76 réponses à ce sujet

[al0u]

FINE HERE wrote...

I'd rather they didn't. Why does every game need some multiplayer function or social media thing anyway? I play Dragon Age to immerse myself in its story, to get lost in its lore and world and have fun. I imagine any kind of co-op for this game would be 1 host character playing all the story while 2nd character is just a glorified party member or it'll be the gaming equivalent of two people reading a book out loud at the same time. No thank you.

This. The last thing I need is someone wandering in and farting in Varric's face when I'm trying to have a convo with him and ruin my immersion (man, Fable's co-op is horrendous)... Part of the reason I like DA so much is I can turn down the lights, put on Barry White and sex up Zev..... I mean... play it solo .... yeah... that....

[Iakus]

FINE HERE wrote...

I'd rather they didn't. Why does every game need some multiplayer function or social media thing anyway? I play Dragon Age to immerse myself in its story, to get lost in its lore and world and have fun. I imagine any kind of co-op for this game would be 1 host character playing all the story while 2nd character is just a glorified party member or it'll be the gaming equivalent of two people reading a book out loud at the same time. No thank you.

THIS!
THIS!
THIS!
THIS!
THIS!
THIS!

[Sidney]

FreshRevenge wrote...

NO NO NO! Leave it alone. Dragon Age is a single player experience and should not butchered by MP or Co-Op. May the Maker have mercy on your soul for thinking such rubbish.

Why does one have anything to do with the latter? Never get this attitude.

You might not have liked ME3 but whatever flaws it had werent related to the existence of a online MP.

[In Exile]

Sidney wrote...

Why does one have anything to do with the latter? Never get this attitude.

Well, as something like TOR shows, co-op/MP leads to a lot of fundamental changes in game design. For example, a limited number of companions so you have to end up parterning up with someone for large swaths of the game. 

Modifié par In Exile, 12 janvier 2014 - 05:37 .

[BlueMagitek]

Teddie Sage wrote...

XxDeonxX wrote...

co-op in a story driven RPG is a terrible idea

The Tales of Series say hi.

From my experience with Symphonia & Vesperia, the additional players just have control in combat, with no influence on the rest of the world.  Same thing with Final Fantasy III (SNES).

However, those are completely different combat systems from Dragon Age.  They only take place in an encounter area, with characters that can be a lot more self sufficient than DA.  Not to mention Tales of combat is a much faster pace.

For the record, I think that co-op could work for a WRPG, but I don't know if it would work for DA.

[Dabrikishaw]

Deflagratio wrote...

I'm not so dismissive about the potential of story-driven Cooperative RPG's. I think it's unrealistically difficult to pull that off though. It would have to simultaneously add something unique to the experience, without taking anything away.


I don't want to turn this into a huge scrolling post, so I'll just say as a short answer, there's no online co-op story campaign because it's too much of an investment with too little a payoff for too few people.

I think a better option is that, assuming there's multiplayer, having the multiplayer co-op form an event-driven emergent story driven by the player metrics.

[FreshRevenge]

Sidney wrote...

FreshRevenge wrote...

NO NO NO! Leave it alone. Dragon Age is a single player experience and should not butchered by MP or Co-Op. May the Maker have mercy on your soul for thinking such rubbish.

Why does one have anything to do with the latter? Never get this attitude.

You might not have liked ME3 but whatever flaws it had werent related to the existence of a online MP.

I enjoyed ME3 except for the ending. And you are wrong. It was the addition of the mp that cause the ending to suffer in such a manner that it did!

[Rotward]

Don't give them bad ideas, **** off. Co-op ruins every game it infects.

[ghostzodd]

Vortex13 wrote...

I would love any form of co-operative mp for DA:I. However, I think that trying for a fully implemented co-op feature might be a little too far fetched.

I would recommend a survival style mode; like ME 3; since BioWare knows that such a setup will work, and then start to expand on it with story based DLCs over the game's lifecycle. Have a horde mode to start, and then slowly start adding in co-op narrative elements, flesh the game out.

Just so long as such a co-op narrative doesn't follow the path of Halo 4's Spartan Ops. I couldn't stand those "missions", which were really nothing but a Firefight with a cutscene at the end of it.

You really want to push that horde mode huh, even though this game is not even a shooter

[Lady Lionheart]

Multiplayer?

In Dragon Age?!

Hmm.. yeeeah... I'm jumping out my window now.

Bye.


Seriously though, I have never been a fan of multiplayer.
If I was I'd be playing COD and Battlefield right now, but no, I am not.
I only enjoy playing RPGs, to me clever dialog, memorable characters and an epic story that can also tear out my heart is infinite times more replayable and enjoyable than battling with some stranger from Maker knows where.
To put all of their blood, sweat and tears into something people like myself might never-EVER think of touching is rather silly.
They should concentrate on the Singleplayer, too many games are dying because of mp I would hate for Dragon Age to become also infected.
I'd still buy it though, but only as long as mp is not needed to access things in sp.

