1807 réponses à ce sujet

[CronoDragoon]

People don't understand the concept of staff mobility yet?

 

It's not all that often you have 100% of a studio working on the same project at the same time. That's why staggered development is the preferred model for bloated AAA budget games. Typically senior level developers get shifted to newer projects that are early in development (Pre-Production).

 

I'm not sure if that's how BioWare's various studios are run, but I know there's quite a few studios that do operate that way, and I'm merely stating the point that "This team is working on this project" isn't as black and white as it sounds. Plus, in the PR information stranglehold, it wouldn't do to well for them to blatanly announce "Yeah, half of Team X is actually working on [unannounced Dragon Age: Multiplayer features]. The AAA PR scene is nothing if not clandestine.

 

Bryan Johnson has said that "a lot of ME3 people are working on DAI. A lot." So yeah.

[ghostzodd]

 

 

Multiplayer is inevitable.......

[dreamgazer]

For me, it'd probably end up like the MP in Tomb Raider, The Last of Us, and Black Flag: Uh, oh, right, there's multiplayer. Forgot about that.

 

If you can take a limited number of characters into the single-player campaign as the Inquisitor's agents, however, I might give it a whirl.

[JeffZero]

For me, it'd probably end up like the MP in Tomb Raider, The Last of Us, and Black Flag: Uh, oh, right, there's multiplayer. Forgot about that.

Yep, same here, with basically every game I play.

I want folks to be satisfied, and for some here that means having MP. I hope they get it, then, but I don't think I'll go near it much at all. In fact, my eyes will dart past the option on boot-up every single time as I brace myself for more of the side of the game I paid to play.

Also, ack, I can't help myself, someone stop me, nope, nope, here I am typing it...

...in response to an earlier statement: ME3's "campaign" is my favorite in the trilogy overall and it's my fifth or sixth favorite game in general. Tying MP into the SP as it did is godawful (I got the ending I wanted without needing it, but many didn't) but the narrative itself was mostly right up my alley, and EC patched one of the wounded spots to a solid state. I love that game.

(iakus, we are fated to this dance, I believe.)

[Judge Bro]

For me, it'd probably end up like the MP in Tomb Raider, The Last of Us, and Black Flag: Uh, oh, right, there's multiplayer. Forgot about that.

 

If you can take a limited number of characters into the single-player campaign as the Inquisitor's agents, however, I might give it a whirl.

TLoU multiplayer was actually really intense! One of the few games to get my heart racing! (Like being the last teammate alive on counterstrike for example)

[CronoDragoon]

TLoU multiplayer was actually really intense! One of the few games to get my heart racing! (Like being the last teammate alive on counterstrike for example)

 

I tried booting up a game for the Remastered Edition, but it just sat there "seeking optimal game" until I quit out. Not sure what the deal was.

[ElitePinecone]

As for Elite Pinecone: Yes, but how about the story? How well did that fare? I don't think its a coincidence that the game Bioware finally introduced to Multiplayer had a story that got them threatened with petitions, legal action, and cupcakes. I'm not necessarily saying that one caused the other but that they both stem from a root cause, a lack of focus on what they were trying to accomplish. 

 

Ridiculous and silly argument.

 

ME3's story, too, was overwhelmingly successful. Its reviews were some of the best of the series. The story and character moments are widely acknowledged to be some of the most powerful that Bioware has ever done, in any game.

 

The fact that many people were dissatisfied with ten minutes of it does not invalidate the accomplishments of the rest of the story, nor should it ever imply that multiplayer was the cause.

 

You're conflating two things, and it's not helping your argument.

[JeffZero]

Ridiculous and silly argument.

 

ME3's story, too, was overwhelmingly successful. Its reviews were some of the best of the series. The story and character moments are widely acknowledged to be some of the most powerful that Bioware has ever done, in any game.

 

The fact that many people were dissatisfied with ten minutes of it does not invalidate the accomplishments of the rest of the story, nor should it ever imply that multiplayer was the cause.

 

You're conflating two things, and it's not helping your argument.

 

I've reached my likes quota. Have this post instead.

[Loki_344]

I tried booting up a game for the Remastered Edition, but it just sat there "seeking optimal game" until I quit out. Not sure what the deal was.

That was a problem for about a week after launch. It was patched and is now a lot more immediate.

