258 réponses à ce sujet

[Twitchmonkey]

I think even if the game is not designed to have multiplayer, it is premature to say it won't. Some games, like Oblivion and I believe GTA: Vice City have modders that develop third-party applications which insert code into the game to at the very least create an NPC in your game which mimics the actions of another player and vice versa in his game.



Granted, I don't think many of these sorts of mods are ever very stable or useful, but they're there if you just want to explore the world with your friends and they don't require the engine to be coded with multiplayer in mind.

[LdyShayna]

AzmodantheRed wrote...

LdyShayna wrote...

AzmodantheRed wrote...

Snoteye wrote...

AzmodantheRed wrote...

You do realize that the vast majority of such content will be created by the player community??? 

The content. Not the support. BioWare has to make time for fitting in multiplayer functionality. That time is better spent improving the singleplayer experience.

The extra improvements in the singleplayer experience PALE in comparison to the gained multiplayer experience.
 
.

You realize, I hope, how extremely subjective this statement is.  No amount of sacrifice to the singleplayer experience is worth it to me, for instance.

Its subjective only to an extent.
Seeing how much of the time and effort for the multiplayer experience will be done by a player community, its clear to where the scales falls. 

you lose a sidequest here and there in single player. but gain years worth of multiplayer content. 

Not for me.  I'll gain not one moment of multiplayer content.  I will just lose.

[Kevin Lynch]

I'm on the side of multiplayer content not benefiting me at all, like LdyShayna. The community might provide multiplayer content for years, but if I don't use it then it's of no benefit, yet I would have lost out on extras Bio would have spent time adding because they had to tweak the game to include multiplayer functionality.



Definitely, I'd prefer they stick with single player.

[AndarianTD]

BoomWav wrote...

Even with the source code, it'd be really difficult and never any good. An engine must be built from the ground up for multiplayer. Seriously, it's not even a remote possibility...  Personally, I'm really happy that we can have this community to share with. Better than any sort of multiplayer.

I agree on all counts. There are architectural features that need to be part of a game in order to effectively support MP, and I just don't see them in DA. If anything, I see the opposite. That includes things from NWN that have been changed or removed for consistency with a strictly SP architecture (such as replacing GetFirstPC() with GetHero() in the scripting API).

From what I can see, DA really is designed to provide an exceptional single-player experience. Personally, I'm happy with that, because SP is what I prefer to play and build for. I think that NWN and NWN2 still have plenty of life in them for folks who want a D&D style MP experience, but I really do get the impression that DA is trying to be something different from that.

[AndarianTD]

AzmodantheRed wrote...

How on earth can you be opposed to that?? A NWN multiplayer client would magically make your single experience less worthwhile?? Please dont feed me this nonsense.

Yes, it would. With all due respect, what I think that you and folks expressing this view aren't taking into account is the fact that a game can't be designed to do anything and everything you want, just by "adding features." A good SP RPG is designed architecturally from the ground up to be that, and the same is true of a good MP game. You have to make different design decisions and tradeoffs when building a game and an engine to support a dramatic SP experience -- for example, with things like powerful cutscene and staging features that are hard to make work well in an MP environment.
 
If you try to design something to be "all things to all people," you generally wind up with something that doesn't particularly excel at being anything to anyone in particular.

Modifié par AndarianTD, 18 octobre 2009 - 03:04 .

[aermeus]

Adrigaar wrote...

If you look at everything we have seen about dragon age:origins it seems to me as though bioware are focusing very intently on establishing an intense and engaging world in their first release, establishing a beach-head if you will. once they have created their world and we have all gotten hooked on it im sure multiplayer options will follow in sequels. the trouble is that with their first release set in the world of dragon age, a world they obviously want to be a success, they have focussed intently on providing a very good player experience, which is easiest to do when the player 's experience is (fairly) controlled.. hence major focus on story and no multiplayer option

This is along my thought process as well.  I think bioware is shooting to make a very deep new IP starting with the games and books that are coming out and are trying to get peeps really interested in it.  They are making their first foray into the MMO market with one of, if not the most, established and successful IPs in history.  If that goes well, and they are succesful in establishing a very successful IP with DAO, I forsee them basing their second major MMO on DAO with an announcement of such in about 2014 (lol).