I'm glad I got that off my chest.

[Lady Lionheart]

There are more reasons to keep MP out than there is to cram it in.

[otis0310]

This game should have no online features at all. Those reosurces should be placed in to making the story a lot better. Multiplayer does not need to be in every single game. The last thing we need is another mess of a game because the developers were trying to appeal to both multplayer and single player.

Choose one focus and stick to it, otherwise we get a mess like Mass Effect 3.

Modifié par otis0310, 12 janvier 2014 - 07:38 .

[Vortex13]

ghostzodd wrote...

Vortex13 wrote...

I would love any form of co-operative mp for DA:I. However, I think that trying for a fully implemented co-op feature might be a little too far fetched.

I would recommend a survival style mode; like ME 3; since BioWare knows that such a setup will work, and then start to expand on it with story based DLCs over the game's lifecycle. Have a horde mode to start, and then slowly start adding in co-op narrative elements, flesh the game out.

Just so long as such a co-op narrative doesn't follow the path of Halo 4's Spartan Ops. I couldn't stand those "missions", which were really nothing but a Firefight with a cutscene at the end of it.

You really want to push that horde mode huh, even though this game is not even a shooter

I will admit to a personal bias when it comes to horde modes yes, but I still propose that such a mechanic would be easier to implement then other forms of MP.

• Horde Modes don't need to worry about conversations, dialogues, moral decisions, etc. that encompass multiple players.
  
  
  
• Horde modes don't require a complete overhaul of the SP campaign, to allow other players to join in, as companions or other Inquisitors.
  
  
  
• A Horde mode has been the most (recent) successful MP addition that BioWare has done in a non-MMO title. A Horde mode is a proven factor, people will play it, a co-op campaign is an unknown (again in recent, non-MMO terms).
  
  
  
• Another bit of personal bias here, but I believe that a Horde mode has far more variety in race, power, and specialization options throughout it's lifecycle then a co-op campaign or PvP mode would. I would highly doubt it that if ME 3 had a campaign co-op, that we ever would have seen the amount of playable races, and variable powers that we got in Horde Mode.
  
   Speaking of the variety of races, classes, and powers a Horde doesn't have to spend any time explaining why such various creatures are working with the Inquisitor like a co-op campaign would. The narrative for a co-op story would have to explain why such things as a Sylvan or Werewolf is walking alongside the host player.

                  


In regards to DA:I not being a shooter, yeah its not as ranged focused as ME is, and MP would obviously play slower, and be more tactically focused. But it is important to note that DA:I does have fast paced, twitch response gameplay present, in addition to the tactical camera we were shown; that most people seem to use as a reason against such MP modes.

From the various videos that we have seen, I have noticed:

• A guardian-type enemy. A foe with a huge shield that blocks all attacks, and one that the player has to remove with a harpoon like attack (assuming warrior class specific). Very similar to ME 3's Guardians. Not necessarily a twitch based mechanic, but it does show that DA:I is leaning more towards enemy types that are resistant to specific attacks, thereby encouraging working with ones party and/or having a varied party. 
  
  
  
• Attacks made with weapons relying on player input rather than auto attacks.
  
  
  
• A dodge/combat roll, that again appears to rely on player input instead of a automatic effect.
  
  
  
• The fact that even BioWare has said that they are shooting for a hybrid of DA:O and DA 2 rather then completely going back to auto attacks and behind the scenes dice rolls; that the players will take a more active role in how they control their characters.

DA:I is more action focused then its predecessors, and while that doesn't automatically assume that Horde mode will be the go to choice for MP, it does mean that a Horde mode wouldn't be something completely at odds with the SP game mechanics. 

Modifié par Vortex13, 12 janvier 2014 - 07:46 .

[ZeroPhoenix94]

I think a co-op mode would be nice. The ideas that Vortex proposed seem decent enough. Imagine teaming up with your friends to fight a horde of drakes and dragons. Heck, if they did it right, a team deathmatch mode might be interesting. Mages vs Templars, anyone?

[Skorm777]

Freewilddragon83 wrote...

Why can't BioWare make online co-op (non-split screen) DA:I?  Game is more fun when you play it with someone you know or have people join your party and help you out.

Mike Laidlaw said in an interview that there will be some form of multiplayer in DAI, and that they were looking Baldurs Gate MP for inspiration. 

[vandalDX]

Skorm777 wrote...

Freewilddragon83 wrote...

