Darth Brotarian wrote...
Also, why can't the MP be given a storyline or dialouge? That would make the MP awesome and worthwhile, IMO.
Mercedes-Benz wrote...
No, they are going to waste time and resources on the MP, and the SP will suffer for it, just like it did in the case of Mass Effect 3.
Plaintiff wrote...
Which games are these supposed to be? Enlighten me.Knight of Dane wrote...
Because they made some ****g good games.
Solmanian wrote...
Darth Brotarian wrote...
BasilKarlo wrote...
Allan Schumacher wrote...
If MP just had to be in there, how would you go about doing it?
Missions that don't impact the SP story but flesh out lore and add items that you can use in SP. Preferably missions that can last an hour or more and have boss battles, legendary items to be found, curses to break, enemies to vanquish, etc. Minimal story and dialogue, obviously, but plenty of strategic combat.
Whose internet connection can last a solid hour without a disconnect, raise their hand?
Note: My hand isn't raised.
Also, why can't the MP be given a storyline or dialouge? That would make the MP awesome and worthwhile, IMO.
I don't have a bad connection, but I agree that an hour is too long. it was a hard taught lesson that the entire MMO genre learned that majority of people find a 4 hour raid too exhausting, and learned too divide the content into "bite sized" segments.
How a bout a MP campaign? Completing a certain kind of mission on a certain map will unlock additional missions? You could design the level in such a way that people in different stages of completion can play together at the same area, everyone complting their own objective in a manner that doesn't disturb the overall group mission.
iakus wrote...
Bedevil123 wrote...
No
plz no
I know how you feel.
ANd the direction this thread has gone has me very, very worried...
This is where I'm falling on this issue too. I don't care if there's a MP component, so long as it's not required for SP like the SNAFU with ME 3's MP initially. Again, I know it's an non-issue now, but it never should have been an issue with claims made that MP would not be required. I may even look at it, even if I'm not very active on it since, as I said, I've lost a couple of steps from where I was even 5 years ago.bigbad1013 wrote...
As much as I dislike the current trend of every single game having to have a multiplayer aspect to it, I don't actually hate multiplayer as long as it is completely optional and doesn't have any impact whatsoever on the single player game.
I don't know if I'm actually looking forward to it, but I'll definitely give it a shot to see if I like it. I did find the ME3 multiplayer to be quite enjoyable, but I cannot stress enough how important it is to me that multiplayer and single player are kept seperate from each other.
I actually played BG in co-op mode over LAN with my GF at the time. We had a blast, and a separate save game just for Co-Op play. One time we went around being as evil as we could possibly be, just to be as evil as we could possibly be, to the point that we couldn't go anywhere w/out "I am the Law".Fast Jimmy wrote...
Well, since I already tackled a revolutionary way to do MP earlier in the thread here, I'll go ahead and tackle co-op, the other MP suggestion most often talked about for the DA series.
Co-op is, in my humblest opinion, not a game seller. It doesn't draw people in. As many people that say playing with their friends would be great, the amount of people who have RL friends that share the same taste in games and also share a similar enough schedule to play together on a regular basis is, just from a statistics standpoint, rather small. Doubly so if the feature is planned as a couch co-op only. So, if a co-op SP portion is included as the MP, I would see it having (needing) to be open to a broad pool of players, instead of direct invites.
Dark Souls had a very interesting concept for co-op. The combat was punishingly hard in that game for many people, but the player always had the option to lay down a summoning circle that would automatically draft other players of a similar level who wanted to engage in the co-op to help fight, especially with some of the game's bosses. The host player would receive help in a hard section of the game, while the joining player would receive bonuses and rewards if they were successful. In addition, there was a way for players to "invade" the games of others, triggering a PvP match.
While I do think the PvP model is rather annoying, I did really like the co-op option.
I believe for DA, which emphasizes story and character roleplay so much, including a group input on conversation would just lead to frustration and derision. In fact, standing around watching other people talk would be quite boring for a lot of players, even friends. So I believe the "instance summong" co-op of Dark Souls would be appropriate.
Keeping with my non-combat skills streak of the last MP idea, I believe this should play a role here as well. How about if, during the SP campaign, there were numerous dungeons/areas that required a member of the party to go off and do something that makes them unable to engage in combat. Think like ME2's suicide mission, with a team member in the vents, disabling computers, or a biotic squad mate providing a shield against the seeker swarms. Except, instead of ME2, which just used an unoccupied team member for this task, the game used a member of your active party. Essentially, you would be down a man (or woman) for this area for combat.
BUT, instead, at the party selection screen, an online player could ask for help. This would draft another human player to join the host. This could be done in one of two ways - one, where the joining player helps out with combat, or two, where the joining player takes the spot of the "lost" party member, allowing the joining player to engage in the non-combat tasks, such as activating runes to open a portal while enemies pour in, or picking a particularly difficult ancient lock.
The non-combat work for the joining member interests me most, so I'll just go with that now. What is the fun in just standing around, watching a bar fill up while the host and his party get to engage in the combat? This is where I figured some type of mini-game or activity involving the said non-combat skill would be enjoyable/entertaining. Perhaps something similar to the Bethesda lockpicking, or maybe even the Quest for Glory 5 trap disarm, where you had to perform a type of Memory mini-game (haven't plugged QFG these past two weeks now). Perhaps some type of geometric pattern or puzzle for a mage to disable a ward.
Whatever the case may be, these could engage the joining player in an activity instead of just standing around, watching all the "fun" happening. Also, if the joinign player isn't protected well by the host, they can get wacked by an enemy, which would interrupt the mini-game and possibly kill the joining player.
