665 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

If they were willing to spend the extra money on the game, then it should go into the main game.

They're not spending money on the game. They're investing money in the game with an expectation of a financial return. If they think they'll get a better ROI from putting that team on MP, that's where the team goes. If they think they can improve ROI by reducing overall investment instead, they cut that team and all those people lose their jobs.

For them to put that second team on the main game, they would need to think that there was a better ROI there than with either of the other two options. And that would be a really difficult argument for you to make.

[Iakus]

You (and others) are already infuriated about it, and I don't think that's going to change if they say "Hey! We have multiplayer".

 

Probably.  But hey, if they could document how it's totally not going to affect SP at all, they can at least make us look stupid.

 

Heck I'd welcome proof that I'm being paranoid here.  I want to believe in Bioware again. 

 

Problem is my concerns about ME3 MP were totally accurate.  And saying "I told you so" didn't feel as good as I'd hoped.

[Iakus]

 
For them to put that second team on the main game, they would need to think that there was a better ROI there than with either of the other two options. And that would be a really difficult argument for you to make.

Kinda brings up an interesting question:  Who did the multiplayer?

 

All three of Bioware's teams are supposedly working on separate projects now:  Edmonton teams are doing Dragon Age and the third IP, and Montreal is doing MassEffect.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Leaked, mind you. And we're closer to release now than they were to ME3's release then

Not all leaks are entirely accidental or unforeseen.

[Lazarillo]

Thanks for the explanations, guys.  Yeah, if it were to turn out that I couldn't obtain an ending (or other story element) I wanted...I'd be pretty miffed, too.  If it's a matter of "it's harder to do because the multi-player rewards are premium-er", that's not as big of a deal.  If they don't completely lock-out any single player content for lack of multi, and they don't wave it in my face too much, eh, I can live.  I admit, I wouldn't want to feel compelled to play with others, but if other people dig that, then good on them.

 

Resource allocation I'm not as worried about since I figure this is the sort of AAA title that is expected to sell well enough to justify most budget requests anyway, and I don't think any game dev wants to create a bad game (they might create one I don't like, but that's because I'm hard to please anyway).

[Jawzzus]

Kinda brings up an interesting question:  Who did the multiplayer?

 

All three of Bioware's teams are supposedly working on separate projects now:  Edmonton teams are doing Dragon Age and the third IP, and Montreal is doing MassEffect.

 

Edmonton isn't doing the third IP (if that's the new IP), Austin is

[azarhal]

Edmonton isn't doing the third IP (if that's the new IP), Austin is

 

The old Mass Effect/KoTOR team in Edmonton is working on a new IP. BioWare Austin is also working on another project that is related to the trailer just released. There not the same thing.

[Deflagratio]

Kinda brings up an interesting question:  Who did the multiplayer?

 

All three of Bioware's teams are supposedly working on separate projects now:  Edmonton teams are doing Dragon Age and the third IP, and Montreal is doing MassEffect.

 

Probably at least a portion of the Mass Effect 3 MP team, along with probably some DICE-Frostbite3 Architects and veterans to help facilitate the technology transfer from Unreal, plus I'm guessing at least lead combat designer(s) from the main BioWare branch actually doing DA:I have at least an advisory or directorial role because I have a hard time believing any Multiplayer wouldn't be fundamentally similar in design to the Single Player game. It's also possible that the Multiplayer team actually helps single player combat as you get an additional perspective on balance and encounter design... That's of course assuming the Multiplayer (If it even exists) is a cooperative style experience in the same vein as ME3's was.

 

I think BioWare/EA also has a floating talent pool of people that don't invest themselves particularly deep creatively (that sounds way more negative than I want it to) that handle more of the formulaic tasks that don't need much emergent input for success. Total guess by the way, but that's how large studios under larger publishers seem to work now.

[HowlingSiren]

About that ME3 MP fiasco... I may have selective amnesia here, but this is how I remember it went down. BioWare said MP was not needed to get all the endings. After playing the SP, forum members pointed out that was not the case, that the EMS scores for each mission/quest without MP did not add up to enough to get the third ending. BioWare devs came on the forums, saying they were quite sure that MP was not needed. Forumites protested. BioWare then went back and checked their numbers and admitted their mistake. And fixed it. 

 

What I took from this, as I assume people are not liars or idiots, particularly on something as easy to disprove, is that BioWare made an unintentional mistake. A mistake that created a huge blow-up. A pretty embarrassing mistake as BioWare first released a lengthy statement confirming MP was not needed when the forum was saying it was. So I am not sure why anyone would assume that BioWare would make the same mistake twice. Or suddenly shift gears and decide to tie MP to the SP campaign, when that was, according to them, never their intent, even for ME3.