Why can't BioWare make online co-op (non-split screen) DA:I?  Game is more fun when you play it with someone you know or have people join your party and help you out.

Mike Laidlaw said in an interview that there will be some form of multiplayer in DAI, and that they were looking Baldurs Gate MP for inspiration. 

They've spent a lot of time talking about the ME3-style MP, as well.

[JoltDealer]

FINE HERE wrote...

I'd rather they didn't. Why does every game need some multiplayer function or social media thing anyway? I play Dragon Age to immerse myself in its story, to get lost in its lore and world and have fun. I imagine any kind of co-op for this game would be 1 host character playing all the story while 2nd character is just a glorified party member or it'll be the gaming equivalent of two people reading a book out loud at the same time. No thank you.

Here's a counter question.  Why would you prefer an exclusively solo game experience in most games?  Multiplayer can be optional, though some developers have tried to push it on gamers like in Mass Effect 3.  Regardless, we now live in a world where playing games with others across the world is an actual possibility.  What's wrong with developers embracing something that wasn't plausible ten years ago?

With multiplayer, you can share experiences with fellow fans and players all over the world.  You can play with them or against them.  What's wrong with that?  If you have issues with other people or socializing, I can understand that, but I just wish people would just admit it and be honest about their reasoning.  The argument that multiplayer takes away resources from single player content has been debunked on multiple occasions by both educated fans and developers alike.  So if that's not true, just what is keeping you from enjoying multiplayer?

As for the topic of the thread, it's a complicated subject.  Even if you're playing as one of the other party members, only one character can give commands, which the joining player may take issue with.  Also, as the joining player, you're taking control of a character away from the hosting player, which may impede his or her ability to strategize.  If we simply import another player's character over and write him or her off as an agent of the Inquisition, it could possibly work.  A five man party could throw off the game's difficulty setting, as could the joining player's level and equipment.  Then you have the issue of loot sharing, conversations, and two players being in two different locations in the same game.  There's a lot that would have to be accounted for to get it working right.

Dragon Age Inquisition's multiplayer, if it does have any, should be more like ME3 without the impact on single player content.  Take the game mechanics of single player and alter them to work in a four person online party.  Then throw them into quests and reward players upon completion.  Co-op in an RPG is much messier to figure out, as opposed to most FPS games.

Modifié par Crimson Sound, 12 janvier 2014 - 08:37 .

[Ponendus]

Why is everyone assuming co-op means during the main game? If it's outside the campaign, there may be no 'cutscenes' during those times so all these problems people are inventing are not even an issue?

I agree that if it is 'forced' that is something to be upset about, but it doesn't have to be that way and for all we know it won't be.

I don't actually care about co-op or multiplayer in general, but if it's an addon - who cares if it's in? Don't play it if you don't want to?

This argument is akin to those that want romances out of the game even though they are entirely optional. I don't understand people that want to prevent others from enjoying something they enjoy when it has zero impact on their own life or their play experience - it seems almost mean spirited. It just makes sense that a game studio want to provide lots of options and experiences to cater to a wide base of players?

These things baffle me...

Modifié par Ponendus, 12 janvier 2014 - 10:20 .

[JoltDealer]

AWT42 wrote...
Just because something is now possible doesn't mean everyone wants it. I play Dragon Age for the story and for the single-player experience. Co-op or multiplayer just doesn't interest me.  Otherwise, I would have found other games that feature those. I prefer to play at my own pace and without other players involved. The type of things I look for in a game just aren't there in co-op or MP games but are in SP games.

ME3 requiring me to play multiplayer (pre-Extended Cut) to get the best outcome in single-player set off alarm bells for me. I just wanted to continue with the story so didn't appreciate having to play MP like that since I was just interested in the single-player only. That's why I look for SP only games.

I wasn't implying that everyone should want it because it's possible, but I just don't like people who berate multiplayer for simply existing because of their own issues with other people.  You like to play at your own pace and I can understand that.  I thank you for being honest.  However a lot of people just say, "Multiplayer is a blight on games and I don't think it should be included in any game, ever."  They usually say nothing to back it up or they claim that multiplayer takes away resources from single player content, which isn't true.  Usually it comes down to their own issues with people/social interactions or this idea that online gamers are a bunch swearing children with attitude problems.

From my point of view, I like multiplayer for the same reason I like going to conventions.  I get to be around my fellow fans.  Multiplayer allows me to interact with other fans all over.  I've said in another thread that some of the best friends I've made on Xbox Live, I met on Mass Effect 3's multiplayer and that's 100% true.  Bioware fans are some of the most chill and polite people around.  Yeah there's a few jerks here and there, but that's just the way life works.  

[Sidney]

FreshRevenge wrote...

Sidney wrote...

