Wulfram wrote...
Can they really be "on the fence" about multiplayer at this stage of development? Seems like they must have started work on it if it's going to happen. Though I guess it might end up getting cut.
Modifié par Fortlowe, 04 janvier 2014 - 03:38 .
In Exile wrote...
Most roles were useless in DA:O. Direct damage (ideally, AOE damage) was by far, far the best possible built for every class. The "freedom" in DA:O was just a freedom to pick between radically inferior designs. That isn't very interesting - when most builds are not good.
Zkyire wrote...
ME3 MP was one of the best parts of ME3 for me and many others.
If the DA dev team can bring that kind of quality (not necessarily the same game mode), then I'll be a happy camper.
In Exile wrote...
Most roles were useless in DA:O. Direct damage (ideally, AOE damage) was by far, far the best possible built for every class. The "freedom" in DA:O was just a freedom to pick between radically inferior designs. That isn't very interesting - when most builds are not good.
LPPrince wrote...
Really hoping for no MP.
Jorina Leto wrote...
I hope for no multiplayer.
Horde mode is basicly just a dungon twisted into a circle. It's no different from playing Left 4 dead. The only difference is the illsution of progress.ghostzodd wrote...
strive wrote...
I don't mind co-op multiplayer its a good way to fool around with the combat without rolling a new character. It isn't very lasting at least ME3's wasn't for me. I got bored of horde mode after about five days. But sometimes I felt like playing an Infiltrator and ME3 multiplayer let me scratch that itch without rolling a new Shepard and leveling him or her up. So I'd just play one mp game snipe some Cerberus and go on with my day.
Horde mode has been done to death in games
Modifié par BlueMoonSeraphim, 04 janvier 2014 - 05:13 .
BlueMoonSeraphim wrote...
I hope there *is* multi-player to
1) Boost sales of the game (more $, more Dragon Age) and
2) Keep BioWare releasing updates and DLC,
as long as
1) It is not tied to single-player,
2) Its development does not take away from single-player campaign development, and
3) IT IS NOT TIED TO SINGLE-PLAYER!
leaguer of one wrote...
Horde mode is basicly just a dungon twisted into a circle. It's no different from playing Left 4 dead. The only difference is the illsution of progress.ghostzodd wrote...
strive wrote...
I don't mind co-op multiplayer its a good way to fool around with the combat without rolling a new character. It isn't very lasting at least ME3's wasn't for me. I got bored of horde mode after about five days. But sometimes I felt like playing an Infiltrator and ME3 multiplayer let me scratch that itch without rolling a new Shepard and leveling him or her up. So I'd just play one mp game snipe some Cerberus and go on with my day.
Horde mode has been done to death in games
Modifié par ghostzodd, 04 janvier 2014 - 07:26 .
Modifié par AngelSpirit, 04 janvier 2014 - 08:04 .
leaguer of one wrote...
LPPrince wrote...
Really hoping for no MP.Jorina Leto wrote...
I hope for no multiplayer.
It's going to happen no matter what you feel.
Unfortunately ME3's premise still boiled down to "giant unknown (to the public MEU citizen) ancient alien-monsters attack the galaxy and everyone must unite to beat them together" and DA:I seems to be "Giant army of demons attack and the player must form an inquisition, uniting armies from across regions to beat them together"ianvillan wrote...
Linkenski wrote...
Why is cameron reflecting the question about DA:I being similar to ME3 in premise with rejection? THEY ARE SODDING SIMILAR! Excuse the language... *ahem*
And it seems like it's all about "big moral dilemmas, big battles, big, big, epic, big!" again. Ugh, after ME3 I don't want another generic war plot again. The choices they showcased at PAX were all about tactics, and while I do welcome that for the combat scenarios and the protagonist being the Inquisition leader, I hope this isn't one of those tick-boxes that EA has forced upon Bioware to make their product market better.
If they go with the "lowest common denominater-route" again I'm gonna break stuff! >:-(
I don't care about EA's by-the-numbers BS.
He also said the games were different because we knew what the reapers were, but the main theme of Mass Effect was that we didn't know what sovereign was, but it was finding out what it was with the help of the factions that made the game.
That same as not knowing what the veil tear is and gathering help to uncover and stop the tears.
spirosz wrote...
More than likely going to have MP. Interestingly enough, I disliked the idea of MP being brought to ME3, but I was open to it and I found it the more enjoyable aspect of the game, sadly. It's better to be open about it and see what it might achieve, who knows - if it's in, it might be good or it might be terrible.
Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 04 janvier 2014 - 09:48 .
Wulfram wrote...
Eh, DPS was probably the best if you were good and wanted to blast through fights quickly. But if you're lazy/not very good then piling on defence and being able to ignore most of the enemies was pretty handy/broken too.
ghostzodd wrote...