[AndarianTD]

AzmodantheRed wrote...

Adventuring with your friends. Exploring new worlds. Interacting with other players. Roleplaying.
Fighting side by side against new threats...or even other adventure groups. Choosing the servers that best fit your playstyle and interest.

there's so much to gain. Why restrain yourself to a sole singleplayer experience while this D&D basis makes a perfect template for more? How much will a good toolset and multiplayer support really cost them in time and effort??

First, Dragon Age is a new game with new IP and new rules, not something constructed on a "D&D basis." Many of us never particularly cared for the D&D roots of the NWN franchise and are happy to see a new game that has set  them aside. Speaking personally, I always thought that the legacy D&D IP of NWN tended to get in the way more than it added. I wanted to play and mod in a fantasy environment that  supported creative adventure building over adherence to a particular RPG model.

Second, some of us don't particularly care for playing online with other players. I prefer an adventuring experience that's a bit more personal. I'm not interested in a shared MP-style experience. You refer to that as "restraining" or limiting oneself from what you think is a desirable feature -- but which many other players don't.

Third, a good toolset and MP support will cost them an enormous amount in time and effort, for reasons that I described in my previous comments.

Modifié par AndarianTD, 18 octobre 2009 - 04:33 .

[SovereignSith44]

Personally, I would hate to see DA:O become an MMO. Those games, imo, are incapable of preserving a game's established lore, which is instead replaced with ridiculous scenarios in which the player can gain phat lewt. (World of Warcraft)

[AndarianTD]

Blessed Silence wrote...

[Multi in NWN seemed thrown in last minute, and since only one person could choose decisions (I believe) then stuff could happen another does not want to.

Actually, from what I understand NWN1 was designed to be a fundamentally MP-architected game. I think you can see some of that by looking at the scripting API, much of which would be counter-intuitive for a game designed around a strictly SP experience.

[Shattered Shield]

ppl have come to expect all RPGs to be multiplayer because of the MMOs.....they fail to see they RPGs are really about the story not who u play with.....like others i dont see the experience u gain from online play because u will always encounter someone wanting to rush a quest or who has finished only to play it again to mess up other players game enjoyment for their amusement. DAO is bringing us back to the reason we started playing RPGs.......love of a good story

[Maufurtado]

There are many games that would gain with Mulitplayer mode. DAO isn't one of them. In my mind, a good multiplayer game invest little in background story in comparison to a game only made for single player. As ever, if a player prefers a multiplalyer game, DAO isn't for him.



Anything else is merely a repetition of tons and tons of the threads that came for this one.

[Maufurtado]

There are many games that would gain with Mulitplayer mode. DAO isn't one of them. In my mind, a good multiplayer game invest little in background story in comparison to a game only made for single player. As ever, if a player prefers a multiplalyer game, DAO isn't for him.



Anything else is merely a repetition of tons and tons of the threads that came for this one.

[AndarianTD]

AzmodantheRed wrote...

After 2 playthroughs you know everything about those characters and the story.

Now pit that against new adventures and challenges made or DMed by a player community. New stories and worlds you explore together with your friends. Interactions with different players.It is never the same. Ever changing.

Now that is a false alternative if I've ever seen one. Aren't you aware of the massive collection of NWN and NWN2 SP modules that has been built and posted, mostly to the NWN Vault? You don't have to play any of these more than once to still have more new and excellent SP works and ever-changing stories available than you could ever get through -- even if you played each of them only once and made it your only gaming hobby for years.

Modifié par AndarianTD, 18 octobre 2009 - 03:41 .

[Ingrimm22]

The answer is really simple: If you make DA:O into a co-op game you have a small scale MMO and no one will want that. The treat of DA:O is, that you have the class-flexibillity and the mechanics of an MMO but you have complete control over your party. Did you ever nerdrage about the amount of stupidity in MMOs, where the tank can't hold aggro, the healer won't heal because he's "DPS-specced" and the Damage Dealer is AFK all the time? Well now all your party members do exactly what you want them to do and if you lose it's entirely your fault. I like that about DA:O as i liked it in Baldurs Gate and Neverwinter Nights.If you want a co-op experience which you can share with your friends then i suggest starting one of the many MMOs out there, it would ruin DA:O.

