76 réponses à ce sujet

[In Exile]

I am 100% sure there is multiplayer. For me it is a confirmed information. Too bad majority of the people never cared for it but yet we will get it in some form. Yet other features that are "hotly requested" are way back in the pecking order without real chance of appearing. 

 

Seeing what an incredible success ME MP was, I'm not sure that the majority of consumers are not interested in it. The forum isn't, but the forum is super niche all things considered. We're posting about a game months away from release after all. 

[DaySeeker]

In specs about the game they have said there would be multi player, but I have seen no info since with specifics.  I'd love postgame multiplayer that allowed me into other people's games to do some exploring with them, or take the role of one of their companions.

[ElitePinecone]

I am 100% sure there is multiplayer. For me it is a confirmed information. Too bad majority of the people never cared for it but yet we will get it in some form. Yet other features that are "hotly requested" are way back in the pecking order without real chance of appearing. 

 

People on the internet are not a majority. 

 

People on the BSN are a tiny, tiny, deeply unusual subset of DA players. The typical person who buys and plays the game is nothing like the typical person on these forums - so it's ridiculous to use opinion here to represent all fans who play Bioware's games.

 

(You're missing out on several million people who will never look at or write about the game on the internet, for starters.)

[Whiskey-One-Eye]

I absolutely want multiplayer, Honestly, so many games that I want to enjoy that are single player, I never get through them because games are really long. They take hours. When I was a teenager that was less of a big deal because I had more freetime. Now I have work, life, hobbies and I prefer to play games where i can interact with friends. I love coop. Borderlands 2 was awesome for the fact that it had coop and it worked amazingly well. This is a different company, IP and genre but that is what i would really like, a game with some seamless coop or almost seamless. I would love to be able to play through with friends. I mostly only buy coop and multiplayer now. If DA has a decent multiplayer option i will definitely buy it if they can confirm some details about it. If it isn't multiplayer then I'm very much on the fence.

 

Also i like multiplayer and coop but almost never play with randos. I think there is a sweet spot between mmo and singleplayer that is simply multiplayer and coop.

 

i second what In exile said about forum users being a niche. Companies can't just listen to the forum users bc of so many reasons. They should listen, but forums can't be the be all and end all... that would be bad.

[Jorina Leto]

games are really long. They take hours.

They're RPGs. Being long is a plus not a minus.

I have work, life, hobbies

So RPGs are not one of your hobbies? Well then don't waste time on them and go play Call of Duty or some other multiplayer game and let us have our single player games untainted with bad multiplayer.

[ElitePinecone]

People are hilariously dramatic. How does the presence of multiplayer "taint" anything? How does it make a game any worse?

[Iakus]

People are hilariously dramatic. How does the presence of multiplayer "taint" anything? How does it make a game any worse?

 

Because if it exists there will be "encouragement" to play it.  Real-money microtransactions won't appear on their own, after all.

 

And I do not want my enjoyment of a game to be dependent on others.  Nor do I want others' enjoyment of a game to be dependent on me.

[ElitePinecone]

So... people are terrified of a hypothetical?

 

Up until the point when they announce that singleplayer content relies on a multiplayer mode, I see absolutely no reason to be so pessimistic. 

 

You're basically imagining a terrible scenario in your head and going "wow this sequence of events I'm making up sounds awful".

[Wulfram]

Once bitten...

[JCFR]

So... people are terrified of a hypothetical?

 

Up until the point when they announce that singleplayer content relies on a multiplayer mode, I see absolutely no reason to be so pessimistic. 

 

You're basically imagining a terrible scenario in your head and going "wow this sequence of events I'm making up sounds awful".

Why? Because that's the way it ends. Always.

 

For Example: i liked to play CoD-sp-campaign in the early days... but today they're just like michae-bay-movie.  All the effort goes to mp.

And that's a shooter.

So what would mp in a RPG be? What would it offer?  A great story, influenced by player choices?  Let me laugh for a minute.

Then what else?  Epic quests? Deep-RPG-mechanics?  tactical group combat? You wish!

It will be either a wannabe MMO or some halfass modes like horde-mode or king of the hill.

 

In other words, the same thing dozens other games delivered before and better.

 

If there are so many mp-only-games, why can't there be room for single-pkayer-only games? Games which only concentrate on story, gameplay, characters... and in which the developers don't have to think "well, how do we implement this or that aspect according to sp and mp?"

