1807 réponses à ce sujet

[DisturbedJim83]

I wouldnt mind DAI MP as long as it isnt directly tied to the SP directly but indirectly sure why not.Maybe you could use MP to unlock things for the SP "Weapons, Armors, Mounts & Keep Custimization options ".Something like that could be cool in my book.

 

 But the main thing about any MP if added is it should be completely optional and not mandatory in any fashion to the Core SP experience.

Just no no and no having to play MP to unlock any single player content is not different and totally unacceptable it would be no better then the ME3 pre patch BS

[Fast Jimmy]

Sure.
 
But that has nothing to do with DA2, and claiming that it could've been improved because of feedback from DA2 is wrong. 
 
The game was well and truly written and planned by the time DA2 launched.

This assumes they had the ending figured out six months before the original release. It also assumes that the game wasn't delayed, so that any feedback from other Bioware titles about things such as the ending could be incorporated.

And the fact that it is different teams working on different IPs is EXACTLY my point. People who say "OBVIOUSLY Bioware wouldn't make the same mistake integrating SP + MP again" assumes that lessons are learned between teams. Which is not clear is true.

[Cribbian]

Just no no and no having to play MP to unlock any single player content is not different and totally unacceptable it would be no better then the ME3 pre patch BS

 

I agree. Keep them completely separate.

[simpatikool]

Hopefully it's coming along in all it's glory. The only reason ME3 stayed on my HD for over 2 years was because of the MP. Hoping DAI has something similar!

 

Ditto here. I am completely 100% excited for MP possibilities of DAI.

[Vortex13]

This assumes they had the ending figured out six months before the original release. It also assumes that the game wasn't delayed, so that any feedback from other Bioware titles about things such as the ending could be incorporated.

And the fact that it is different teams working on different IPs is EXACTLY my point. People who say "OBVIOUSLY Bioware wouldn't make the same mistake integrating SP + MP again" assumes that lessons are learned between teams. Which is not clear is true.

 

 

While we don't know that "BioWare has learned their lesson" we do know that BioWare and EA are well aware of how successful the ME 3 MP was; and I am more inclined to believe that having both the developer and the publisher aware of the achievements of MP would (most likely) mean that they know of the fan backlash of the forced integration pre-EC. I am more inclined to believe that BioWare has a hand on the situation regarding MP, but since they have been relatively dodgy on the whole MP subject we can't really be sure either way.

 

 

Apart from the War Asset issue that ME 3 had at launch, MP had no negative impacts on the SP; at least not enough to warrant the uproar that the ending(s) received. Sometimes though, it almost feels that people believe that the horribleness of the conclusion to the ME trilogy is entirely because of the MP's addition to the game, and that by adding it to DA:I will somehow, magically make it's endings just as bad. The truth of the matter is that MP was caught in the middle of a bad situation and bad writing (IMO), and the general reaction was that the new and different elements to the game were the cause of ME 3's ills.

 

 

Personally, I feel that if a game's narrative is so flimsy that a MP mode would shatter all the lore, and sour the entire franchise then the writing must not have been very strong in the first place, and MP should be the least of players' worries. 

[Fast Jimmy]

While we don't know that "BioWare has learned their lesson" we do know that BioWare and EA are well aware of how successful the ME 3 MP was; and I am more inclined to believe that having both the developer and the publisher aware of the achievements of MP would (most likely) mean that they know of the fan backlash of the forced integration pre-EC. I am more inclined to believe that BioWare has a hand on the situation regarding MP, but since they have been relatively dodgy on the whole MP subject we can't really be sure either way.
 
 
Apart from the War Asset issue that ME 3 had at launch, MP had no negative impacts on the SP; at least not enough to warrant the uproar that the ending(s) received. Sometimes though, it almost feels that people believe that the horribleness of the conclusion to the ME trilogy is entirely because of the MP's addition to the game, and that by adding it to DA:I will somehow, magically make it's endings just as bad. The truth of the matter is that MP was caught in the middle of a bad situation and bad writing (IMO), and the general reaction was that the new and different elements to the game were the cause of ME 3's ills.
 
 
If a game's narrative is so flimsy that a MP mode would shatter all the lore, and sour the entire franchise then the writing must not have been very strong in the first place, and MP should be the least of players' worries.

I don't disagree with your logic, but here's an analogy I made a year or so ago:

Imagine Bioware as your kid, enrolled in school. She's always been a straight A student, 4 0 GPA, where you never had to really worry about her completing her assignments and doing well. Suddenly, out of nowhere, she gets a C on her report card (DA2, in this example). A C is average, nothing terrible... but you usually always expect straight A's, so it is highly unexpected.