 

Based on this, and until proof of the contrary, I must admit that I fail to understand how some people can be so extremely opposed to optional, free content. The "taking away resources" argument has been disproved ad nauseam. If you don't want MP, don't play it. Simple as that.  

[Iakus]

About that ME3 MP fiasco... I may have selective amnesia here, but this is how I remember it went down. BioWare said MP was not needed to get all the endings. After playing the SP, forum members pointed out that was not the case, that the EMS scores for each mission/quest without MP did not add up to enough to get the third ending. BioWare devs came on the forums, saying they were quite sure that MP was not needed. Forumites protested. BioWare then went back and checked their numbers and admitted their mistake. And fixed it. 

 

What I took from this, as I assume people are not liars or idiots, particularly on something as easy to disprove, is that BioWare made an unintentional mistake. A mistake that created a huge blow-up. A pretty embarrassing mistake as BioWare first released a lengthy statement confirming MP was not needed when the forum was saying it was. So I am not sure why anyone would assume that BioWare would make the same mistake twice. Or suddenly shift gears and decide to tie MP to the SP campaign, when that was, according to them, never their intent, even for ME3.

 

Based on this, and until proof of the contrary, I must admit that I fail to understand how some people can be so extremely opposed to optional, free content. The "taking away resources" argument has been disproved ad nauseam. If you don't want MP, don't play it. Simple as that.  

 

You are close.  the mistake was fixed eventually.  After being told repeatedly the numbers didn't add up:

 

But no mistake was ever admitted to publicly.

 

As such, I have aboslutely no faith that such a mistake won't be repeated.  Particularly given we are already seeing history repeat itself.  I'm quite confident there will be "encouragement" to get people to partake in MP.  

[Vandicus]

1) OGB wasn't part of her romance arc.  You can do it, or get Alistair to, without romancing her (or him)

2)  I'd care.  I don't like having the galactic preparedness map on the main menu.  I don't like it, I don't care about it, I don't want to be reminded of it.

3) You seriously don't think the maps, enemies, powers, etc, weren't done with MP in mind?

4) I have no idea what you're talking about here, so I'm just not going to respond.  Well, I will point out the timed exclusive to SP DLC the XBone has.  That's great customer service for SP fans...

1. "Optimal" ending has you or a companion forced to bang Morrigan. More importantly, I don't know why you'd want Bioware to repeat was in largely regarded as a mistake. 

 

2. Well fair enough, I personally wouldn't be bothered by random stuff on my main menu keeping track of various in-game activities, but there's no particular reason to have them their either.

 

3. I seriously don't, having played MP and singleplayer extensively. MP enemies are statted and operate differently, powers in MP are far more diverse(many don't exist in SP,), weapons are statted differently, the gates(health and shield) operate differently. MP clearly borrowed map assets from a handful of single player side quests, but the single player experience is much larger than the small handful of arena-like designs that existed in MP(and its not like all MP maps were directly pulled from SP, many are modified versions). It is doubtful that the MP team did map design for SP.

 

4. You brought up specific DLCs in regards to MP. All the MP specific-dlcs were "free" dlcs provided by the extra revenue generated by microtransactions. These microtransactions were a system to bypass the not-insignificant gear grind.

[DarkKnightHolmes]

3. I seriously don't, having played MP and singleplayer extensively. MP enemies are statted and operate differently, powers in MP are far more diverse(many don't exist in SP,), weapons are statted differently, the gates(health and shield) operate differently.

 

Umm, as someone who has also played the mp and sp (but didn't bother with any dlc's) in m3 how do enemies act different in mp/sp? They pretty much act the same with the multiplayer AI using the same tactics as their singer player counterpart. Also the new diverse powers came in with the DLC too, vanilla multiplayer has no original powers and they're all the same as the single player ones.

[SirGladiator]

I actually wish MP had 'more' of an impact on the SP game, not less.  Granted it's absolutely wrong to not allow you to have a happy ending to the game unless you play the MP, like they did in ME3, but I'd like to be rewarded in some way for playing the MP, whether it be gaining gold I can use in the game, maybe some cool items, whatever.  I'd like to feel like the things I'm accomplishing in the MP are impacting my SP game in some way, even if it's small.  Of course even without those rewards the MP was super fun in ME3 and almost certainly will be in DAI also, but I'd really like to earn something from it as well.  That'd make the awesomeness even more awesome . 

[Joe25]

Not sure if true or fake, your thoughts?

EDIT: it appeared in Origins in DAI achievements but ur seems it is either fake IR was removed
EDITEDIT: seems legit?

