411 réponses à ce sujet

[Dutchess]

LOL, how did this go from master's degrees to... porn? xD I'm pretty sure you don't need a degree for THAT.

[Killdren88]

As I've said in the past. If it MUST be in the game, I'd rather have it be an optional DLC. I really want no part of it, and nor do I wanna see it. I personally don't want them using resources on it. Dragon age has always been a SP game. Why change it? It is fine the way it is. Some games were designed for one person to personalize their party as they see fit. Not play with others. DA:O had the best amount of social interaction. You post updates on your own personal story, and you even had the option to not take part in it, and it was not shoe horned like ME3 was at first. If MP has to be in it then fine, but not at the expense of SP.

[Fast Jimmy]

renjility wrote...

LOL, how did this go from master's degrees to... porn? xD I'm pretty sure you don't need a degree for THAT.

It doesn't take much here on the ole BSN.

[Mark of the Dragon]

No I am not. I am still hoping DA3 does not have an actual MP

[mjboldy]

I'm against it but realize that they aren't going to do it just because I said I don't want it. I at least hope that they do not intertwine the singleplayer and multiplayer together like they did with Mass Effect 3 aka, you have to play it in order to get the special ending (although was fixed in an update). Obviously if it is included I won't be playing much of it. Maybe a few games but am getting a little frustrated with all the game developers feeling that multiplayer needs to be shoe-horned in every single game.

[Gilbert Salarian]

 I am not a big multiplayer fan.  The only time I play is with a group of friends, and usually this is co-op: Borderlands and Rock Band being the main two.  The only time I do competitive MP is in-person: Mario-Kart, Wii Sports, Mortal Kombat, or bust out the N64 for Goldeneye.  My initial stance is to keep MP out of single-player RPGs; if I wanted to play with others I’d join an MMO since they are built around multiplayer gaming.  However, as in improv (and listening to dear Mr Schumacher) let’s not say ‘No’. 


What do I NOT want from a multiplayer experience?
1)   It to be unavoidably linked to single-player.  ME3, even though we were told MP would have no bearing on SP, failed in this regard.  The EC patch ‘fixed’ this issue, but it seemed too much of a coincidence that MP was needed to achieve every ending.

2)   Team MP.  For example, I don’t want to join the Templar Faction and fight against the Mage Faction.  Crappy players (such as myself) tend to get more discouraged and beat-down by the top players, who get frustrated by having to pull an even heavy load for the team.  This tends to create a more negative experience all around.

3)   Lengthy grind to get all of the best weapons/items/characters via random drops.  (see further for details)


What DO I want from a multiplayer experience?
1)   Be forthright from the start.  See the ME3 example.  If MP will affect the SP, have the guts to say, “Look, you can get most of the endings in SP, but if you want them all you’ll have to play MP.  I can hear many of you raging now, but try it.  You’re going to like the way it plays; I guarantee it!”

2a)  Free-for-All.  Jedi Academy (even Goldeneye) is a good example of a fun Free-for-All MP experience.  Timed matches or first to 15 kills (for example) and every man, elf, dwarf, and qunari for themselves.

2b)   Drop-in Drop-out.  This would be tricky to do since the SP experience differs from player to player.  Borderlands handles Drop-in Drop-out well, and is a fairly open world game to boot. (Of course, it also isn’t a party-based game like the Dragon Age series)  There’s also the problem of who controls the action.  As noted earlier, SWTOR handles this decently, but a further refinement of that dialogue system would need to be done to make it work for Dragon Age.

2c)   Independent Co-Op Campaign.  This initially sprung to mind because of Call of Duty (please don’t hate on me), but the concept could work.  Let’s say, for instance, that the plot of DA3 Single-Player revolves around the Mage-Templar War and the Orlesian Civil War.  Well, the MP can take place on the Nevarra-Orlais border as Nevarra has decided to take advantage of Orlais’ weakened state.  The Co-Op campaign can revolve around beating back (or helping) those pesky Nevarran invaders.  The impact on the single player game would be minimal: ambient dialogue based on how the Co-Op campaign was going, epilogue slides showing what changes the MP made, etc.

3)   Unlockable characters.  Start with basic, generic PCs (i.e. the Origins choices: human noble, elf mage, dwarf commoner, etc) with drops of named PCs of greater attributes.  Regarding point (3) above, have most unlockables be attained via milestones (ex. Competing in 10 MP matches unlocks Oghren, Killing 100 enemies with a human rogue unlocks Leliana, Winning 5 matches unlocks Xenon the Antiquarian), but have a few as rare random drops (ex. You have a 0.6% chance of getting Flemeth each match)

Modifié par Gilbert Salarian, 17 avril 2013 - 01:48 .

[Allan Schumacher]

Just some ideas.

I swear I read them, but in the interest of preventing wall of text.