If it's coop, then fine - that i can ignore. But no halfass mp, that even interferes with sp.

[Iakus]

Once bitten...

 

"The burned hand teaches best.  After that advice about fire goes to the heart" -Gandalf

[Iakus]

Why? Because that's the way it ends. Always.

 

For Example: i liked to play CoD-sp-campaign in the early days... but today they're just like michae-bay-movie.  All the effort goes to mp.

And that's a shooter.

So what would mp in a RPG be? What would it offer?  A great story, influenced by player choices?  Let me laugh for a minute.

Then what else?  Epic quests? Deep-RPG-mechanics?  tactical group combat? You wish!

It will be either a wannabe MMO or some halfass modes like horde-mode or king of the hill.

 

In other words, the same thing dozens other games delivered before and better.

 

If there are so many mp-only-games, why can't there be room for single-pkayer-only games? Games which only concentrate on story, gameplay, characters... and in which the developers don't have to think "well, how do we implement this or that aspect according to sp and mp?"

If it's coop, then fine - that i can ignore. But no halfass mp, that even interferes with sp.

 

 

I would seriously hate to see Dragon Age devolve into some kind of Diablo clone 

[KaiserShep]

The story-focused side of me rather loathes the idea of there being multiplayer implemented in Dragon Age, because Mass Effect, I felt, suffered for it as well. Multiplayer in ME required some sort of bonus for all the time put into it, so we got galactic awareness and the ability to heap on as many asset points as we can with N7 promotions. Problem is that it reduced the outcome of the single player campaign to arbitrary numbers with no really meaningful effect on how the story progresses. Shepard survives destroy simply because of a number. There was no attempt at creating an illusion around it within the story.

[N7_5P3CTR3]

I won't play MMO or most any other form of MP for that matter. That being said, I LOVE ME3 MP! I WANT DA:I MP!

And I thought they fixed it so it wouldn't affect SP anymore because of fan flames?

 

As for those of you complaining about getting DCd, were you leader/hosting? It could have been because of another player's crap connection. I'm just wondering because my husband and I play a lot, and we've had other people join our lobby and their lag was so bad it affect our normally great connection.

[ElitePinecone]

I would seriously hate to see Dragon Age devolve into some kind of Diablo clone 

 

How in the world do you ever see this happening?

 

How is it remotely possible, given the footage they've shown already? Is there any evidence for this happening?

 

I know this forum eats pessimism for breakfast and has doomongering as its main hobby, but this is ridiculous.

[ElitePinecone]

Why? Because that's the way it ends. Always.

 

Well, I'm glad we can just solve every issue by throwing around absolutes and platitudes. Do you have more than one example, or am I supposed to trust you that this is "the way it ends", always? 

 

Game development doesn't work like that. People don't work like that. There's no fundamental law of the universe that describes the way multiplayer works in games. Speculating about what Bioware will do based on the events in an unrelated game series made by a different studio over ten years is absurd. 

[Iakus]

How in the world do you ever see this happening?

 

How is it remotely possible, given the footage they've shown already? Is there any evidence for this happening?

 

I know this forum eats pessimism for breakfast and has doomongering as its main hobby, but this is ridiculous.

 

Perhaps not with DAI, but in the future sure.

 

Look what's happened to other franchises

[Mr. Homebody]

I hope that Dragon Age will remain pure singleplayer series forever and ever. Forced ME 3 multiplayer was already hurtful enough. 

 

There are already hundreds MMO games, far more than true singleplayer series. Either you can have perfectly polished sigleplayer experience or multiplayer. They do not mix. 

[ElitePinecone]

Perhaps not with DAI, but in the future sure.

 

Look what's happened to other franchises

 

I'll care about that in three years or whatever when DA4 is announced.

 

Worrying about a hypothetical future change in the franchise now is silly.

[Iakus]

I'll care about that in three years or whatever when DA4 is announced.

 

Worrying about a hypothetical future change in the franchise now is silly.

 

After ME3, I choose to be silly

[Al Foley]

 

I hope that Dragon Age will remain pure singleplayer series forever and ever. Forced ME 3 multiplayer was already hurtful enough. 

 

There are already hundreds MMO games, far more than true singleplayer series. Either you can have perfectly polished sigleplayer experience or multiplayer. They do not mix. 

