If they weren't allowed to say who was a romance option we would not know 6/8 of them.
We would still be at 0/8.
Thats what i was talking about.
Not the fact that people will ask "Is Varric a romance option!!??" constantly and get an be told "We arent confirming or denying anything".
You nailed it buddy.
There is no such thing.
If you have two different teams working on the same game, that's still a whole second team that could be working on the main game.
For free? Because EA isn't going to give BioWare the money to hire and retain a bunch of network programmers if there's no MP.
They should be giving them the money for extra hands on the single player game.
You know, the "Dragon Age" part? RPG?
I hope it's nothing like the ME3 matches or capture the territory/keep type of thing if they end up adding multiplayer. I would love it if it was something more like the Fable series. Playing through the story with your heroes together or at least letting your friend play as one of your companions.
They should be giving them the money for extra hands on the single player game.
You know, the "Dragon Age" part? RPG?
We are not privy to Biowares financial accounts, but given the amount of content they kept creating for ME3 MP, and the hype, we can assume it paid for itself through all the microtransactions. That revenue would not have come through SP so would not increase the SP budget.
I hope it's nothing like the ME3 matches or capture the territory/keep type of thing if they end up adding multiplayer. I would love it if it was something more like the Fable series. Playing through the story with your heroes together or at least letting your friend play as one of your companions.
How would that work with the conversations?
Why would not playing the game concern them? They have your money, that's all that matters.
Because it's indicative of the likelihood of the performance of future games.
Or to put it in another way, it helps them make a more educated guess about how many of their customers are going to just do this, and how many of them are actually not going play any sequels in the future.
same way with fable still. They are there during the cut scenes or important story events, but they're not "there". More like a ghost. Gotta have played Fable to understand what im talking about.
How would that work with the conversations?
Have you played SWTOR?
Groups have conversations. Each player picks a response, then it randomly determines which character responds. It works fairly well.
Thats what i was talking about.
Not the fact that people will ask "Is Varric a romance option!!??" constantly and get an be told "We arent confirming or denying anything".
You nailed it buddy.
So let me get this straight...
Since BioWare will not tell us the last two romance options this means that BioWare is unable/unwilling to tell us anything about them?
They are not obligated to tell us all eight of the romance options just because they've told us six of them, and doing so does not equate to them being unable to tell us.
They should be giving them the money for extra hands on the single player game.
You know, the "Dragon Age" part? RPG?
That's not how it works.
The entire "second team" working on the POSSIBLE multiplayer would NOT EXIST unless said team was working on the multiplayer.
We are not privy to Biowares financial accounts, but given the amount of content they kept creating for ME3 MP, and the hype, we can assume it paid for itself through all the microtransactions. That revenue would not have come through SP so would not increase the SP budget.
I dont care?
I have no use for multilayer garbage. Neither do most people playing an RPG with pause and play built in.
Frankly, I would prefer it if they gave me a 10 dollar refund if it meant they could delete the multiplayer content from my harddrive.
If the achievements are fake, there need not be anymore discussion.
If they are legit, then here's what I think:
The MP has "get to second stage" achievement. Since it's multiplayer, it can only mean that it's a survival mode(or atleast that's all I could think of). I also believe that more achievements are to come. I doubt there are only two stages.
Again, this is all assuming these are real.
Those changes wern't made untill the forced multiplayer had "become a huge success", by being forced on people...You speak the truth.
I too find the idea that it was 'forced' a little strong.
ME3 sold around 3.5 million copies worldwide.
About half of those people played the multiplayer, some 1.7 million people.
You might say that half of people not playing the multiplayer shows lack of support for it.
Yet only 42% of purchasers had finished the single player within 5 months of release
Also looking at the MP manifest, about 800,000 people look to have played multiplayer enough to get their war assets improved and no more.
A further 900,00 look to have played... and played... and played.
I think it would be fair to say that multiplayer was indeed forced upon you because of the war asset calculations.
But to imply its success was tainted in some way misses the point in my opinion, as it fails to recognise not far off a million people who played well beyond the single player game requirement. Many of those players logged literally several hundreds of hours in the game.
Have you played SWTOR?
Groups have conversations. Each player picks a response, then it randomly determines which character responds. It works fairly well.
Played it for 10 minutes. Never touching it again.
So let me get this straight...
Since BioWare will not tell us the last two romance options this means that BioWare is unable/unwilling to tell us anything about them?
They are not obligated to tell us all eight of the romance options just because they've told us six of them, and doing so does not equate to them being unable to tell us.
That's not how it works.
The entire "second team" working on the POSSIBLE multiplayer would NOT EXIST unless said team was working on the multiplayer.
Im saying that they have an NDA that keeps them from talking about certain aspects of the game and development process.