[spinachdiaper]

I think a DAI MP might be the only redeeming value to some since DAI is looking more and more like a direct theme and style sequal to DA2 and a mere lip service gloss over referancing of DAO.

[dreamgazer]

DAI is looking more and more like a direct theme and style sequal to DA2 and a mere lip service gloss over referancing of DAO.

 

Can you elaborate on this?

[Loki_344]

The funny thing is EA hasn't green lighted a major title single player only game in a few years. Why would anyone assume they would let this major title slide by without multiplayer included.

 

Yeah... fact is single player campaigns aren't a very effective vehicle for microtransactions, look at Dead Space 3. That system was so blatantly exploitative that once word got out about it I'm sure it negatively effected sales. Microtransactions in multiplayer games seem to be a lot easier to swallow for most, hence why EA seems to find it so important for a mode to be included in its games.

[JeffZero]

I think a DAI MP might be the only redeeming value to some since DAI is looking more and more like a direct theme and style sequal to DA2 and a mere lip service gloss over referancing of DAO.

 

I think this is the first time I've seen someone express this opinion. Inquisition certainly continues many of 2's arcs -- which it would be pretty bad if it didn't, being that they all kind of felt like preludes in a way -- but it is stylistically Origins 2.0 IMO.

[Loki_344]

I think a DAI MP might be the only redeeming value to some since DAI is looking more and more like a direct theme and style sequal to DA2 and a mere lip service gloss over referancing of DAO.

 

You assume much...

[spinachdiaper]

I think this is the first time I've seen someone express this opinion. Inquisition certainly continues many of 2's arcs -- which it would be pretty bad if it didn't, being that they all kind of felt like preludes in a way -- but it is stylistically Origins 2.0 IMO.

I would of prefered if they jump ahead a large chunk of time TES style after DA2 since everything in that game was not worthy continuing.

[Maria Caliban]

I think this is the first time I've seen someone express this opinion. Inquisition certainly continues many of 2's arcs -- which it would be pretty bad if it didn't, being that they all kind of felt like preludes in a way -- but it is stylistically Origins 2.0 IMO.

I think it, but I've said it all of three times.

[JeffZero]

Ah, well, fair enough, then. (To both of you, that is!)

[SofaJockey]

For me, it'd probably end up like the MP in Tomb Raider, The Last of Us, and Black Flag: Uh, oh, right, there's multiplayer. Forgot about that.

 

If you can take a limited number of characters into the single-player campaign as the Inquisitor's agents, however, I might give it a whirl.

 

Oh wow, if it was there and like Tomb Raider and & Black Flag (I don't have Last of Us)

I'd be giving it a miss for sure, I'm not that much of a fanatic for tacked-on MP ! 

[Adhin]

Tomb Raider MP wasn't bad, Last of Us has some good MP too (both have some interesting unique mechanic to set it apart). There are some heavy clan/competition around AC multiplayer so... they're not 'bad' or 'tacked on' but none of them are my cup of tea either. But none of that would work in DAI lol. It would have to be something like WoW PvP stuff which.. yeah whatever, some people like that - I don't.

[Nerevar-as]

I think this is the first time I've seen someone express this opinion. Inquisition certainly continues many of 2's arcs -- which it would be pretty bad if it didn't, being that they all kind of felt like preludes in a way -- but it is stylistically Origins 2.0 IMO.

They painted themselves into that corner when they left II´s plot open for an expansion that didn´t get done. Which means they actually expected II to be sucessful, which I find hard to believe..

[Dermain]

Yeah, which I find rather distasteful, as it smacks of tricking people into buying their stuff.

 

You do know that's the whole point of marketing right?

 

To get people to buy things? It's a very capitalistic thing to do...

 

Personal opinion usually dictates the whole "tricking" thing. Unless you talk about Aliens: Colonial Marines...that's just really bad business practices. Thankfully, it's a rare occurrence.

[Adhin]

Yeah, the main reason they span out stuff is to keep people talking about stuff. If they blew 'all the infos' lets say 3 months before release, other then us crazies would remember 3 months later. It's the only reason they space anything out, why they do different bits for announcements. Keeps people guessing, keeps people speculating, keeps people babbling like crazy people and bringing it up with people who don't pay attention worth a damn.

