203 réponses à ce sujet

[Flamingdropbear]

I read somewhere that all new EA games have to have an onine component and most of the thoughs on this board relating to it seem to suggest that multiplayer in NOT the way to go. So here is another idea:
Every week a new notice goes up on the Chanters board, Mage's Collective bag or Favours for intersted parties barkeep altering you to new mission to complete over the week, wether that's killing bandits threatening the village, stealling documents from a bard or just getting ingredents for a pie. Complete the task and get some cash, or an new bit of loot, or a decoration for your castle.
The idea was from ME3's weekend operations but kept within the single player experience. Since it can be kept within the pre existing maps little need for new resources, and the only VA needed is the Chanter spouting the chant of light mumbo jumbo, and it can be added to like the additional free packs in ME3's mutliplayer
So BSN pull the idea apart like wild horses, and lets see if we can get something workable.

[Renmiri1]

Guy who said such gem of wisdom got the boot for making EA lose money for 3 years in a row.

[K_Tabris]

The online requirement needs to go, as does the idea of multiplayer. Not everyone has full access to the Internet all the time. Some people don't always want to play connected either.

[Zeldrik1389]

Thats wat they did to the new simcity. Result: disastrous sale, massive sh!tstorm from gamers, and EA CEO got the boot. Terrible idea.

[Overdosing]

I hope with the change of the CEO, having mandatory internet access goes bye-bye. That stuff just kills me on the inside.

[MrIDunnoYou]

I find myself wondering if anyone read the first post, or if they just read the poorly worded topic title. Flamingdropbear isn't saying anything about people needing to be connected to play the game. They're giving a suggestion for what the required online component could be, instead of multiplayer.

[K_Tabris]

MrIDunnoYou wrote...

I find myself wondering if anyone read the first post, or if they just read the poorly worded topic title. Flamingdropbear isn't saying anything about people needing to be connected to play the game. They're giving a suggestion for what the required online component could be, instead of multiplayer.

Or maybe some of us would rather not have the requirement at all then come up with ideas for sp alternatives. You shouldn't assume.

[MrIDunnoYou]

NovinhaShepard wrote...

MrIDunnoYou wrote...

I find myself wondering if anyone read the first post, or if they just read the poorly worded topic title. Flamingdropbear isn't saying anything about people needing to be connected to play the game. They're giving a suggestion for what the required online component could be, instead of multiplayer.

Or maybe some of us would rather not have the requirement at all then come up with ideas for sp alternatives. You shouldn't assume.

My bad, I should have said that the majority of the comments before mine seemed like they came from people who didn't read the first post, as they were commenting about the mandatory internet connection.

[Allen Spellwaver]

DAO's online component. Problem solved.

[Avalon The Elf]

Considering i can't hook up any consoles to the internet this would really suck

[FieryDove]

Renmiri1 wrote...

Guy who said such gem of wisdom got the boot for making EA lose money for 3 years in a row.

Frank Gibeau was fired? I had not heard that.

http://www.pcgamer.c...yer-experience/

[legbamel]

The requirement for an on-line component is not the same thing as an "always on-line" requirement. The former I don't find too worrisome, as long as it's sufficiently divorced from the story and its outcomes. I was very pleasantly surprised by how much fun ME3's multi-player mode turned out and, with those caveats, would not hate it in the DA world in some form.

The latter I do hate and, considering the unreliability and limitations of many people's Internet connection (and the crapitude that is X-Box Live) would reduce the popularity of the game and thus endanger the future of the IP.

[Fast Jimmy]

EntropicAngel wrote...

legbamel wrote...

The requirement for an on-line component is not the same thing as an "always on-line" requirement. The former I don't find too worrisome, as long as it's sufficiently divorced from the story and its outcomes. I was very pleasantly surprised by how much fun ME3's multi-player mode turned out and, with those caveats, would not hate it in the DA world in some form.

The latter I do hate and, considering the unreliability and limitations of many people's Internet connection (and the crapitude that is X-Box Live) would reduce the popularity of the game and thus endanger the future of the IP.

This. You need to change your title, OP, as it's extremely misleading.

As for myself, I can deal with an online component. I won't partake, but I can deal. I cannot however deal with an always-online requirement. 

There is only one way to deal with an always-online requirement...

[spam image removed]

Modifié par Ninja Stan, 02 avril 2013 - 05:42 .

[Zeldrik1389]

Multiplayer is fine. I understand the need for online feature, BUT it should not be a "must". Players should have the option to play game offline. Not everyone has a good internet connection. I just hate games that require you to always be online, or had to be online to start. I rmb a year ago, I had to wait 10 - 12 hours at the airport, and games were the only thing keep me from dying of boredom. I just got Diablo 3 the day before, and I was dying to play it. But It required constant good internet connection to play, which was not possible at that airport. It ruined the game greatly for me.

[Nefario]

So, I'm not sure if anyone's linked to this yet, but Mike Laidlaw speaks a little bit about online functionality (though he's careful not to get too specific, and he's not necessarily speaking about DA3 features) in this panel:
http://www.escapistm...tm_campaign=all

Suggestion seems to be that you might be able to access crafting and perhaps other similar sorts of features from your phone (or elsewhere).

