665 réponses à ce sujet

[Rawgrim]

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.

 

It is good that you enjoyed it, by all means. I just didn't.

 

Yes. I heard there was some fan service in the game.

[Malanek]

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.

I'm willing to give you that there will be a very small amount of time taken away from SP as some devs would need to split their time and some decisions would have to be made to interface with both. But it would be really, really small. That is made up in the long run by the ability to share assets.

[TheodoricFriede]

 

If the multiplayer is completely separate from the single player game the bugs for multiplayer will not affect the singleplayer at all. If anything they will share the same bugs caused by having the same engine.

 

That isnt how it works.

 

Everything in a game is interacting with other parts of a game. No matter how unrelated they may seem be.

[Dermain]

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.

 

The movies were limited by the technology of the time, and because they were movies. The ancillary (novels, comics, games)Star Wars products all have some form of technology that was not evident in the movies. 

[Rawgrim]

Has any rpg game\series gotten better with the inclusion of multiplayer, though? I mean if its added in mid-series. I can't think of a single one.

[Rawgrim]

The movies were limited by the technology of the time, and because they were movies. The ancillary (novels, comics, games)Star Wars products all have some form of technology that was not evident in the movies. 

 

Still. Sticking to the source material is better than going for fanfiction.

[TheodoricFriede]

I'm willing to give you that there will be a very small amount of time taken away from SP as some devs would need to split their time and some decisions would have to be made to interface with both. But it would be really, really small. That is made up in the long run by the ability to share assets.

I think you greatly underestimate the amount if time taken.

 

Further, that was just an example of how the mere existence of the Multiplayer has an effect on the Singleplayer.

 

There are far more reasons then what i had mentioned.

[VilhoDog13]

I'm kind of interested actually. I imagine it being like ME3.

You have agents for the inquisition and you go about missions. Factions might include mages/Templars/demons/dark spawn.

Maybe that's how (story-wise, not gameplay) your inquisition gains resources. Exploring caves occupied by mages. Saving villages under siege by Templars. Fighting demons where there's a fade rift.

Actually, I'd totes be excited to play it.

[SofaJockey]

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.

 

You and those 10 people will be within the 800,000 then, that works.   
I don't think you should have had to play MP, but I'd be staggered if that lesson had not been learned, if it exists, this time.

[Deflagratio]

They should be giving them the money for extra hands on the single player game.

 

You know, the "Dragon Age" part? RPG?

 

Actually, you don't want to just arbitrarily assign people to parts of a game just to have "More hands" on deck. Every person you add to a project must be managed and directed towards a goal, as you increase the size of the team, maintaining a cohesive effort gets exponentially more difficult. You want to keep a particular team as small as is possible to achieve particular project goals. Over staffing can and almost always does result in a poorer end result.

[TheodoricFriede]

Actually, you don't want to just arbitrarily assign people to parts of a game just to have "More hands" on deck. Every person you add to a project must be managed and directed towards a goal, as you increase the size of the team, maintaining a cohesive effort gets exponentially more difficult. You want to keep a particular team as small as is possible to achieve particular project goals. Over staffing can and almost always does result in a poorer end result.

Then put them on QA.

[Malanek]

Has any rpg game\series gotten better with the inclusion of multiplayer, though? I mean if its added in mid-series. I can't think of a single one.

I am going to say ME3 was better with the inclusion of MP. No, I wasn't overly fond of the ending but I highly doubt it would have been better if there was no MP. Not just because the MP was awesomely fun, but has improved the devs understanding of their own gameplay dramatically and ME4 should really benefit from it. They admitted it themselves when they were talking about the armax arena.

[Dermain]

Has any rpg game\series gotten better with the inclusion of multiplayer, though? I mean if its added in mid-series. I can't think of a single one.

 

Divinity: Original Sin?

 

Other than the fact that the multiplayer may have added the DREADED "micro-transactions" for items, which then add to the revenue of the game, which then lead to more time spent on developing content for the game...

 

Nope can't think of a single thing...

[Rawgrim]

You and those 10 people will be within the 800,000 then, that works.   
I don't think you should have had to play MP, but I'd be staggered if that lesson had not been learned, if it exists, this time.

 

Mostly I kept hearing, via headsets turned on, that people played it to get a break from Call of Duty. It wasn't exactly teaming with rpg fans in there.

[Malanek]

Mostly I kept hearing, via headsets turned on, that people played it to get a break from Call of Duty. It wasn't exactly teaming with rpg fans in there.

Does that actually matter? They bought the game giving Bioware more money. What is wrong with that?

[Maria Caliban]

People talk of "two separate teams" but that isnt how game design works.

I think David Gaider knows how game design works.

[Deflagratio]

Then put them on QA.

 

This shows how little you actually know about the subject. I don't think there's a single developer of software on the planet that isn't also a part-time QA on their own work. But keep trying.

[Dermain]

Does that actually matter? They bought the game giving Bioware more money. What is wrong with that?

 

I don't think you're understanding that they ARE NOT TRUE RPG FANS!!! *insert more rage* 

[TheodoricFriede]

I think David Gaider knows how game design works.

I think that David Gaider is trying to sell me a Videogame.

[Rawgrim]

I am going to say ME3 was better with the inclusion of MP. No, I wasn't overly fond of the ending but I highly doubt it would have been better if there was no MP. Not just because the MP was awesomely fun, but has improved the devs understanding of their own gameplay dramatically and ME4 should really benefit from it. They admitted it themselves when they were talking about the armax arena.

 

 

The game took controll over your character in almost every cutscene and long conversation. Huge no-no in an rpg. The players are to be in the drivers seat in that genre, not the passanger's seat. The ending was extremely rushed, as well. ME 2 was alot more polished, and alot more solid game. MP did have a negative effect on the game. No doubt about it.

[Killdren88]

Mostly I kept hearing, via headsets turned on, that people played it to get a break from Call of Duty. It wasn't exactly teaming with rpg fans in there.

 

Another fear of mine bringing in Multiplayer. When you say you want Cod's Audience your also asking for all of the negative aspects. The Griefer...The Trolls the elitist, the people who just aren't nice really and your opening the door to them by bringing in MP.

[TheodoricFriede]

This shows how little you actually know about the subject. I don't think there's a single developer of software on the planet that isn't also a part-time QA on their own work. But keep trying.

Oh you're so adorable thinking you know so much.

[Dermain]

The game took controll over your character in almost every cutscene and long conversation. Huge no-no in an rpg. The players are to be in the drivers seat in that genre, not the passanger's seat. The ending was extremely rushed, as well. ME 2 was alot more polished, and alot more solid game. MP did have a negative effect on the game. No doubt about it.

 

You are falsely assuming that all of the issues with ME3 were because of the addition of multiplayer...

[Morroian]

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.

 

Every statement from BW devs plus statements from others working in the industry is that this is incorrect. EA and other major publishers will assign an entirely separate budget for the MP budget and would not allocate it to the SP otherwise. You may have worked on projects where this was not the case but from all indications this is not normal practice in the mainstream games industry.