Im saying that the second team should always exist, and always be working on single player content.
If they were willing to spend the extra money on the game, then it should go into the main game.
Played it for 10 minutes. Never touching it again.
May I ask what you thought was wrong with it?
I too find the idea that it was 'forced' a little strong.
ME3 sold around 3.5 million copies worldwide.
About half of those people played the multiplayer, some 1.7 million people.
You might say that half of people not playing the multiplayer shows lack of support for it.
Yet only 42% of purchasers had finished the single player within 5 months of release
Also looking at the MP manifest, about 800,000 people look to have played multiplayer enough to get their war assets improved and no more.
A further 900,00 look to have played... and played... and played.
I think it would be fair to say that multiplayer was indeed forced upon you because of the war asset calculations.
But to imply its success was tainted in some way misses the point in my opinion, as it fails to recognise not far off a million people who played well beyond the single player game requirement. Many of those players logged literally several hundreds of hours in the game.
I certainly had to play it in order to make sure Shepard survived. Quit playing the MP when I finished the single player story. I know of at least ten others that had to do the same thing.
I know of at least ten others that had to do the same thing.
13 others.
Myself, my friend, and his mother.
I dont care?
I have no use for multilayer garbage. Neither do most people playing an RPG with pause and play built in.
Frankly, I would prefer it if they gave me a 10 dollar refund if it meant they could delete the multiplayer content from my harddrive.
I don't believe you are reading these replies. Multiplayer generates additional sales and revenue. It's not taking anything from SP. In fact in the long run they probably subsidize each other as you have shared assets like models, artwork, mechanics etc.
May I ask what you thought was wrong with it?
It ruined the story of Kotor 1-2, wich was supposed to be a trilogy. I ran into sith lords named IoWnzU666 (or the like), wich ruined my immersion. Technology that is wastly superior to what we see in th movies, were present. Stuff like that. Not fond of it.
I too find the idea that it was 'forced' a little strong.
ME3 sold around 3.5 million copies worldwide.
About half of those people played the multiplayer, some 1.7 million people.
You might say that half of people not playing the multiplayer shows lack of support for it.
Yet only 42% of purchasers had finished the single player within 5 months of release
Also looking at the MP manifest, about 800,000 people look to have played multiplayer enough to get their war assets improved and no more.
A further 900,00 look to have played... and played... and played.
I think it would be fair to say that multiplayer was indeed forced upon you because of the war asset calculations.
But to imply its success was tainted in some way misses the point in my opinion, as it fails to recognise not far off a million people who played well beyond the single player game requirement. Many of those players logged literally several hundreds of hours in the game.
I only ever touched Mutiplayer for one reason only. Fools hope if I helped with all the weekly operations that the ending would changed. Alas I felt stupid afterwards.
I don't believe you are reading these replies. Multiplayer generates additional sales and revenue. It's not taking anything from SP. In fact in the long run they probably subsidize each other as you have shared assets like models, artwork, mechanics etc.
Its very existence takes away from the single player.
People talk of "two separate teams" but that isnt how game design works. There is no aspect of any videogame that is completely isolated. Literally by adding the data for the multiplayer into the code of the game, they have created thousands upon thousands of errors that the programmers need to spend time on.
It ruined the story of Kotor 1-2, wich was supposed to be a trilogy. I ran into sith lords named IoWnzU666 (or the like), wich ruined my immersion. Technology that is wastly superior to what we see in th movies, were present. Stuff like that. Not fond of it.
Well that's more a problem with the fact that the original Star Wars trilogy was made in the 70's, and they were unable to do "advanced" technology at that point.
Its very existence takes away from the single player.
People talk of "two separate teams" but that isnt how game design works. There is no aspect of any videogame that is completely isolated. Literally by adding the data for the multiplayer into the code of the game, they have created thousands upon thousands of errors that the programmers need to spend time on.
It ruined the story of Kotor 1-2, wich was supposed to be a trilogy. I ran into sith lords named IoWnzU666 (or the like), wich ruined my immersion. Technology that is wastly superior to what we see in th movies, were present. Stuff like that. Not fond of it.
Fair enough. You could have played on a role playing server where silly names are frowned upon if that bothered you. But yes, MMOs do require a little "look the other way" on certain story/plot points. It's inevitable and I did find it a bit jarring on some points. I still very much like the game however, there is a lot of good stuff there and parts of the story do address what happens to certain characters from Kotor.
Well that's more a problem with the fact that the original Star Wars trilogy was made in the 70's, and they were unable to do "advanced" technology at that point.
Its far superior to what we see in the prequel trilogy too. And considering the SWTOR takes place 4000 years before those movies as well, it felt lame and forced.
Retour en haut