Modifié par Ingrimm22, 18 octobre 2009 - 04:08 .

[Tenjac]

Ignoring the fact that it would take a complete engine rewrite to make DA:O cooperative will not change that fact. The probability of that happening is so close to zero as to be nigh indistinguishable. Your chances are far greater of seeing it in a sequel. This is a single player game. No amount of arguing will change that.  If you can write an entire engine for it, then yes... you can mod it into a coop multiplayer game.

Modifié par Tenjac, 18 octobre 2009 - 04:16 .

[vyvexthorne]

I've only tried MP games a couple times.. all were terrible experiences. Usually there's one person who tries to help you but there's a hundred others that just make you feel ignorant and stupid. Each time I gave up frustrated and feeling dumb saying I'd never do it again.. After awhile I'd think.. well maybe things have changed.. and I'd do it again only to get the same experience. I seem to have missed some seminar on how to MP successfully.

[Ingrimm22]

Well MP and MMOs especially are not for everyone, you have to be willing to put up with massive amounts of rudeness, selfishness and pure stupidity to get to the good stuff. Best advice would be to go in there with friends, play it with friends and ignore everyone else.

[AzmodantheRed]

AndarianTD wrote...

AzmodantheRed wrote...

After 2 playthroughs you know everything about those characters and the story.

Now pit that against new adventures and challenges made or DMed by a player community. New stories and worlds you explore together with your friends. Interactions with different players.It is never the same. Ever changing.

Now that is a false alternative if I've ever seen one. Aren't you aware of the massive collection of NWN and NWN2 SP modules that has been built and posted, mostly to the NWN Vault? You don't have to play any of these more than once to still have more new and excellent SP works and ever-changing stories available than you could ever get through -- even if you played each of them only once and made it your only gaming hobby for years.

true.

Then its simply about the multiplayer experience. vs more time to work on single player experience.
large part matter of personal preferance.

You talk about tremendous work required to get cutscenes etc to work in MP due to game mechanics. Well i dont need cutscenes in MP.

really...how much work is it to copy something NWN did 7 years ago. minus the co-op? 

[AzmodantheRed]

Snoteye wrote...

AzmodantheRed wrote...

Its subjective only to an extent.
Seeing how much of the time and effort for the multiplayer experience will be done by a player community, its clear to where the scales falls.

you lose a sidequest here and there in single player. but gain years worth of multiplayer content.

No. There is no try scale. LdyShayna will most likely never gain a second's worth of multiplayer content because she doesn't play multiplayer. It is a useless feature to her and at the cost of something else she could have benefitted from (ironically, something that could have contributed to replayability). She should not feel compelled to want multiplayer, at a "slight" cost to her personal enjoyment, because the majority in the long run might then get more from the game, either.

I do not buy games based on their replayability value. I can count on two hands the games I've completed more than once. One hand, those I've completed more than twice. That means that, to me, the more singleplayer I get, the more the game is worth, and I will not trade any of it for a feature I will never use. I didn't get NWN for multiplayer, either.

I've heard many complaints that tech supporters overcharge for their services. After all, they just sit down and press a few keys, maybe turn a few screws, and suddenly everything is in order -- they're not exactly ruining their backs lifting heavy stuff (well, they might be in some cases), and usually you can't even really see what they've fixed. But that doesn't mean it isn't (difficult!) work, and without it the customer would have been paralyzed. I think quite a few people here are seriously underestimating the amount of work required to add multiplayer support, along with the impact it would have had on the rest of the game.

How much more players would they attract with MP? How much would pay a small fee for multiplayer client?? (I would). These things can justify more time spent, and wont come at expense single player. 


In the end theres the MP experience at a cost of a lesser SP experience.   
Up to personal feelings how much you rate both.And ofcourse the effort and time MP would actually take that comes at expense of single player.



But even if this expense would be minor, you guys are opposed.

DO you realize we will gain a massive amount of playtime in MP.
The MP haters will gain far less time with their increased SP experience.   
So basically you feel happy denying a lot for others, to gain a little for yourself?

