710 réponses à ce sujet

[ElitePinecone]

Fast Jimmy wrote...
(the more likely option) the SP mechanics will become LESS about managing your party, LESS about using group tactics thoughtfully, LESS about character builds limitations and MORE about how fast you can head shot your enemies.

What evidence have you seen that this is the case, at all?

Look at the PAX demo. It's far more about party management and group tactics than even DA2. 

I think - respectfully - that you're being limited in imagining what an MP combat system *could* be like because your focus is on how that same system would *have* to lead to twitch combat based around player skill. That's not true.

[TK514]

101ezylonhxeT wrote...

I honestly don't care about what they do with MP as long as it doesn't affect SP in any single way so the the MP people can do whatever and we SP people can play and completely ignore MP entirely.

Pretty much my feelings on the subject.

[Texhnolyze101]

TurretSyndrome wrote...

101ezylonhxeT wrote...

I honestly don't care about what they do with MP as long as it doesn't affect SP in any single way so the the MP people can do whatever and we SP people can play and completely ignore MP entirely.

It will affect it, one way or another. 

Thats the part that bothers me.

[zMataxa]

ElitePinecone wrote...

Also, I think the original poster maybe lumps all singleplayer fans together as wanting detailed conversations, characterisation, romances, etc, when in reality maybe some of them sincerely just want to hack at things with swords and lob fireballs at darkspawn. Maybe a lot of them like both aspects of the games.

____________

That was me.
And I assure you - My focus is never into lumping all S/P fans into wanting one package.
Last thing I'm intending.  I am quite sorry if any of my posts came across that way. 

If you've seen my posts around BSN, you may see that I like to recognize the plurality of tastes. 
But at the same time, I do try to speak out at times  for the finer things - that Bioware has shown they can do in the past, concerned they will move too far from depth focus to shiny object approach.
In other words, change in BIGGER ways - their final output - the game we play.

Heck, I even recognized the value of MP in this thread and that it's the way of the future, whether we S/P players like it or not.
But there's still a finer point that I was making in terms of the whole design process and Zot alocation (Pg 11, post 3) - which ultimately decides the game focus, feel, content, etc..

PS.  Again it bears repeating. I did enjoy both DAs and all 3 MEs.
But yes, I did feel ME3 was starting to feel more FPS with cutting some story-line detail. 
I could feel something was missing.  But whatever.  Bioware does - what it does.
That's the way it goes. 
Cheers.

[leaguer of one]

TurretSyndrome wrote...

101ezylonhxeT wrote...

I honestly don't care about what they do with MP as long as it doesn't affect SP in any single way so the the MP people can do whatever and we SP people can play and completely ignore MP entirely.

It will affect it, one way or another. 

No it won't.

[AtreiyaN7]

Oh, it's one of these threads again. One could point out that MP in ME3 was quite popular - not to mention the fact that a separate team was involved in it, so that it didn't take away manpower OR resources from the single-player campaign.

If you don't like multiplayer, then don't play it. These sorts of anti-MP petitions seem grounded in irrational fears for the most part - hmph. I'm willing to bet that they will not have an EMS-style aspect a la ME3 (not that MP impacted me in the least - I finished the game and got my ideal ending just fine without touching MP; I certainly played MP AFTER I finished the single-player campaign just to be clear - and I enjoyed it). And if your much-loathed MP isn't a requirement, then having a bad ISP is pretty much irrelevant.

DA:I is highly unlikely to be like Diablo 3, and I hated the always-online connection, which I ultimately considered to be stupid AND highly annoying. As far as an MP experience goes, it kind of sucked when I wasn't hanging with my friends. But here's the thing: I actually recognize that MP is different in every game - sometimes it's good, sometimes it's bad. It certainly doesn't merit anti-MP threads to be repeated for the rest of eternity, especially when you can just ignore the bloody option if you hate it THAT much. *rolleyes*

Modifié par AtreiyaN7, 09 novembre 2013 - 06:45 .

[DooomCookie]

MP is something I don't like. I don't like playing with other people, I don't like the lack of story and, for me, the best parts of gameplay, that is, slowly developing your character, are lost. I don't see the point of it in Dragon Age, which is meant to be and marketed as a SP RPG, with emphasis on story and choice. So yeah, I'm going to complain about MP in these threads because I would definitely rather see a polished campaign, or even another quest or something, rather than MP.