But Bioware says they have learned their lesson, that the C was a fluke. And that she wants to go out for sports for the next semester - something she's never done before (MP is ME3). You have some misgivings, but since she is usually a A student, you take her word that she will be able to handle the responsibility and return to the high level of success... after all, lots of kids to out for sports (and have MP components), so we just need to chill out.

Except the next report comes out with very low marks and some very bad remarks from the school. And while the sports team had a better season than anyone expected, you are now seeing a trend where bad report cards indicate something is wrong and not just a fluke.

Would you let this kid keep playing sports? Or would you say "focus on getting your grades back up where they were before we even CONSIDER getting you back to sports" and only consider it when they returned to the higher standards you expected?


Lots of liberties taken with this metaphor, but to me it seems valid. One of the big problems with DA2 was the desire to change so much about the game design that A) players were thrown for a loop by the change and the resulting extra work made the development path that much more difficult.

Adding a MP component is a huge undertaking, especially if you have little experience with it AND you aren't just copy-pasting the feature from another template. And even if you ignore budget and time schedules, you still have focus - focus from the lead designers, the producers, the entire executive team - focus that is now divided across different teams and development cycles. If you trust your other teams explicitly to make high quality content (or the bar isn't set that ugh to begin with, like the SP story component of most FPS), the. you have nothing to worry about. But if you need high quality and the team hasn't had the most sterling results in the most recent outings... is a shift in focus and attention the best idea?

[Sanunes]

I don't disagree with your logic, but here's an analogy I made a year or so ago:

Imagine Bioware as your kid, enrolled in school. She's always been a straight A student, 4 0 GPA, where you never had to really worry about her completing her assignments and doing well. Suddenly, out of nowhere, she gets a C on her report card (DA2, in this example). A C is average, nothing terrible... but you usually always expect straight A's, so it is highly unexpected.

But Bioware says they have learned their lesson, that the C was a fluke. And that she wants to go out for sports for the next semester - something she's never done before (MP is ME3). You have some misgivings, but since she is usually a A student, you take her word that she will be able to handle the responsibility and return to the high level of success... after all, lots of kids to out for sports (and have MP components), so we just need to chill out.

Except the next report comes out with very low marks and some very bad remarks from the school. And while the sports team had a better season than anyone expected, you are now seeing a trend where bad report cards indicate something is wrong and not just a fluke.

Would you let this kid keep playing sports? Or would you say "focus on getting your grades back up where they were before we even CONSIDER getting you back to sports" and only consider it when they returned to the higher standards you expected?
 

 

The problem with that metaphor is that you are assuming there was enough time between Dragon Age 2 and Mass Effect 3 to improve "grades" which isn't necessary possible for the damage that happened during a long period of time and can't change in a short period of time.  If anything Dragon Age Inquisition is the "next term" because there was time to digest and look at how to improve.  For all we know that six month delay where its rumored that Casey Hudson and Mac Walters did a major overhaul of the ending is the the "cram session" to try and boost their "grades" and it backfired.

[Fast Jimmy]

The problem with that metaphor is that you are assuming there was enough time between Dragon Age 2 and Mass Effect 3 to improve "grades" which isn't necessary possible for the damage that happened during a long period of time and can't change in a short period of time.  If anything Dragon Age Inquisition is the "next term" because there was time to digest and look at how to improve.  For all we know that six month delay where its rumored that Casey Hudson and Mac Walters did a major overhaul of the ending is the the "cram session" to try and boost their "grades" and it backfired.

Since when is a year (March 2011 to March 2012) too long of a period to change the final ten minutes of a game?

[J-Reyno]

Since when is a year (March 2011 to March 2012) too long of a period to change the final ten minutes of a game?

It's not, which is why it's silly to think that MP was the cause.  In no way would MP have been a barrier to the time and resources needed to write better endings.  That's just a writing failure.  

[Fast Jimmy]

It's not, which is why it's silly to think that MP was the cause.  In no way would MP have been a barrier to the time and resources needed to write better endings.  That's just a writing failure.

But then we to right back to discussion of focus and attention, not resources. If the lead designer and producer are having to oversee an entire different department (and in the case of ME, an entirely different LOCATION) to complete the MP component, that is less time and oversight they give to other areas of the project. The fact it was stated that Casey Hudson and Mac hammered out the ending to ME3 over a weekend with no time for peer review says that there wasn't much focus or attention given to the endings at all. Was that because Casey was visiting Bioware Montreal twice a week to oversee the MP team and didn't notice Mac had completely hit a wall on the development of the story arc?