I would be shocked if they built in an always-online DRM sort of thing into DA3. I'm still sort of expecting multiplayer, and if it's included I imagine I'll probably ignore it. But as online components go, what Mike talks about in the video doesn't sound too bad. Mayyybe even something I'd use... once or twice.

[Fast Jimmy]

Nefario wrote...

So, I'm not sure if anyone's linked to this yet, but Mike Laidlaw speaks a little bit about online functionality (though he's careful not to get too specific, and he's not necessarily speaking about DA3 features) in this panel:
http://www.escapistm...tm_campaign=all

Suggestion seems to be that you might be able to access crafting and perhaps other similar sorts of features from your phone (or elsewhere).

I would be shocked if they built in an always-online DRM sort of thing into DA3. I'm still sort of expecting multiplayer, and if it's included I imagine I'll probably ignore it. But as online components go, what Mike talks about in the video doesn't sound too bad. Mayyybe even something I'd use... once or twice.

My only problem with that is that are they going to make crafting or inventory management so complicated or time consuming that you'd need to spend time on an app to handle the boring minutia of it? I mean, an app that would let you craft or do other things sounds like its taking menial work out of the game and letting you do it on a phone instead. Why not just NOT have menial, time wasting activities? Then you don't need the app or the poor gameplay.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 02 avril 2013 - 01:48 .

[Nefario]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

My only problem with that is that are they going to make crafting or inventory management so complicated or time consuming that you'd need to spend time on an app to handle the boring minutia of it? I mean, an app that would let you craft or do other things sounds like its taking menial work out of the game and letting you do it on a phone instead. Why not just have menial, time wasting activities? Then you don't need the app or the poor gameplay.

My impression (not so much based on what he said, more just how I'd imagine something like that working) is that it wouldn't be required for crafting so much as it'd just let you access it when you weren't actually in game. If that were the case, how complicated/time-consuming/whatever crafting is would be an issue independent from it's availability on a phone app or whatever else.

[Fast Jimmy]

krul2k wrote...

whats the point of that though?? id understand 100% in a MMO, but a SP game?

Agreed. I mean, if crafting turns into a time-wasting mini-game just so they can plug an app for the game... who is that helping? It certainly isn't the player, who views such things as mobile apps that tie into a AAA video game as either unnecessary or something they don't even have access to (for those without an internet connection or a smart phone). 

Apps that, in real life, are used to help us do things more easily and take some of the headache out of life are great.

Apps that are made to help us do things more easily in a video game, which can be designed in its very nature to be easy and streamlined, is not good. It is either indicating poor game design or arbitrary systems put in place to promote the app in question.

If you need an app to help you organize your inventory, then the game's inventory system probably wasn't as well designed as it should have been. If the crafting involves a lot of tedium and legwork, then the game was designed to do so to eat up the player's time and extend the play time. There is no reason why my character needs to wait fifteen minutes for steel to be heated or a forge to fire up. If you want, you can show a little animation or cut scene. You don't need to pad the time used to do things for no reason just so an app can be created that let's me do this menial, unnecessary work on an app while I am sitting in an airport. 

[Sanunes]

Part of the problem I think is how people are interpreting the "online component" comments. I dislike the always online parts of SimCity 4 and Diablo 3, but the multiplayer aspects of Mass Effect 3 or the co-op segments of Dead Space 3 I did enjoy, it really boils down to what the studio is going to do with the challenge EA sets before them.

As far as the DRM sign-in, I think it was poorly implemented with Mass Effect 3 for it took too long, but sadly I have accepted it for years from EA and other companies, so I can't get mad at it now.

Edit: (Re-read OP)

The problem with something like you are offering is to me there is more of a have versus have-not for the people that have access to the internet or the time to complete these challenges will have an advantage in single player if it would be gold or other items they unlock and personally I like how seperate the multiplayer in Mass Effect 3 was from single player.

Now I haven't experienced Halo 4, but from what I understand they added a co-op mission every week for a year and that would be something that I think would work well with Dragon Age, for they could balance and already existing quest or zone for two or more people and they can experience it that way and it can be kept independant of single player.

Modifié par Sanunes, 02 avril 2013 - 02:19 .

[gw2005]

Overdosing wrote...

I hope with the change of the CEO, having mandatory internet access goes bye-bye. That stuff just kills me on the inside.

switch the donkey for an ass won't change the smell.

[kjdhgfiliuhwe]

Overdosing wrote...

I hope with the change of the CEO, having mandatory internet access goes bye-bye. That stuff just kills me on the inside.

Well, the EA president is on record saying DRM is a "dead end" and not conducive to good business, but considering the amount of foot-in-mouth the brass in EA has been conducting over Sim City, it's hard to take the guy seriously, and I'm wondering if he has any idea, despite being President, of the DRM used by his own company. I'm sure DA III will have a similar online component that the previous two games and the ME games had. 

Modifié par kjdhgfiliuhwe, 02 avril 2013 - 04:19 .