[TurretSyndrome]

leaguer of one wrote...
No it won't.

Yes it will.

[leaguer of one]

TurretSyndrome wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...
No it won't.

Yes it will.

Because you're ability to jump to conclutions with no base behind it proves it so?

Sorry, no it won't.

Modifié par leaguer of one, 09 novembre 2013 - 06:44 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

TurretSyndrome wrote...

101ezylonhxeT wrote...

I honestly don't care about what they do with MP as long as it doesn't affect SP in any single way so the the MP people can do whatever and we SP people can play and completely ignore MP entirely.

It will affect it, one way or another.

That's a different question.  I'm opposed to the SP campaign being compromised to accommodate MP.  I'm opposed to MP affecting SP in any way.

But that doesn't mean I'm opposed to MP.  I'm just opposed to MP done in a way that harms SP.

All else being equal, I don't care if MP exists.  You probably don't either.

But whether all else is equal, that's a different question.  And likely one we can't answer.

[ImperatorMortis]

Hazegurl wrote...

ImperatorMortis wrote...

I don't really like it tbh.

I mean must everything be multiplayer these days? 

I agree, MP works for some games but not every single game created. I don't see how MP would work for an rpg game. Even Mass Effect 3's MP isn't anything to write home about compared to other MP games.  The way I see it, devs who make rpg games should just consider going all out and make it an MMO instead of including some half assed MP just for the sake of having a MP. It's even worse when you make MP almost essential for the SP just to force people to play it.

Well to be fair it did kind of work out for Balders Gate/Neverwinter Nights. 

[leaguer of one]

DooomCookie wrote...

MP is something I don't like. I don't like playing with other people, I don't like the lack of story and, for me, the best parts of gameplay, that is, slowly developing your character, are lost. I don't see the point of it in Dragon Age, which is meant to be and marketed as a SP RPG, with emphasis on story and choice. So yeah, I'm going to complain about MP in these threads because I would definitely rather see a polished campaign, or even another quest or something, rather than MP.

That does not give you ground to complain about the mp being that it's optional. Even more when they are adding a year to development just to add on to the sp.

[zMataxa]

leaguer of one wrote...

Because you're ability to jump to conclutions with no bade behind it proves it so?
Sorry, no it won't.

Leaguer.  I think if you are going to say that, I deserve a reply to my post P11, post 3 about the whole zot allocation process.  Thanx.

Modifié par zMataxa, 09 novembre 2013 - 06:44 .

[Fredward]

Honestly the people who seem dogmatically opposed to any kind of inclusion of MP in the game's main argument seems to be "yes, well it might detract from the SP campaign." This is not a valid argument folks. You'd be laughed out of the room if the crux of your argument relied on a "maybe" in any other context. Especially since the main draw of an RPG (I assume) is the story that has to be told through the SP campaign. Like I said before it's not BF. 

[Schneidend]

MasterScribe wrote...

If another developer (DICE?) makes the multiplayer separately, then I might be up for it.

I'm not a fan of MP, but it could be fun in the DA setting. Maybe.

Having a second dev team devoted to the multiplayer accomplishes this already, with more oversight and supervision from the lead directors and producers.

[DooomCookie]

leaguer of one wrote...

TurretSyndrome wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...
No it won't.

Yes it will.

Because you're ability to jump to conclutions with no bade behind it proves it so?

Sorry, no it won't.

Surely it will, at least in terms of potential gains?  I know nothing of how game development works, but I presume there is a separate team working on the MP and a separate budget allocated to MP.  I don't like multiplayer and I honestly don't get the point of it in this series, so as a fan I'd rather see that budget given to voiceacting or QA or a general payrise for the developers and the team working on it set to work on an aspect of the SP campaign.

[zMataxa]

Foopydoopydoo wrote...

Honestly the people who seem dogmatically opposed to any kind of inclusion of MP in the game's main argument seems to be "yes, well it might detract from the SP campaign." This is not a valid argument folks. You'd be laughed out of the room if the crux of your argument relied on a "maybe" in any other context. Especially since the main draw of an RPG (I assume) is the story that has to be told through the SP campaign. Like I said before it's not BF. 