FreshRevenge wrote...

NO NO NO! Leave it alone. Dragon Age is a single player experience and should not butchered by MP or Co-Op. May the Maker have mercy on your soul for thinking such rubbish.

Why does one have anything to do with the latter? Never get this attitude.

You might not have liked ME3 but whatever flaws it had werent related to the existence of a online MP.

I enjoyed ME3 except for the ending. And you are wrong. It was the addition of the mp that cause the ending to suffer in such a manner that it did!

MP caused the writers to be stupid? Were they too busy playing MP ro write a good ending and please don't tell me the "breath" thing ruined anything.

[Malkavianqueen]

I would love for a co-op mode for the main story so I could play Dragon Age with my boyfriend. We've done this with Neverwinter Nights 2, Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale and a whole slew of other games, and it's been great. The only real Co-op RPGs that have come out recently have been MMOs, and in my opinion, don't have the same quality single player RPGs have. At least we have Divinity: Original Sin coming out soon to play together. :C I would gladly buy the option as a DLC so it didn't detract from the main game and of course I wouldn't want it to be forced. *sighs* I can dream.

[FINE HERE]

AWT42 wrote...

Crimson Sound wrote...

FINE HERE wrote...

I'd rather they didn't. Why does every game need some multiplayer function or social media thing anyway? I play Dragon Age to immerse myself in its story, to get lost in its lore and world and have fun. I imagine any kind of co-op for this game would be 1 host character playing all the story while 2nd character is just a glorified party member or it'll be the gaming equivalent of two people reading a book out loud at the same time. No thank you.

 Here's a counter question.  Why would you prefer an exclusively solo game experience in most games?  Multiplayer can be optional, though some developers have tried to push it on gamers like in Mass Effect 3.  Regardless, we now live in a world where playing games with others across the world is an actual possibility.  What's wrong with developers embracing something that wasn't plausible ten years ago?

With multiplayer, you can share experiences with fellow fans and players all over the world.  You can play with them or against them.  What's wrong with that?  If you have issues with other people or socializing, I can understand that, but I just wish people would just admit it and be honest about their reasoning.  The argument that multiplayer takes away resources from single player content has been debunked on multiple occasions by both educated fans and developers alike.  So if that's not true, just what is keeping you from enjoying multiplayer?

Just because something is now possible doesn't mean everyone wants it. I play Dragon Age for the story and for the single-player experience. Co-op or multiplayer just don't interest me otherwise I would have found other games that feature those. I prefer to play at my own pace and without other players involved. The type of things I look for in a game just aren't there in co-op or MP games but are in SP games.

ME3 requiring me to play multiplayer (pre-Extended Cut) to get the best outcome in single-player set off alarm bells for me. I just wanted to continue with the story so didn't appreciate having to play MP like that since I was just interested in the single-player only. That's why I look for SP only games.

Pretty much that. Not to mention that there are plenty of other games that offer a multiplayer experience and I just don't feel like Dragon Age is really good for that outside of some add-on 'horde mode' thing that really isn't anything special nor does it add to the experience.

I just don't like that every game wants me to either play with others or tell people on facebook how I enjoy the game. That's annoying. Not everyone cares about social networking and not everyone wants to play video games with others all the time. DA has been a very good single player game and I would like it to stay that way. No tacked on multiplayer that is pretty meh on its own. No co-op where the 2nd player is pretty much ignored for the entirety of the story. No playing along with someone else's play through or putting up with their choices and actions which might ruin mine. Just a good story that I can enjoy at my pace and take my time playing.

I like the party members and getting to know them. I like seeing my decisions change the story. I like taking time to plot out my party's attacks and picking out dialogs. I can't see that ever working in a multiplayer format. Not to say that it isn't possible, but so much of the story would have to be removed or altered to make that work, it'll be like an MMO, where there are thousands of heroes in the world all doing the same quest and taking away any sense of achievement(at least in my opinion).

The combat especially feels like it'll change completely. If only 2 players play in the co-op mode, what happens to the other 2 party members? Does one person retain control of them while the other only controls themselves? Who controls the other party members inventory? Are the companions going to be useless if there are 4 player controlled characters? That just doesn't seem to fit the party-based combat.

So... yeah.

[BouncyFrag]

Only if we can steal away potential love interests for ourselves. All your Cullen are mine.

Modifié par BouncyFrag, 13 janvier 2014 - 01:10 .

[Nightdragon8]

my problem with story driven co-op, is that it never feels right. KTOR i think did it pretty well. Now the biggest issue is then that if having another person with you with different choices going to effect your game. Or is it more like a sidecart on a motorcycle that your just along for the ride.

If someone is willing to be in that spot then fine but honestly its not "needed" for me.