We won't know, but the fact that it is a possibility has me saying "hold off on putting in a MP component in the DA franchise for the first time until you release a game that knocks one out of the park." Bioware should be using a "better safe than sorry" approach for DA:I, given some of the perceived shortcomings in their last two or three titles.

[Sanunes]

Since when is a year (March 2011 to March 2012) too long of a period to change the final ten minutes of a game?

 

It depends on when (or if) they decided that the final ten minutes needed to be changed, for there was the leaked script with the dark energy ending, for all we know the ending we did get was them changing the ending to meet what people want.

[Fast Jimmy]

It depends on when (or if) they decided that the final ten minutes needed to be changed, for there was the leaked script with the dark energy ending, for all we know the ending we did get was them changing the ending to meet what people want.

Which means they still didn't learn the lesson. Even if they tried to fix it based I. Feedback from DA2, they didn't understand it enough to fix the root of the problem.

Again - assuming the same is true of the ME3 MP complaints and any theoretical MP in DA:I could result in the same outcome - Bioware believing they need to change SOMETHING about the process but changing it in the absolute wrong way to address the criticism involved. Hence why I brought it up in the first place. People assuming that Bioware learned from the vocal outcry directed against another team is not an assumption that we can automatically take for granted, given the track record.

[BobZilla84]

In all honesty Mp isnt the villian when it comes to ME3 bad writing/poor decision making was the ending's were not really the problem to me honestly it was the writing/choices and by the end of ME3 I really didnt care about the ending's.

 

In truth the only thing about ME3 I liked was the Mp because the Sp was just bad imo and a more diverse Mp would have been better more modes/variations and such would have sweet.

 

So as I said I am down with DAI Mp as long as it doesnt a.Suck A** and b.negitively affect the quality of DAI's Sp because DAI is a Sp game first and foremost.

[Catche Jagger]

Why are people focused on a lack of multiplayer? I wasn't a fan of the Mass Effect multiplayer because it felt tacked on and had very little substance to it. I'd rather Bioware put as much of their time and resources as they can on a solid single-player experience (what I want out of a Dragon Age game) then to waste it on some mediocre multiplayer feature.

But, that's just my opinion on the topic.

[SofaJockey]

A game I enjoyed last year (and this year again in a definitive edition) was the rebooted Tomb Raider.

They had different folk working on it and it did not connect with the single player game.

 

I don't recall the inclusion of a lack-lustre multiplayer having the slightest impact on the warm reception the game otherwise received.

 

So for DAI there are only really two factors that impact:

1. In relation to those developers that worked on it, did that effort steal from the single-player resource pool or budget?
2. Does the single play game rely upon or insist upon the multiplayer content.

If there are enough resources focused an single player and SP is not connected then whether MP was great or poor the impact on the SP game would be same.

 

And there's more:

 

Just because multiplayer would not lead into single player does not mean single player could not lead into multiplayer.

Cullen as the military advisor could be setting out the battles that are fought in multiplayer on behalf of the Inquisitor.

 

Maps would only become available to multiplayer once the single player party had controlled them and the Inquisitor's troops would then be there to hold them. You could use the same maps as the single player game and players could run as the usual races, classes and specialisations.

 

This either already exists or doesn't at all... we're just waiting for the reveal or denial aren't we... 

[Lebanese Dude]

Every time I read the thread title I start humming "Radioactive".

[ElitePinecone]

And the fact that it is different teams working on different IPs is EXACTLY my point. People who say "OBVIOUSLY Bioware wouldn't make the same mistake integrating SP + MP again" assumes that lessons are learned between teams. Which is not clear is true.

 

No. What evidence do you have that the ME3 team took nothing from DA2? Or that Bioware, as a company, took no lessons from DA2?

 

They could've taken a thousand lessons, but all of them were completely useless if they had no time or resources to change anything. 

[Beerfish]

This assumes they had the ending figured out six months before the original release. It also assumes that the game wasn't delayed, so that any feedback from other Bioware titles about things such as the ending could be incorporated.

And the fact that it is different teams working on different IPs is EXACTLY my point. People who say "OBVIOUSLY Bioware wouldn't make the same mistake integrating SP + MP again" assumes that lessons are learned between teams. Which is not clear is true.

Let's put it this way, the fact that they put a patch in that negated the problem would indicate they were indeed aware of the back lash for that decisons/oversight.   It would be very surprising if they made the same mistake twice and they would be due every bit of flack over it if that was the case.