Well then again. MP haters not being the most social people isnt that suprising.

[Snoteye]

AzmodantheRed wrote...

How much more players would they attract with MP? How much would pay a small fee for multiplayer client?? (I would). These things can justify more time spent, and wont come at expense single player.

I don't know why you bothered quoting when you clearly didn't bothered reading. Everytime something is added to a game, something else isn't. I don't want that something else to be related to singleplayer in any way; I am fine with it being related to multiplayer.

AzmodantheRed wrote...

In the end theres the MP experience at a cost of a lesser SP experience.
Up to personal feelings how much you rate both.And ofcourse the effort and time MP would actually take that comes at expense of single player.

I know neither total man hours nor percentages of total development time, only that it's too much for my liking.

AzmodantheRed wrote...

But even if this expense would be minor, you guys are opposed.

DO you realize we will gain a massive amount of playtime in MP.
The MP haters will gain far less time with their increased SP experience.

If you think we don't know this you're sorely mistaken. Thing is, however many hundreds of hours of multiplayer you might enjoy, there's a good chance I won't enjoy a second of it. Why should I pay for your enjoyment, both with money and a lessened personal enjoyment of the same game?

AzmodantheRed wrote...

So basically you feel happy denying a lot for others, to gain a little for yourself?

As a matter of fact, yes, I'm perfectly comfortable doing that.

AzmodantheRed wrote...

Well then again. MP haters not being the most social people isnt that suprising.

Then we probably have something in common.

[Tiskenburdle]

You know.. In the beginning I was really wishing this DA:O had multiplayer. Not so much in order to play with random people on the internet, but in order to play with friends via LAN. NWN was great for that.



After giving it a lot of thought though, I realized there are some inherent problems. How could the NPCs be as intricate and involved with the story? Who would they talk to, which PC? What happens if they like the Paladin, but hate the rogue? Do they stay in the party or leave? Does everyone see the romance cutscenes? It would be possible to make a game where everyone had their own little side plots, but it hasn't been done yet.



As it stands though, I enjoy a good dungeon crawl just as much as I enjoy a deep and involved story. However my impression is that they intended DA:O to be the latter. My hope is that DA:O takes off as an intellectual property and A Never winter Nights version of the universe is eventually developed. But I can almost guarantee that this particular game and it's expansions will focus on the single player experience.



Again, I'd like to stress that I'm not opposed to Multiplayer, I probably prefer Dungeon crawling with a few friends to playing an involved story by myself.. But when my friends aren't available, I'd much rather be playing something akin to Baldur's Gate than Neverwinter Nights. There needs to be a place for this style of game as well. Maybe someday soon, they'll make an attempt to combine the two, but that's going to be a very tough and long project to do well.

[SunKilMoon]

The only multiplayer I wanted/needed, was the couch co-op type, where my brother or friends could come in and control one of the party members

[Whist Darkblade]

here here.



BEWARE OF NOOBS!!!!!!!!!

[SheffSteel]

It seems that a lot of the reasons why people don't want to see multiplayer are related to bad experiences in MMOs, whereas a those who are asking for MP support are after the same good experience they had in BG or NWN. Perhaps it comes down to whether you play with friends or strangers. Perhaps whether you can talk to one another (by voice) is also important... ?





Incidentally I don't like the argument that the developers shouldn't support multiplayer because, well, Snoteye etc. don't want to play it. What about the fact that I don't want to play an elf? I'm sure the devs put a lot of resources into animating and voicing elves, and I have to pay for that when I buy the game. But you don't see me complaining about it, because I realise that if they only worked on the content that everyone could agree on, there wouldn't be much of a game at all. That's why they call it the lowest common denominator.

[vyvexthorne]

Talking about story and multiplayer .. Even though I'm not a Mp, MMo fan, I'm really looking forward to see if Star Wars: The Old Republic really does what they want it to do... If they can combine a really good story and MMo it surely will change how games like that play out. I've said in another post how I love playing for story.. but playing for levels never really appealed to me.

I do agree that playing with good friends in MP would most likely be a great experience.. My basic problem has always been that none of my friends play video games.