 

Game's that don't do that ultimately get forgotten when there release date hits, sadly, and often slip under the radar. Like Dermain says - it's personal opinion that makes that seem like tricking. It's a corporation, they're not sacrificing goats to there pagan gods to cast a hex on any of us (... least I hope not ). They just wanna keep us talking and speculating about it and keep that momentum going to release.

 

...And yes, that is maddening. I want all my infos now

[Deflagratio]

I think a DAI MP might be the only redeeming value to some since DAI is looking more and more like a direct theme and style sequal to DA2 and a mere lip service gloss over referancing of DAO.

 

 

Can you elaborate on this?

 

 

My take on this sentiment has always been that Dragon Age: Origins and Dragon Age 2 aren't all that different. There's really just a couple key differences that really define the two as different games.

 

Obviously the combat is everyone's first leap, but then there's also the scope of the story, being narrowed in on Hawke and the events in Kirkwall. Within that limited scope came probably the most pervasive and universally disliked difference, the repetitive nature of the setting. Then about the only remaining difference I can think of is that DA2 was clearly didn't have the time it needed to get that last coat of polish that may have prettied up Kirkwall enough to not look like 2/3 empty space.

 

I'm not all that convinced the combat change from DA:O to DA2 was universally negative, if anything I only have an issue with the combat presentation, being more suited to a spectacle fighter like DMC.

 

How many of these issues can you really say haven't been resolved just on what we've seen. Combat has been slowed down to a weighter pace, maybe still a bit too much flair for some people, but even the Rogue attacks are much more conservative. The Story Scope has been expanded to both Ferelden and Orlais and with it the breadth of exploration options (more on that in a bit) and environmental variance therein, and Dragon Age: Inquisition has been delayed twice now, so EA and BioWare are obviously keen to expand (first delay) and tighten(second) the experience.

 

Then you have what Dragon Age: Inquisition brings to the table as its own entity. The biggest change (And of course my favorite) is the exploration element. DA:O's biggest pitfall was the very linear nature of the game and the areas. The most "Open" area probably being Lothering which should read as a pretty profound insult. (You could argue Deep Roads were more open but thematically claustrophobic). I won't cite some of the unproven but promising new features, like World Master's content population or the Inquisition management system, but they certainly have the potential to further define Inquisition farther away from either DA:O or DA2 on favorable terms.

 

And since this thread is about multiplayer, I guess I have to ramble a few sentences before the Off-Topic police pull me over. Dragon Age: Inquisition - Team Based Cooperative Story of Nations and Armies. Nowhere in that description is multilayer not thematically viable. (A feeling I didn't share in ME3 desipte the overall positive reception I had of the feature.)

[Vortex13]

Tomb Raider MP wasn't bad, Last of Us has some good MP too (both have some interesting unique mechanic to set it apart). There are some heavy clan/competition around AC multiplayer so... they're not 'bad' or 'tacked on' but none of them are my cup of tea either. But none of that would work in DAI lol. It would have to be something like WoW PvP stuff which.. yeah whatever, some people like that - I don't.

 

 

I am not a fan of those MP modes because of their competitive nature. I recently got Last of Us Remastered, and the MP for that game quickly got stale for me after about the twentieth time a stealth class with a bow and arrow was able to kill me while I was shooting at him with a semi-auto rifle  .

 

Personally, I hope that DA:I has no (or at least very little focus on) competitive PvP MP. Not only because co-op play brings out the better side of gamers (mostly); at least compared to competitive play. And not just because I find the prospect of playing a competitive game mode for twelve hours a day; just to remain competent at it; very appealing. The major reason why I would be against a large focus on competitive MP is because the strict need for balance will lead to the homogenization of the classes; as well as restricting speciality classes.  

[ManchesterUnitedFan1]

They said the same thing about Mass Effect 3's MP, to be fair - and that comment by Jesse Houston seems more unequivocal than anything the DA team's ever said, even though it was announced six months later.

 

Obfuscation and evasion are pretty standard parts of PR and marketing

 

It's depressingly hilarious how ridiculous his comment seems in light of what actually happened in ME3.

 

''As for the Multiplayer rumours - They are just rumours. We're really focused on delivering the best single player story experience that we possibly can and one that can tie up all the loose ends and finish the trilogy with the love and devotion that it deserves!''

 

'Tie up all the loose ends'? Yeah okay.