74 réponses à ce sujet

[Maria Caliban]

BioWare isn't denying the fact that we get to romance nugs! THAT MEANS WE CAN ROMANCE NUGS!

BioWare hasn't denied that hookers and blow come free with every physical copy purchased. I think we all know what that means.

Examiner as a news site is pathetic click bait full of 'gaming journalists'.

It's trash. The only time its information with worthwhile is when it's stolen it from another site, and even then the 'journalists' will misrepresent the information.

This is a new bloody low by them.

No, it's not. This is mild for them.

[Hizoku]

as others have said, as long as it doesn't affect my single player experience in any and is just there for us to have fun with then i'm all for it... i'll probably hop on there a few times... before quitting once i see a few no lifer's at the highest level and i'm still under level 5 (provided it has a leveling system like ME3's)

 

 

 

BioWare hasn't denied that hookers and blow come free with every physical copy purchased. I think we all know what that means.
 

has this been confirmed?!  

[CrimsonN7]

I pumped ALOT of hours in ME3 MP, loved it, spent most of my BSN time over in that section, it was a surprise hit for Bioware, nobody expected it to do as well as it has. So I'm not surprised that it will return in ME4, however it's not something I desire for DAI. If we are getting MP with this game I may try it out but I'm not too pushed.

[Magdalena11]

I'm always shocked at the level of pissing and moaning not getting that *gasp* causes people -- in endings everyone claims to hate anyways.

 

Your argument anyways makes about as much sense as me saying I don't want to play the exploration part of the game (...and really I'd rather not hated Skyrim and it's parents with a passion) so as long as wandering around vast empty parts of the map doesn't uncover anything useful to the game like money, items or crafting materials.

What I am saying, in no uncertain terms, is that MP always winds up being a contest of who can find the best cheats and I'd prefer not to be forced to play that game.  I have been told that Frostbite is unhackable and I'll believe that when I see it.  My tiny little ego doesn't play well with others and reacts poorly indeed when it suspects someone other than myself is being favored.  Call me silly, but I really do prefer to be the hero of my own story.  I can fully envision logging in to my first session of MP and being confronted with everyone else's awesomeness in comparison to myself being just perfectly acceptable.  I'm already envisioning how un-fun that would be and I'd rather go on the record as having said I thought it was a bad idea from the start.

[Borosini]

Campaign co-op is probably the only type of multi-player I would be interested in—if and only if P2 controls only companions and P1's gameplay experience is essentially unchanged. This means full control of conversations/decisions, and full ability to pause combat without input from P2. It's probably best if P2 can't pause the game at all during combat.

 

This might seem like a sore deal for P2, but there are definitely players out there who enjoy watching someone else play and yet would like to be involved in some fashion. I'd gladly play second fiddle to a friend or loved one for a bit of quality time.

 

There are probably all sorts of reasons why such a thing would be difficult to implement. But I would find it vastly preferable to having a phantom Inquisitor haunting the true Inquisitor's steps à la Fable.

[Inquisitor7]

What if the multiplayer if any at all was 2 players taking over each others fortress.Or go to war.

[Dio Demon]

BioWare hasn't denied that hookers and blow come free with every physical copy purchased. I think we all know what that means.

Maker's breath! *dies of laughter*

[HellaciousHutch]

If I buy a game, I should get access to all of its content without having to jump through ang extra hoops.

Also, some of us REALLY HATE multiplayer. So if multiplayer is a necessary component, then there's just no point in us playing the game at all.

Moreover, multiplayer isn't an expected core component of the game the way that exploration is in TES games. No one could follow the development of a TES game and realistically hope to enjoy all of the game's content without having to do any exploration. But it's highly unusual for single-player content to be restricted by multiplayer participation like that, so it makes much more sense for someone to have that expectation with regard to a Dragon Age game, none of which have any multiplayer component at all at this point.

That's largely why ME3 annoyed so many people. Neither of the earlier games had contained any MP at all, and then when MP was announced for the third game, BioWare explicitly denied that any MP play would be required to experience all of the SP content. And that wasn't true.

People don't like those sorts of surprises. People don't like having the rug pulled out from under them like that.

 

The people who disliked and complained about multiplayer in Mass Effect 3 (and now Inquisition, before it's even confirmed that it's in the game) are the same people who thought it was NOT planned from the beginning and tacked on, people who have very limited knowledge of game design and are completely ignorant. 

[Elite Midget]

I will only welcome it if it's separate from the main story.

 

I don't want a ME3 situation where you must play Multiplayer for the Singleplayer mode.

[RevilFox]

I'm fine with them including it, so long as it has zero effect on the main game. I hated the idea that playing multiplayer would make my single player  ME3 campaign easier or add value to it.

[Sylvius the Mad]

The people who disliked and complained about multiplayer in Mass Effect 3 (and now Inquisition, before it's even confirmed that it's in the game) are the same people who thought it was NOT planned from the beginning and tacked on, people who have very limited knowledge of game design and are completely ignorant.

I don't care if it's tacked on. I care about the ultimate effect of including it.

Whether it was tacked on or planned from the start, the problem with ME3's multiplayer is that it damages the setting of the single-player game by having that single-player reality suffer effects that have no in-game explanation. Moreover, as the MP is a fundamentally different game, the skills to play one don't necessarily transfer over to the other, so a player who excels at the single-player game may be incapable of enjoying the MP or even playing it at all (my pause-to-aim approach is entirely inapplicable in MP, for example).