Where I struggle is, perhaps paradoxically given our viewpoints on MP's contributions to the game, is that I personally would stay away from a PvP element. While PvE still does have some level of "OMG balance!" with PvP it becomes SO much more critical, IMO. While this may not affect single player, I do think it leads to a greater possibility of the two systems (singleplayer and multiplayer) becoming increasingly distinct, which could translate into greater challenges in enabling an excellent idea that comes from one system, positively supporting the other.

Other aspects, however, such as purely support characters, I think are interesting (and applicable, regardless of the MP being PvE or PvP, or even in the single player game itself)

[Nightdragon8]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I remember one RTS (either C&C:Generals or an Age of Empires game) that allowed either (any) player to pause the game at any time. We never really used it, but I think in a Dragon Age game it would be necessary. Dragon Age is built on strategic use of abilities--something that requires pausing, or very slow gameplay.

Yes? No?

Could be. Is it an issue if each player is controlling only one character? Pause could still be a solution as well.

I don't know if the pace necessarily needs to be that different, however. But since we're looking at the Pause system, I'll break it down the way I see it.

This is a pretty binary decision IMO. It'd either exist or not (you can have some timers or other things, but lets keep it simple).

With pause
Pros: Enables finer strategic/tactical flexibility by allowing the group to suspend play and adjust their tactics on the fly at a less frantic pace

Cons: Could be tech issues with replicating the pause. I see a big risk of potential griefing (assuming you're not playing with only friends) through excessive use - this would lead me to think that the system would need to be implemented in a way to try to minimize that.


Without pause is pretty much the mirror for pros and cons (I stayed away from any sort of "gamers may not like it" for the con, since one can rationalize that for any feature). The big issue I would need to see with pausing is whether or not it's as big of a requirement if you're only controlling one player. Does it significantly undermine the strategic aspects? Can the player continue to drive the action and maintain control without it when only worrying about a single actor?


It's something that is very difficult to really know without some level of prototyping and play testing, I would find. But all we have is a forum so we make do with what we got!

Star Wars: Rebelions RTS that erither side could pause, and most RTS's in multi you can pause. But in Rebelions we ended up agreeing to a speed and only when we are assinging stuff do we slow down the game.

If DA3 is anything like DA:O and DA2 then it would be the standered MMO style MMORPG kind of gameplay.

Otherwise if the game turns into more of a Elder scrolls game where its first person then it will more than likly be like Mount&Blade only with magic.

[Allan Schumacher]

EntropicAngel wrote...

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.).

Computing Science certainly isn't a "common field of science" but I felt a description of my program most apt when put as the following:

"A Computing Science program does not teach people how to become programmers.  It teaches them how to become computing scientists."

I do strongly value research (I have actually contributed to peer-reviewed papers, although not as a primary author, and have helped with research projects around Computer assisted programming/game design/story writing, as well as AI pathfinding and decision processes - in both cases leveraging RTS gaming as a test bed), empiricism and the scientific method, and enjoy experimentation.  I have a preference towards more practical applications, rather then theoretical, so while I don't mind crunching algorithms, I typically prefer to do so with practical experimentation.

From wikipedia

A scientist, in a broad sense, is one engaging in a systematic activity to acquire knowledge. In a more restricted sense, a scientist is an individual who uses the scientific method.[1] The person may be an expert in one or more areas of science.[2]
This article focuses on the more restricted use of the word. Scientists
perform research toward a more comprehensive understanding of nature, including physical, mathematical and social realms.

I think it's a reasonable description.  It is certainly broad.

Hmm.

I would call that more engineering, personally [have a
friend with a Bachelor's and (soon-to-be) Master's in CS...or was it
CE?].

Doesn't matter I suppose.

Don't tell an engineer that (they are exceptionally protective of the title).  While I prefer the practical side (and in that sense am probably closer to engineer in that sense), my school did offer programs in Computing Science (under the Faculty of Science) and Computer Engineering (under the Faculty of Engineering).  There were some shared courses, but the CompSci program does cover a lot more theoretical concepts, while the Engineering program certainly covered more "Applied Sciences" angle.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 17 avril 2013 - 07:57 .

[Flamingdropbear]

Original Question- No not really. I have nothing against it personally, but I don't really enjoy mutliplayer games much.

Allan Schumacher wrote...
If MP just had to be in there, how would you go about doing it?

Here's and idea dredged up after  6 hrs interupted sleep, 5 hrs driving a car, three coffees and several neat whiskeys (or scotches if you're a yank).

You create a team of 4 characters from various builds ( e.g. Dalish archer, apostale mage e.t.c.) with the rock paper scissors idea of rogue beats mage, mage beats warrior, warrior beats rogue or something like that. You then choose thier equipment (using cast off's from the single player game?) and set up thier tactics ( similar to those in DA2, but more in depth). You then upload the group and tactics to the web and they are pitched against other peoples groups either randomly or against friends groups. These battles are fought without any more input from the player after being posted, but can be watched as a video which can be shared, and can go for a few rounds with changed made to the groups, equipment and tactics between rounds.