DAI doesn't even have stages or acts this go round. Fake 

[Iakus]

 

I actually wish MP had 'more' of an impact on the SP game, not less.  Granted it's absolutely wrong to not allow you to have a happy ending to the game unless you play the MP, like they did in ME3, but I'd like to be rewarded in some way for playing the MP, whether it be gaining gold I can use in the game, maybe some cool items, whatever.  I'd like to feel like the things I'm accomplishing in the MP are impacting my SP game in some way, even if it's small.  Of course even without those rewards the MP was super fun in ME3 and almost certainly will be in DAI also, but I'd really like to earn something from it as well.  That'd make the awesomeness even more awesome . 

 

I have the exact opposite view.

 

Your reward for playing multiplayer should be getting to play multiplayer.  I don't even trust cosmetic differences.  ME3 claimed that MP would simply be "another path" and we all know how that turned out.

 

I don't want my enjoyment of a game to be dependant on others

I don't want others' enjoyment of a game to be dependant on me

[addiction21]

 

 

Your reward for playing multiplayer should be getting to play multiplayer.  I don't even trust cosmetic differences.  ME3 claimed that MP would simply be "another path" and we all know how that turned out.

 

 

Ya we know. A vague scene after only one of the choices for the ending that came after the credits.

 

You missed out on nothing else You got everything else the game offered except this one tiny few second scene. Yes I think it is bs that you had to do mp, the tablet game or gibbed editor like I did but its also intellectually dishonest to continue to act like single player revolved around multiplayer.

 

Did you miss any companions, missions, interactions, weapons, skills, upgrades, armor, etc...? 
 

[ElitePinecone]

MP is a hot-button issue.  Waiting until the last minute to annouce it will only infuriate those who don't want it.  Especially after the backlash of ME3, where the exact same thing happened

 

In fact, the parallels to 2011-2012  here are kinda eerie. 

 

How do you know it will infuriate those who don't want it?

 

Speaking for other people is always a terrible idea. 

 

I don't think this is nearly as big a deal as you think it is.

[ElitePinecone]

DAI doesn't even have stages or acts this go round. Fake 

 

Read the second last word again a few times

[Iakus]

How do you know it will infuriate those who don't want it?

 

Speaking for other people is always a terrible idea. 

 

I don't think this is nearly as big a deal as you think it is.

Because I read the forums.

 

So is dismissing other people.

 

Obviously, you don't.

[Sidney]

Because I read the forums.

 

So is dismissing other people.

 

Obviously, you don't.

 

 

You are way, way, way, way., way too worked up about a optional element of the game. It is easy to ignore and avoid unlike a lot of even more annoying game elements that I'm willing to bet you embrace wholeheartedly.  Dear god all this for one gasp?!?!?!

[Iakus]

You are way, way, way, way., way too worked up about a optional element of the game. It is easy to ignore and avoid unlike a lot of even more annoying game elements that I'm willing to bet you embrace wholeheartedly.  Dear god all this for one gasp?!?!?!

 

All this for the principle of not forcing multiplayer on a single player game.  

[Mirrman70]

All this for the principle of not forcing multiplayer on a single player game.  

 

how do you know it is being forced?

[Iakus]

Ya we know. A vague scene after only one of the choices for the ending that came after the credits.

 

You missed out on nothing else You got everything else the game offered except this one tiny few second scene. Yes I think it is bs that you had to do mp, the tablet game or gibbed editor like I did but its also intellectually dishonest to continue to act like single player revolved around multiplayer.

 

Did you miss any companions, missions, interactions, weapons, skills, upgrades, armor, etc...? 
 

 

You mean besides

Spoiler

the only ending that even hinted at Shepard surviving?  

 

Yeah, it's a crap scene.  But it's the only one of its kind the player gets.

 

That's a big deal, regardless of how brief a scene it is.

[Iakus]

how do you know it is being forced?

 

4000 EMS 

[ElitePinecone]

Because I read the forums.

 

So is dismissing other people.

 

Obviously, you don't.

 

The forums aren't everybody, though.

 

They're a seriously obsessed, tiny, devoted, probably neurotic section of their fanbase.

 

Bioware cannot and should not use the BSN's potential reaction as a reason to influence the timing of their reveals.

 

Looking at the posts of five or ten "omg I'm worried about multiplayer" fans are absolutely useless when the fate of the game will be decided by millions of other people. 

 

And how can you conclude that people will be annoyed at a late reveal if it's literally just you who keeps saying it and talking about broken trust? I've seen far more posts here that look forward to MP, even *if* we're using this thread as a measurement of fan reactions, which is silly in itself.