1807 réponses à ce sujet

[wright1978]

Actually, Chris Priestly explicitly told us it wasn't.

Thanks for finding that. I thought with all this it was a bug stuff that I'd imagined that post by priestly.

[AppealToReason]

It's not like there aren't a bunch of other games with MP, or even a MP focus out there.  It's getting harder and harder to find good SP games though.  Especially rpgs.

 

Man, I can't wait for Pillars of Eternity and Tides of Numenera.

 

 

This is the dumbest thing I see people bring up.

 

"I don't get why people would play on a high difficulty. Just go play Dark Souls instead"

 

"I don't get why people want romances. Go play a dating sim instead"

 

"I don't get why people like other people. Go play with yourself instead"

 

Oh no! A feature I could totally ignore! But I won't so I can complain.

[Vandicus]

Actually, Chris Priestly explicitly told us it wasn't.

You've confused explicit with implicit(plus some creative interpretation on your part).

 

Are you glossing over the mention of save imports as a method to achieve "greater levels of success", or is this a hypothetical debate over whether it would be justified to have locked the extra scene behind save import requirements?

[ElitePinecone]

Thanks for finding that. I thought with all this it was a bug stuff that I'd imagined that post by priestly.

 

The communication after ME3 was haphazard at best, devs were contradicting each other a fair bit early on.

 

Since it seems pretty unlikely that they'd get the calculations for the ending EMS variables so wrong, I'm more inclined to believe Chris and think that it was an attempt to get people to use MP.  

 

I don't think we'll get a true answer regardless, since people are still so bitter about it and would probably assume the worst even if it was a bug.

 

The best thing to do going forward is just to not repeat that, or at least try to be less misleading in future marketing.

[ElitePinecone]

You've confused explicit with implicit(plus some creative interpretation on your part).

 

Are you glossing over the mention of save imports as a method to achieve "greater levels of success", or is this a hypothetical debate over whether it would be justified to have locked the extra scene behind save import requirements?

 

The quote was not "greater levels of success".

 

It was "highest levels of success". As in, "You can reach the highest levels of success in the single player experience alone, but Galaxy at War gives you alternative ways to get there."

 

Playing the ME3 singleplayer alone was insufficient to achieve the highest levels of success in the ending, as measured by the EMS requirement. There were not enough War Assets to do so.

[Sanunes]

The quote was not "greater levels of success".

 

It was "highest levels of success". As in, "You can reach the highest levels of success in the single player experience alone, but Galaxy at War gives you alternative ways to get there."

 

Playing the ME3 singleplayer alone was insufficient to achieve the highest levels of success in the ending, as measured by the EMS requirement. There were not enough War Assets to do so.

 

The catch is the quote from Chris Priestly also said "save import" so there intent could have been importing a save from previous games would have been enough to push it over the edge. 

[Vandicus]

The quote was not "greater levels of success".

 

It was "highest levels of success". As in, "You can reach the highest levels of success in the single player experience alone, but Galaxy at War gives you alternative ways to get there."

 

Playing the ME3 singleplayer alone was insufficient to achieve the highest levels of success in the ending, as measured by the EMS requirement. There were not enough War Assets to do so.

I'm referencing the quote Sylvius brought up, not the faq. Bioware seemed patently unaware that it was necessary to have above 50% war readiness to get the "best" ending to my recollection.

[ElitePinecone]

Okay, to be honest I'm kinda amazed that they didn't seem to realise how people would take that.

 

(You'd think someone would've gone over the EMS requirements and checked them in the game before launch, at a minimum - otherwise why have such a system at all?)

[Vandicus]

Okay, to be honest I'm kinda amazed that they didn't seem to realise how people would take that.

 

(You'd think someone would've gone over the EMS requirements and checked them in the game before launch, at a minimum - otherwise why have such a system at all?)

Way I figure it, there was either a last second change to the EMS of some war assets, or they simply went: How much EMS is available from War Assets available in the base game(8370)? Multiply by 50%(4185). Round down to nearest thousand(4000). Set that as entry point. Without a full start to finish play testing for the specific easter egg ending, the person setting the requirement may not have realized some war assets are mutually exclusive.

 

Granted, Bioware could've checked instead of reassuring us that such was not the case, but they did acknowledge the problem and later fix it.

[JeffZero]

I think my biggest issue with that whole debacle was that only one ending had an extra perk. And then that extra perk turned out to be my least favorite seven seconds of any of the endings... man, what a mess.

 

Inquisition, don't do that.

[Vandicus]

I think my biggest issue with that whole debacle was that only one ending had an extra perk. And then that extra perk turned out to be my least favorite seven seconds of any of the endings... man, what a mess.

 

Inquisition, don't do that.

It was kind of ridiculous how war score did practically nothing in the end. Would've been nice to see some of the damage to the Citadel races and their homeworlds mitigated by how successful you were. Instead we got different colored beams.

[cronshaw]

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 posted this before but a more likely reason for the issues with ME3s resolution was the fact that too many people were involved in it.
It was pretty clear to me that they had lost their focus when ME2 came out.
And I'm not sure the story ever had a unifying creative vision.
Great stories generally aren't collaborations
They are the work of singular geniuses.
It's why so many TV shows "jump the shark"

[King Dragonlord]

Thats a necessary evil of producing such a big game. Its something they could avert by deemphasizing the larger arc and focusing on tasks and quests as episodes set in the game's backdrop.

[JeffZero]

It was kind of ridiculous how war score did practically nothing in the end. Would've been nice to see some of the damage to the Citadel races and their homeworlds mitigated by how successful you were. Instead we got different colored beams.