Due to most of being done on servers I can be controlled/ tweaked on smart phones and tablets, it uses the things you do in the game so doesn't require changing concepts the game and allows for the game to be played away from the PC, Xbox or PS.

Now feel free to rip the idea to shreads, or just ignore it.

[Fast Jimmy]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Just some ideas.

I swear I read them, but in the interest of preventing wall of text.

Where I struggle is, perhaps paradoxically given our viewpoints on MP's contributions to the game, is that I personally would stay away from a PvP element. While PvE still does have some level of "OMG balance!" with PvP it becomes SO much more critical, IMO. While this may not affect single player, I do think it leads to a greater possibility of the two systems (singleplayer and multiplayer) becoming increasingly distinct, which could[/i] translate into greater challenges in enabling an excellent idea that comes from one system, positively supporting the other.

Other aspects, however, such as purely support characters, I think are interesting (and applicable, regardless of the MP being PvE or PvP, or even in the single player game itself)

Hmmmm. I do see where you are coming from with the PvP concerns. Perhaps if there were just simply non-combat ways to let the bad guys in?

For instance, instead of sneaking a rogue into a trap protected/locked tower to take out a squishy support Mage, you instead unlock the doors, disarm the traps and then have a warrior come by with an aggro skill that sends a whole horde of enemies into the tower, causing the Mage to stop providing support and possibly dying, giving the other team time to notch more kills on their belt and take the lead...?

Again, I'd be interested in MP for the first time in a LONG time if it could support (and, even actively promote) having entire builds devoted to non-combat abilities (not just support/buff/heal/etc., but a build that can primarily avoid combat altogether).

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 17 avril 2013 - 01:00 .

[Kommunicating]

Completely uninterested in a Dragon Age Multiplayer.
A single player campaign is obviously Bioware's strongpoint, they should focus on that. Focus on single player and not have a multiplayer, that way the single player campaign will be that much better.
While the Mass Effect 3 multiplayer did turn out better than I had expected, I still am not compelled to believe that a Dragon Age MP will do the franchise justice.
If they absolutely HAVE to do a multiplayer, Maker help us all, then a different form of multiplayer such as a co-op campaign sort of thing may peak my interest. If they can do it right.

[Beerfish]

I'd simply make DA mp very much like ME mp but of course work out some kinks and make a few changes here and there. I'd use the exact same concept. 4 person group, wide variety of classes and races, co op. No pvp at all. Reasonably short matches time wise. Challenges. Under no circumstance have mp have any affect on the sp game at all.

[zombitologist]

If anything I'm more excited to see what they deem appropriate for a multiplayer option. Mass Effect had Co-op survival mode, will Dragon Age go PvP or a parallel co-op campaign (part of me would really like this idea).

[Lluthren]

It all depends on the reviews for me. I'm getting the game for sp.
I love mp in ME3, i just hope DA mp is just as good or better.

[Endurium]

As long as the MP component doesn't affect my SP gaming (war assets I'm looking at you), I don't care. I enjoyed MP in games but playing with/versus strangers gets old after a few years. SP forever!

[mopotter]

Nope. Have no interest in it at all and as long as it does not mess with the SP game I don't care if it's available or not. The only on line game I play is The Old Republic and I play that one by myself. I'm social at work, at home, with friends, I play video games by myself.

[Whitering]

 No, I have never played the MP in any game, even Starcraft. I did try once back in Alpha Centauri.

[Zeldrik1389]

I'm not a big fan of MP, but having some kind of co-op PVE would be nice. (team up to explore difficult dungeon, or fight nasty bosses.. etc. Like sp battles, but with actual players instead of npc companions.) Playing your favorite game with your friends is great. But of course, as long as we aren't forced to be online to play SP.

Modifié par Zeldrik1389, 17 avril 2013 - 09:05 .

[bmwcrazy]

No.

If I wanted a multiplayer RPG, I'd play an MMORPG.

[RedArmyShogun]

I for one can't wait to be yelled at people half my age should I buy it.

[Stella-Arc]

I hate MP but strangely enjoyed the Mass Effect MP. However, the one thing I hated of it was that I couldn't play with the race I wanted. I wanted a male quarian engineer but all I got were a bunch of same ammo, upgrades for guns (I-X), ect. There was one time where I got so many female quarian infiltrators that I could have made an army (exaggeration but you get my point). I'm not particularly good at MP and the constant harassment for my "poor performance" prevents me from playing at higher difficulty settings to get more money to unlock the Premium Specter Packs (I get booted out a lot in the lobby by other players).

If Dragon Age is going to have something similar to the ME MP then have all the gender and classes available. Upgrades, specializations can be unlocked as you gain points, money, ect. I don't want to spend real money just to see if I'm lucky enough to unlock the character I want.