is currently demanding MP in all games.

Not quite. EA is asking that all games have an online component. Dragon Age Origins and Dragon Age 2 both had online components (being able to upload screenshpots to the BSN, redeem online codes, etc). Dragon Age 3 will have some form of online component as well, but nothing we can discuss yet.

Of course. You guys made a lot of money off console gamers buying points to spend on weapons and other items they would have otherwise unlocked just by playing the game. Congratulations, you've acquired the brain dead CoD audience.

[AppealToReason]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

freche wrote...

Aolbain wrote...

Have they even hinted for MP? I more got the implication that it would be some online-integration, like a place where you could show of your characters and your progress through the game.

I don't think BW has, but I think EA is currently demanding MP in all games.

Not quite. EA is asking that all games have an online component. Dragon Age Origins and Dragon Age 2 both had online components (being able to upload screenshpots to the BSN, redeem online codes, etc). Dragon Age 3 will have some form of online component as well, but nothing we can discuss yet.

Of course. You guys made a lot of money off console gamers buying points to spend on weapons and other items they would have otherwise unlocked just by playing the game. Congratulations, you've acquired the brain dead CoD audience.

But COD has nothing like that in any of their games. Just DLC maps that you buy because you can't unlock them. Microtransactions is more like Diablo, F2P's, and Facebook games which are more or less exclusively for the PC master race.

[nicethugbert]

Rubios wrote...

nicethugbert wrote...

Rubios wrote...

nicethugbert wrote...

You criticize attempting to replicate the success of other games with MP that sell a ton of copies yet you offer Bohemia Interactive or Valve as examples of companies that have had success with moddables games.

Yes.

(?)

Therefore you have contradicted yourself and in the process shown your bias, your lack of objectivety, and lack of consideration for other people.  So, why should we pay any attention to you?

Your reading compresion is something to be worried about.

Someone says mods can't make profits go up -----> There are companies with skyrocketing profits thanks to the modding community -----> That statement is false.

EA follows the current market leader ------> The current market leader became so by NOT following others (because we have this thing now, it's called innovation)  -----> Waste of money / time, more so in the long run as they're moving away from their own clients.

So, you don't want EA to follow the lead of companies which are making money, directly or indirectly, off modding any more than you want them to follow the lead of companies that are making money, directly or indirectly, off MP because that would not be innovating, that would be following. Following is not innovating.  Not innovating is bad for profits.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

AppealToReason wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

freche wrote...

Aolbain wrote...

Have they even hinted for MP? I more got the implication that it would be some online-integration, like a place where you could show of your characters and your progress through the game.

I don't think BW has, but I think EA is currently demanding MP in all games.

Not quite. EA is asking that all games have an online component. Dragon Age Origins and Dragon Age 2 both had online components (being able to upload screenshpots to the BSN, redeem online codes, etc). Dragon Age 3 will have some form of online component as well, but nothing we can discuss yet.

Of course. You guys made a lot of money off console gamers buying points to spend on weapons and other items they would have otherwise unlocked just by playing the game. Congratulations, you've acquired the brain dead CoD audience.

But COD has nothing like that in any of their games. Just DLC maps that you buy because you can't unlock them. Microtransactions is more like Diablo, F2P's, and Facebook games which are more or less exclusively for the PC master race.

The CoD audience pays $15  for each individual map pack. Map packs that often include a couple maps from the previous game that they already paid for last year. Of course, they don't make the connection and don't realize that paying $15 for a map pack is insanity becuase they represent the lowest common denominator in society.

Big publishers like Activision and EA love these kinds of gamers because they don't think about anything other than spending $60 on the same game they bought last year. Or in this case, points to buy weapons that are already on the disc that they paid full price for. There is no redemption for such a person.

Modifié par EpicBoot2daFace, 20 janvier 2013 - 12:29 .

[Plaintiff]

Rubios wrote...
Indeed, just look at how much money Bohemia Interactive or Valve are not making thanks to the modding commmunity.

Oh wait...

Unless Bohemia Interactive and Valve are making the mods themselves, and charging for them, then no, mods do not make money.

What Bohemia Interactive and Valve do make money from are sales of their games. Whether you mod it later or don't is irrelevent, because they got all the money they were going to get from you when you paid for the product. It doesn't matter if you play it, mod it, or throw it away without even opening it, their profits are not increasing or decreasing as a result of any of that.

The link between mods and profit for the producers of the main game is extremely tenuous at best, and any profit that could be said to be linked to modding is negligable. Possibly the companies make money from the sale of the toolset, but the people with the skill and desire to use a toolset to create mods are a niche audience, and game companies make no money whatsoever from the downloading/use of the mods themselves.  It is not financially sensible to make the creation of a toolset a priority. They will make more money, more directly, if they devote that time to creating additional content themselves.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 20 janvier 2013 - 01:08 .

[demont0]

As long as it remains a completely separate entity from SP, i couldn't care less about the inclusion of it in game, as i know i will probably completely ignore it (as i have with ME. I don't appreciate a one mode MP, with micro-transactions for completely random boxes. How there isn't outrage about this, I have no idea).

[Plaintiff]

demont0 wrote...

As long as it remains a completely separate entity from SP, i couldn't care less about the inclusion of it in game, as i know i will probably completely ignore it (as i have with ME. I don't appreciate a one mode MP, with micro-transactions for completely random boxes. How there isn't outrage about this, I have no idea).

If that one mode is fun, then what's the problem?

As for paying money for random boxes, you might as well ask why there's no outrage over lottery tickets and other games of chance.