 

But that is the problem right there.  Forced multiplayer.  If it were just an option and not effected the singleplayer campaign would people really complain?  Wait...don't answer that.   But the main issue in ME 3s MP, and probably the only reason I tried it out, was because it was forced on one.  If its optional in DA I I really do not see much of a problem and would even check it out based on my experience. 

 

Though forcing it, and forcing us to use it did give me a firm excuse to actually partake in the mode and I found I liked ME 3s MP.  Maybe not as much of the story, ok definatly not as much as the main story, but instead of mindlessly killing things for hours on end in some pseudo version of the real world in military shooters I could mindlessly kill things for hours on end in my favorite sci fi universe in a good long while. 

[Iakus]

But that is the problem right there.  Forced multiplayer.  If it were just an option and not effected the singleplayer campaign would people really complain?  Wait...don't answer that.   But the main issue in ME 3s MP, and probably the only reason I tried it out, was because it was forced on one.  If its optional in DA I I really do not see much of a problem and would even check it out based on my experience. 

 

Though forcing it, and forcing us to use it did give me a firm excuse to actually partake in the mode and I found I liked ME 3s MP.  Maybe not as much of the story, ok definatly not as much as the main story, but instead of mindlessly killing things for hours on end in some pseudo version of the real world in military shooters I could mindlessly kill things for hours on end in my favorite sci fi universe in a good long while. 

 

Me, I have no interest in spending hours mindlessly killing things in what is supposed to be a story-based roleplaying narrative.

 

And there is no profit in not pushing players into it, once it's in.  The money must flow, after all.

[Al Foley]

Me, I have no interest in spending hours mindlessly killing things in what is supposed to be a story-based roleplaying narrative.

 

And there is no profit in not pushing players into it, once it's in.  The money must flow, after all.

Must it?  I don't know.  In my first play through of ME 3 I barley touched the MP, I do not even think I promoted anybody....maybe at the most one character...and got the best ending in the game my Shepard did the spastic breath at the end.  So for being 'mandatory' you did not have to play it a whole lot to get the 'best' result.  Sure, its annoying.  And even in all the hours I sank into the ME 3 MP I never spent one solitary cent on an single pack.  So...these microtransaction dealios don't seem to be the most effective way of making money.  Sure, I won't argue or judge if you decide to spend money on them but at least for ME 3 you could get everything in the game without spending a single real world penny. 

[Iakus]

Must it?  I don't know.  In my first play through of ME 3 I barley touched the MP, I do not even think I promoted anybody....maybe at the most one character...and got the best ending in the game my Shepard did the spastic breath at the end.  So for being 'mandatory' you did not have to play it a whole lot to get the 'best' result.  Sure, its annoying.  And even in all the hours I sank into the ME 3 MP I never spent one solitary cent on an single pack.  So...these microtransaction dealios don't seem to be the most effective way of making money.  Sure, I won't argue or judge if you decide to spend money on them but at least for ME 3 you could get everything in the game without spending a single real world penny. 

 

Having to go even one round of MP to get the lousy five second gasp in SP is a douche thing to do to players.  Especially when you repeatedly assure the customers before that it would not be the case

 

You don't spend money on them.  I don't, but others spend (imo) stupid amounts of money on them.  Enough that it is actually a profit-generating system. 

 

Not to mention the subscription service needed to do MP games in general.

 

You'll never see the relatively harmless BG-style method of multiplayer again. Or at least, not anytime soon.  No way to easily monetize it.

[ElitePinecone]

Me, I have no interest in spending hours mindlessly killing things in what is supposed to be a story-based roleplaying narrative.

 

And there is no profit in not pushing players into it, once it's in.  The money must flow, after all.

 

Do you concede the possibility that the developers might've learned from the reaction to ME3's SP-MP integration, though? Pushing people to play multiplayer is absolutely not a fundamental law of the universe. It takes a decision by people, and those decisions can change.

 

That was the biggest complaint people had about ME3's MP, after all. We don't even know if the singleplayer integration was a successful method for pushing people to play MP - we don't have the data or the information to tell that. How do you know EA hasn't decided to abandon that route and market the MP as its own thing? 

 

And if you look at most of the threads that come up about multiplayer in DA:I, many of the positive reactions are "I'll love it if it's not attached to the singleplayer in any way, shape or form."

 

At the very least that's a significant message to take away, and I (again) see absolutely no reason to be as pessimistic as you're being. Not until they release more information.