 

In the original endings, yeah, pretty much. I'm much more satisfied with Extended Cut, but I always understand the folks that aren't.

[King Dragonlord]

I tell you one thing I'd like to change is the loyalty mission. It worked as is for that specific scenario but instead of each mission being about one character, each mission could be about two or three ccharacters and how they interact/contrast/support/whatever. For any given mission, pick a sSpock and a Bones and play Kirk to them. Depending on who you pick, your axes of choices vary. Its no longer Good vs Evil, but Alistair vs Morrigan or Jacob vs Mordin.

[Iakus]

This is the dumbest thing I see people bring up.

 

"I don't get why people would play on a high difficulty. Just go play Dark Souls instead"

 

"I don't get why people want romances. Go play a dating sim instead"

 

"I don't get why people like other people. Go play with yourself instead"

 

Oh no! A feature I could totally ignore! But I won't so I can complain.

 

Your reducio is absurding all over the place.

[SofaJockey]

Your reducio is absurding all over the place.

 

Only on the BioWare forum could we enjoy philosophical argument jokes 

[Sylvius the Mad]

You've confused explicit with implicit(plus some creative interpretation on your part).

Are you glossing over the mention of save imports as a method to achieve "greater levels of success", or is this a hypothetical debate over whether it would be justified to have locked the extra scene behind save import requirements?

Bugs are unintended. This was not.

As it happens, the post I quoted wasn't the one I wanted. I remember Chris saying that ME3 was done the way it was "to encourage players to try multiplayer". If that's the case, it clearly wasn't a bug.

You're right about implicit/explicit, though.

[Vandicus]

Bugs are unintended. This was not.

As it happens, the post I quoted wasn't the one I wanted. I remember Chris saying that ME3 was done the way it was "to encourage players to try multiplayer". If that's the case, it clearly wasn't a bug.

You're right about implicit/explicit, though.

If he has in fact said something like that, that'd be fairly concerning. The message I was seeing from Bioware employees around the time of launch was first "No, you guys just haven't done all the SP stuff or didn't import saves, all the endings are accessible without playing MP.", then radio silence for a while, and finally the acknowledgement and fix some time later.

 

Although of course if they did co-op campaign mp, I don't think many of the concerns expressed in the thread could conceivably manifest.

Modifié par Vandicus, 18 août 2014 - 06:50 .

[SofaJockey]

If he has in fact said something like that, that'd be fairly concerning. The message I was seeing from Bioware employees around the time of launch was first "No, you guys just haven't done all the SP stuff or didn't import saves, all the endings are accessible without playing MP.", then radio silence for a while, and finally the acknowledgement and fix some time later.

 

These statements are not incompatible.

 

I understand that BioWare did want people to try multiplayer and why not, it was a new feature. 

Topping up your readiness by trying a little multiplayer (or playing the phone app) reduced the need to complete everything.

 

But if someone really did want to completionist the single player then it would have been enough to trigger everything.

 

Or at least that was the plan.

 

But whether by bug or mistakes BioWare's confidence in that truth quickly turned to an 'oh s**t' moment.

Then silence.

Then a fix.

 

I cannot subscribe to the notion that this was malicious.

 

Hanlon's Razor applies:

 

"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." 

 

It is also unreasonable that this cause célèbre be treated as a universal justification for any

possible concern, trust issue  or differing choice against BioWare every time one appears ad infinitum.

 

BioWare are entitled to make mistakes like anyone else.

 

I respect that concerns, trust issues or choice disagreements may exists about what we expect or perceive

to be in DAI and it is perfectly acceptable to express them.

 

But I welcome the day that DAI, the game which sits only 3 months from release be judged on its own merits

and not on the basis of the design of the ME3 endings from 2.5-years ago.

 

I'm not expecting unadulterated fanboyism (this is the BioWare forum after all !)

but a little generosity during the crunch and launch phase would be nice...

[Sylvius the Mad]

I didn't even play ME3 (after ME2, and following a very candid forum discussion with Casey Hudson, it was clear I wasn't interested in where they were taking the series). I'm completely indifferent to the substance of the ME3 MP debate. I just want people to understand the complexity of the issue.

[Iakus]

 

I'm not expecting unadulterated fanboyism (this is the BioWare forum after all !)

but a little generosity during the crunch and launch phase would be nice...

Tried that.  2.5 years ago.  Didn't help.

[Shadowson]

So yea.. Dragon Age Inquisition would be kinda cool with a multiplayer in my opinion and also in my opinion i think all this back and forth over ME3 and its multiplayer component has a place, but that place is in a forum dedicated to Mass Effect. 

[CronoDragoon]

Your reducio is absurding all over the place.

 

He's right. Whether I can find things I like in other games is irrelevant. I want them in this game, too, if it makes sense to have them. I don't owe "SP purity" players anything.

 

With that being said, if there's no MP I won't stamp my feet or make cancellation threats on the BSN and then not follow through with them. I'll just shrug my shoulders and enjoy the excellent SP campaign that has 150 hours of content regardless of the existence of MP.

[The Night Haunter]

Honestly, if we are done with Gamescon and there was no mention, at all, of multiplayer for DAI I wouldn't get my hopes up. Chances are it is out, there is a slim chance Bioware is doing something very silly and waiting until as late as possible to advertise a marketable part of the game, but that is unlikely. If you don't expect it then the worst that could happen is you'll get what you expect, and you might get a pleasant surprise instead.

 

But at this point I'd bet against MP.