[Beerfish]

Why are people focused on a lack of multiplayer? I wasn't a fan of the Mass Effect multiplayer because it felt tacked on and had very little substance to it. I'd rather Bioware put as much of their time and resources as they can on a solid single-player experience (what I want out of a Dragon Age game) then to waste it on some mediocre multiplayer feature.

But, that's just my opinion on the topic.

1)  Many people like ME mutiplayer alot.

2) It's been said 100 times over though people refuse to believe it that MP is a totally separte entity with separate budgets etc.  They don't go hauling people off of the sp game to work on mp.  They have a separate team, separate budget.

[SofaJockey]

For your amusement, this speculation on Forbes:

 

"The Inquisition “levels up.

 

Or, rather, it grows in strength and political power as you acquire new influence across the land. No word on whether this means you get your own fortress or not.I do wonder if this is a way for EA to slip in some multiplayer functionality. Play the multiplayer game or download the iPad app to further spread your organization’s influence, etc. This would be similar to what we saw in Mass Effect 3 with your military preparedness rank which could be boosted by playing on the app, online, and so forth. Just speculation on my part, however. Other than the words of EA executives who have said in the past that all EA games will have multiplayer, the mode has not been confirmed (or denied) by BioWare."

 

http://www.forbes.co...tails-revealed/

[Sanunes]

For your amusement, this speculation on Forbes:

 

"The Inquisition “levels up.

 

Or, rather, it grows in strength and political power as you acquire new influence across the land. No word on whether this means you get your own fortress or not.I do wonder if this is a way for EA to slip in some multiplayer functionality. Play the multiplayer game or download the iPad app to further spread your organization’s influence, etc. This would be similar to what we saw in Mass Effect 3 with your military preparedness rank which could be boosted by playing on the app, online, and so forth. Just speculation on my part, however. Other than the words of EA executives who have said in the past that all EA games will have multiplayer, the mode has not been confirmed (or denied) by BioWare."

 

http://www.forbes.co...tails-revealed/

 

I don't consider that speculation, but "come here we want cash for those clicks".  Considering that the statement from EA was along the lines of "we want all games to have a social aspect" which is a lot different then just multiplayer.

[simpatikool]

I don't consider that speculation, but "come here we want cash for those clicks".  Considering that the statement from EA was along the lines of "we want all games to have a social aspect" which is a lot different then just multiplayer.

 

I would consider it speculation. The key line is Bioware has neither confirmed or denied, which is why we are even talking about it. Even this thread contains speculation. Until Bioware says MP or no, we will continue to have discourse around the subject. Either decision will result in customers being disappointed.

[Killdren88]

Really. Since when do all modern games these days need Multiplayer to be a success? Origins was perfect the way it was. It did not need Multiplayer to get to where it was in 09 where it was one of the best games of the year. And really....when you make a MP game you invite all sorts of toxic individuals into the game. From those who do nothing more than attempt to lord their skills over you telling you how to play and come the simple trolls who go out of the way to ruin the experience. The game will be better off for not bringing in Multiplayer. Sometimes it seems like you hinge the success of the game as a whole on a feature the majority of players don't care about when it comes to the genre.

[ElitePinecone]

Really. Since when do all modern games these days need Multiplayer to be a success? Origins was perfect the way it was. It did not need Multiplayer to get to where it was in 09 where it was one of the best games of the year. And really....when you make a MP game you invite all sorts of toxic individuals into the game. From those who do nothing more than attempt to lord their skills over you telling you how to play and come the simple trolls who go out of the way to ruin the experience. The game will be better off for not bringing in Multiplayer. Sometimes it seems like you hinge the success of the game as a whole on a feature the majority of players don't care about when it comes to the genre.

 

Once again, the multiplayer would be optional content. I feel like you're fishing for reasons to hate it, rather than considering the possibility that it might be more fun than you expected. 

 

I was intensely wary of ME3's MP, but it was some of the most fun combat gameplay I've had in ages. It was great entertainment and added value, on top of a singleplayer campaign that, sans the last hour or so, was very nearly perfect.

 

As for a toxic community, well, if you never played MP you'd never see them. ME3 *did* develop a hardcore multiplayer fanbase who talked about ideal builds all day and sometimes disparaged casual players, but I barely know anything about them. It was enough for me to play with random people every now and then, and I left them to their own forum and their own community. 

 

(A game can be embraced by more than one type of fan, after all - look at how DA appeals to grognardy RPG nerds, fans of action combat, people focused on story and another community who really loves romance. As far as I'm aware, most of those groups are simultaneously looking forward to DA:I.)

[DisturbedJim83]

Every time I read the thread title I start humming "Radioactive".

Within Temptations does my favorite cover of that song