This will give the host player an extra hand in fighting by getting their full party back and would, in addition, allow them to get past obstacles faster if the joining player is quick at the mini-games (although it could also take longer than the computer if the joining player is fairly terrible at them). The joining player would gain rewards for doing co-op missions, in terms of exclusive gear, more money, extra XP, perhaps even MP related kits, if we were to combine this with the previous idea I had for MP.
It would not result in the host player "losing" control of any of the members of his party to friends or strangers, but would rather actually return a companion that would have been otherwise occupied. Similarly, it lets players who want to unlock loot and even possibly grind for more XP if they find they are stuck in a bind by going back and helping hosts with earlier areas/encounters. Maybe the rewards can even include special potions/tomes that give permanent stat boosts, or allow for a reset of a build (like the Maker's Sigh in DA2).
Thoughts? Questions? Feedback?
Allan Schumacher wrote...
If you'd prefer I could avoid all threads about controversial subjects.
I'm not a fan of speaking in negatives, so I'm not going to come in and start asking people "How would you ensure Multiplayer doesn't work."
The primary reason for me doing so is to get people to examine a feature within a context that they think is appropriate. It is easy, and uninteresting, to go and dismiss something as "Nah, it's not what I want." Anyone can do that, and since we don't have much to discuss in detail at this moment.
As a computing scientist, the idea that a feature like this just can't be done appropriately is far more likely to get me thinking about ways to prove that idea wrong (it's a scientist thing...). So I figure it'd be fun to engage the fans with ideas of what they may think is possible.
I find so many people give things such a fleeting level of thought and become closed minded towards other ideas, that they're kind of at a local maximum.
I know a feature like this is the line in the sand for you, which is fine if that's the way that you feel about it. If my talking about it with people makes you worried, then you read too much into my discussions. I tried this in a different thread about party banter as well, in large part because someone felt that improvements to the system just couldn't be done. Maybe that's the case, but it was fun to go through it with a few people and come up with ideas that they might think are interesting.
PvP shouldn't even be considered for co-op mode, or really any mode. If I want PvP, I can load up one of the MMOs I have that support it. Especially not the invade a game option. Nothing sucks worse than getting to a major boss fight in MP mode only to have some group of "bored" players decide that it's a good time to grief you. Been there, done that, got the t-shirt and a hat. I'll pass.
Guest_EntropicAngel_*
Allan Schumacher wrote...
As a computing scientist, the idea that a feature like this just can't be done appropriately is far more likely to get me thinking about ways to prove that idea wrong (it's a scientist thing...). So I figure it'd be fun to engage the fans with ideas of what they may think is possible.
Modifié par EJ107, 15 avril 2013 - 03:20 .
EntropicAngel wrote...
Allan Schumacher wrote...
As a computing scientist, the idea that a feature like this just can't be done appropriately is far more likely to get me thinking about ways to prove that idea wrong (it's a scientist thing...). So I figure it'd be fun to engage the fans with ideas of what they may think is possible.
A scientist, huh. Interesting.
Though I suppose that's a broad term, calling yourself a scientist doesn't necessarily mean you've a degree in the more common fields of science (Biology, Chemistry, Physics, etc.).
Allan Schumacher wrote...
As a computing scientist, the idea that a feature like this just can't be done appropriately is far more likely to get me thinking about ways to prove that idea wrong (it's a scientist thing...). So I figure it'd be fun to engage the fans with ideas of what they may think is possible.
Fast Jimmy wrote...
Well, he does have a bachelor's in Computer Science.
Wow, that isn't totally stalker-esque that I know that.
Allan Schumacher wrote...
If MP just had to be in there, how would you go about doing it?
iakus wrote...
Allan Schumacher wrote...
If you'd prefer I could avoid all threads about controversial subjects.
I'm not a fan of speaking in negatives, so I'm not going to come in and start asking people "How would you ensure Multiplayer doesn't work."
The primary reason for me doing so is to get people to examine a feature within a context that they think is appropriate. It is easy, and uninteresting, to go and dismiss something as "Nah, it's not what I want." Anyone can do that, and since we don't have much to discuss in detail at this moment.
As a computing scientist, the idea that a feature like this just can't be done appropriately is far more likely to get me thinking about ways to prove that idea wrong (it's a scientist thing...). So I figure it'd be fun to engage the fans with ideas of what they may think is possible.
I find so many people give things such a fleeting level of thought and become closed minded towards other ideas, that they're kind of at a local maximum.
I know a feature like this is the line in the sand for you, which is fine if that's the way that you feel about it. If my talking about it with people makes you worried, then you read too much into my discussions. I tried this in a different thread about party banter as well, in large part because someone felt that improvements to the system just couldn't be done. Maybe that's the case, but it was fun to go through it with a few people and come up with ideas that they might think are interesting.
I know I'm probably reading too much into it. It's just the unspoken assumption here that MP will be a part fo the game that has me worried. I probably shouldn't be as worried as I am, since up until a few months before release there was pretty much an unspoken assumtion that ME3 wouldn't have MP, so what isn't spoken isn't necessarilly what's true
My personal concerns aren't really about gameplay mechanics, though. It's how to ensure that SP remains a complete game, both in quality and in quantity. As I've said before, only x amount of data can fit on a disk. That amount can perhaps be expanded, but there is an upper limit. There's only so many things you can pack in the suitcase. I've yet to see how that can be addressed.
Modifié par Darth Brotarian, 15 avril 2013 - 05:15 .
Retour en haut