Wissenschaft wrote...
Decent interview. MP in ME3 seemed to work just fine along with the single player so I'm not worried.
Considering you had to play multiplayer to get the best ending? No it did not work with Single Player since you had to play it.
Linkenski wrote...
Unfortunately ME3's premise still boiled down to "giant unknown (to the public MEU citizen) ancient alien-monsters attack the galaxy and everyone must unite to beat them together" and DA:I seems to be "Giant army of demons attack and the player must form an inquisition, uniting armies from across regions to beat them together"ianvillan wrote...
Linkenski wrote...
Why is cameron reflecting the question about DA:I being similar to ME3 in premise with rejection? THEY ARE SODDING SIMILAR! Excuse the language... *ahem*
And it seems like it's all about "big moral dilemmas, big battles, big, big, epic, big!" again. Ugh, after ME3 I don't want another generic war plot again. The choices they showcased at PAX were all about tactics, and while I do welcome that for the combat scenarios and the protagonist being the Inquisition leader, I hope this isn't one of those tick-boxes that EA has forced upon Bioware to make their product market better.
If they go with the "lowest common denominater-route" again I'm gonna break stuff! >:-(
I don't care about EA's by-the-numbers BS.
He also said the games were different because we knew what the reapers were, but the main theme of Mass Effect was that we didn't know what sovereign was, but it was finding out what it was with the help of the factions that made the game.
That same as not knowing what the veil tear is and gathering help to uncover and stop the tears.
I'm just a little iffy that cameron decided to be dishonest and outright rejected the whole claim that they were "similar". Nobody said they were identical. They're just veery similar in concept, so why try to cover for that by saying it isn't?
Modifié par chris2365, 04 janvier 2014 - 10:42 .
chris2365 wrote...
ghostzodd wrote...
Wissenschaft wrote...
Decent interview. MP in ME3 seemed to work just fine along with the single player so I'm not worried.
Considering you had to play multiplayer to get the best ending? No it did not work with Single Player since you had to play it.
Initially. They corrected that in the Extended Cut.
As for MP in DAI, they say they are on the fence about about. For those asking how they could still be on the fence, they could have thrown around some ideas and made some prototypes to see how it could work, but aren't sure whether it's a feauture worth implementing.
As for comparisons with ME3, I hope they realize that the success of ME3's MP is not because putting MP in everything works. In this case, it worked because you had a variety of classes, powers, races maps, etc. Not to mention the DLC was free. Putting a horde mode in your average game will not make it more succusful. It needs the right ingredients, and ME3 had them. DAI might not, and seeing as the Keep already fulfills the online component requirement from EA, they might not try to force something in that isn't there.Linkenski wrote...
Unfortunately ME3's premise still boiled down to "giant unknown (to the public MEU citizen) ancient alien-monsters attack the galaxy and everyone must unite to beat them together" and DA:I seems to be "Giant army of demons attack and the player must form an inquisition, uniting armies from across regions to beat them together"ianvillan wrote...
Linkenski wrote...
Why is cameron reflecting the question about DA:I being similar to ME3 in premise with rejection? THEY ARE SODDING SIMILAR! Excuse the language... *ahem*
And it seems like it's all about "big moral dilemmas, big battles, big, big, epic, big!" again. Ugh, after ME3 I don't want another generic war plot again. The choices they showcased at PAX were all about tactics, and while I do welcome that for the combat scenarios and the protagonist being the Inquisition leader, I hope this isn't one of those tick-boxes that EA has forced upon Bioware to make their product market better.
If they go with the "lowest common denominater-route" again I'm gonna break stuff! >:-(
I don't care about EA's by-the-numbers BS.
He also said the games were different because we knew what the reapers were, but the main theme of Mass Effect was that we didn't know what sovereign was, but it was finding out what it was with the help of the factions that made the game.
That same as not knowing what the veil tear is and gathering help to uncover and stop the tears.
I'm just a little iffy that cameron decided to be dishonest and outright rejected the whole claim that they were "similar". Nobody said they were identical. They're just veery similar in concept, so why try to cover for that by saying it isn't?
I think it's because some fans have noticed recently that Bioware has been using the same tried and true formula since the early days, and some have wanted change. Bioware said they tried going for a more personnal story in DA2, but then some people found that to be not to their taste. And honestly, after all the criticism they've gotten recently (merited or not), who can blame them for going back to basics. It's always worked for them and gotten them praise from the fans and the gaming industry. IMO, as long as the game is fun and well made, I could care less about the story they tell.
In case anyone doesn't see the relation: http://i36.tinypic.com/1zb9eg3.png
and http://www.cracked.c...y-3872-bioware/
Retour en haut