___________

You are right it's not an argument.
But until we see the zot allocation, you don't have any argument either.
It runs on opinions and speculations and assurances.

I would say that this thread should be considered more as a lithmus test for people'c concerns and an interesting little sample group of likes.
I think dismissing people's concerns that MP won't affect SP in any way is not valid.

[zMataxa]

Schneidend wrote...

Having a second dev team devoted to the multiplayer accomplishes this already, with more oversight and supervision from the lead directors and producers.

___________

Have you read my reply to hoorayforicecream?
I ask because you used his post as one of your building blocks for your perspective.

[Fredward]

zMataxa wrote...
___________

You are right it's not an argument.
But until we see the zot allocation, you don't have any argument either.
It runs on opinions and speculations and assurances.

I would say that this thread should be considered more as a lithmus test for people'c concerns and an interesting little sample group of likes.
I think dismissing people's concerns that MP won't affect SP in any way is not valid.

Uh... hasn't it been repeatedly stated that MP and SP are not only handled by different groups but they ALSO get entirely different budgets? What that means is that there would never have been a magical increase in the amount of dosh spent on the SP it just means there would have been no MP. Gettit?

[Kalas Magnus]

they are going to have multiplayer. it is EA. just accept it

biower shouldnt base their decisions on what you cant do.
i think you can get the "best" ending in me3 without playing multiplayer

if you dont like it dont play it.

[zMataxa]

Foopydoopydoo wrote...

zMataxa wrote...
___________

You are right it's not an argument.
But until we see the zot allocation, you don't have any argument either.
It runs on opinions and speculations and assurances.

I would say that this thread should be considered more as a lithmus test for people'c concerns and an interesting little sample group of likes.
I think dismissing people's concerns that MP won't affect SP in any way is not valid.

Uh... hasn't it been repeatedly stated that MP and SP are not only handled by different groups but they ALSO get entirely different budgets? What that means is that there would never have been a magical increase in the amount of dosh spent on the SP it just means there would have been no MP. Gettit?

______________

Well I'd like your opinion then as well on the earlier discussion where we dealt with that. 
hoorayforicecream and I were having that very discussion.
My post Page 11 post 3.

Modifié par zMataxa, 09 novembre 2013 - 06:53 .

[leaguer of one]

DooomCookie wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

TurretSyndrome wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...
No it won't.

Yes it will.

Because you're ability to jump to conclutions with no bade behind it proves it so?

Sorry, no it won't.

Surely it will, at least in terms of potential gains?  I know nothing of how game development works, but I presume there is a separate team working on the MP and a separate budget allocated to MP.  I don't like multiplayer and I honestly don't get the point of it in this series, so as a fan I'd rather see that budget given to voiceacting or QA or a general payrise for the developers and the team working on it set to work on an aspect of the SP campaign.

Everything for the sp in resources is per arranged and plan before production. So everything need to make the sp quality is aready at hand. MP get it's own resources. If one team is working on the sp and another is working on th mp, there is no issue with one game mode draining resources from another. The sp is not going to have less having if it's done this way. In fact, the sp is gaining more now with the extention that was added to the production to the game....

So unrustle your jimmies about the mp.

[DooomCookie]

leaguer of one wrote...

DooomCookie wrote...

MP is something I don't like. I don't like playing with other people, I don't like the lack of story and, for me, the best parts of gameplay, that is, slowly developing your character, are lost. I don't see the point of it in Dragon Age, which is meant to be and marketed as a SP RPG, with emphasis on story and choice. So yeah, I'm going to complain about MP in these threads because I would definitely rather see a polished campaign, or even another quest or something, rather than MP.

That does not give you ground to complain about the mp being that it's optional. Even more when they are adding a year to development just to add on to the sp.

If it wasn't optional I would just be angrier.    That brings me onto another point though.  I really MP is completely disconnected from the game.  No making us play through it with AI or adding features that involve it, like that galactic readiness in ME3.

And, as I said in another post, I'm annoyed that the money and manpower going to MP aren't going to SP instead.  That sounds really selfish, but Dragon Age is a single player game.

[TurretSyndrome]

leaguer of one wrote...

Because you're ability to jump to conclutions with no base behind it proves it so?

Sorry, no it won't.

Ah so yours is a valid argument then? Just because the developers take your hand and assure you that it won't affect it in anyway... Fine, think what you will.