Why would it matter how the content was developed? That it was included is sufficient.

[TurretSyndrome]

I think the least they could do is let people know one way or the other. A lot of people actually want to see multiplayer or at least a straight answer on the subject. If they are not including it(which I think they aren't cause they would've revealed it by now), they could just say so instead of this "no comment" attitude they wish to maintain. I mean, they said it's highly unlikely for mod support and they were pretty straight about that. I don't see any reason why it's so hard in doing the same with multiplayer. 

 

For me personally, it doesn't really matter. I would've liked a 4V4 arena mode where number of players can be between 1 to 4 in either team. They could've used those coliseums in that one map for the mode. Either that or a co-op mode like in Divinity: Original Sin, but with a better integration of the co-op player into the story so they can "see" the MC's interactions with other NPCs if they like and whenever they want. But now, I kinda lost interest, and half the reason is because of how hush hush they are being with the subject.

[Sidney]

What I am saying, in no uncertain terms, is that MP always winds up being a contest of who can find the best cheats and I'd prefer not to be forced to play that game.  I have been told that Frostbite is unhackable and I'll believe that when I see it.  My tiny little ego doesn't play well with others and reacts poorly indeed when it suspects someone other than myself is being favored.  Call me silly, but I really do prefer to be the hero of my own story.  I can fully envision logging in to my first session of MP and being confronted with everyone else's awesomeness in comparison to myself being just perfectly acceptable.  I'm already envisioning how un-fun that would be and I'd rather go on the record as having said I thought it was a bad idea from the start.

 

 

In a coop mode, ala ME3, none of that cheating matters all that much. In ME3 MP it wasn't your hero, it was a "operative" anyways so it wasn't like your Shep was diminished by the awesomeness of others.

[AlanC9]

I
Whether it was tacked on or planned from the start, the problem with ME3's multiplayer is that it damages the setting of the single-player game by having that single-player reality suffer effects that have no in-game explanation.

How is this a problem if you don't play MP, though? No MP, no damage, unless we're counting the pre-EC EMS issue.

[Sylvius the Mad]

How is this a problem if you don't play MP, though? No MP, no damage, unless we're counting the pre-EC EMS issue.

I am counting that, and I'm also considering balance issues. If the developers expect players to have extra resources arising from MP, then the game might be balanced for that.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I would hope that any co-op multiplayer supports LAN play.

There's no need to force everyone to go through an online matchmaking server.

[rafoquinha]

I believe they are silent over this cause they are not sure if they will be able to achieve this by the time the game ships. Maybe they are aiming for a coop DLC, as Killzone recently did, or maybe they wont like the results and will scrap it.

 

I am sure they are trying to do it. Thats for sure. There were surveys and many interviews on the past about it. Just google it and you will see it

[Sidney]

I am counting that, and I'm also considering balance issues. If the developers expect players to have extra resources arising from MP, then the game might be balanced for that.

 

 

Truthfully, again, that is a weak concern. The gasp was the total effect of that and that changed and did exactly nothing.

 

Balancing issues can cause problems for all sorts of aspects of the game some don't like - I hate crafting stupidity with a burning white hot passion but if the devs expect people to be crafting uber-sword X then they might balance for that.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Truthfully, again, that is a weak concern. The gasp was the total effect of that and that changed and did exactly nothing.

I never even played ME3. I'm speaking entirely theoretically.

[HellaciousHutch]

I don't care if it's tacked on. I care about the ultimate effect of including it.

Whether it was tacked on or planned from the start, the problem with ME3's multiplayer is that it damages the setting of the single-player game by having that single-player reality suffer effects that have no in-game explanation. Moreover, as the MP is a fundamentally different game, the skills to play one don't necessarily transfer over to the other, so a player who excels at the single-player game may be incapable of enjoying the MP or even playing it at all (my pause-to-aim approach is entirely inapplicable in MP, for example).

Why would it matter how the content was developed? That it was included is sufficient.

 

I'm sorry to tell you, the multiplayer in no way affected the single player in Mass Effect 3, other than adding (if your war assets were maxed to the max) an additional 10 second clip at the end of the game, that, would of had a poor ending even without said clip. Multiplayer didn't hurt Mass Effect 3's campaign, it was poor writing--making the main enemy of your games something so...impossible to defeat in any sort of logical, no nonsense way.

 

BioWare pretty much screwed themselves at the end of Mass Effect 2. (They need to stick to more small scale villains and issues; something at least somewhat believable).

[RustyW]

This is doing my head in now, Bioware have some decency and come out and say yes or no, surely it can not be that hard and if the answer is yes, please throw the multi player lovers a crumb of what is involved or they may have a melt down

[rafoquinha]

BRING ON THE CO_OP CAMPAIGN

 

honestly id love nothing more thatn to be able to share my DA experience with friends n family, playing alongside each other, adventuring, so 2 fingers to all you haters

I remember the good old times of Baldurs Gate. Great story and dialogue, yet full co-op in the main campaign. Dungeon Siege 3 made a nice approach on co-op campaig by letting co-op players even helping the Host (player 1) with its decisions in the dialogues.

[rafoquinha]

I'm not denying that I'm a kitty cat. Does that make me a kitty cat?

Apparently, it does

 

Yes, but, but, Examiner.

 

You can stop shilling your Examiner articles here any time, you know.

 

Examiner was right

 

BioWare hasn't denied that hookers and blow come free with every physical copy purchased. I think we all know what that means.
 

 

What does it mean? Co-op confirmed, babe