46 réponses à ce sujet

[Wulfram]

Does it actually need it though? or is it just the flavour of the time?

 

They can stick micro-transactions in it

[thehomeworld]

No this series doesn't need MP just like ME didn't need it either it'll take away from time they could be using to fix bugs or other issues they'll also gimp the LIs and any quests just to make room for all the work that MP will place on them and I'ld really rather not see them do that again.

[ElitePinecone]

 they'll also gimp the LIs and any quests just to make room for all the work that MP will place on them and I'ld really rather not see them do that again.

 

How do you know this?

 

Edit: and how on earth would multiplayer programmers, artists and designers "gimp" the LIs or quests, which are created by writers and cinematic animators? They're completely different parts of the team!

[addiction21]

How do you know this?

 

 

 

They don't know it. Just making up excuses as to why multiplayer is bad.
 

[Paul E Dangerously]

They don't know it. Just making up excuses as to why multiplayer is bad.
 

 

Like you need excuses. The more multiplayer focused a Bioware game is, the more the campaign suffers. At one end you had BG2 (simply "had" multiplayer) -> ME3 (MP was touted as a thing, intruded into SP) -> NWN (Focused entirely around MP and the toolset, campaign took a noticeable nosedive).

[Voxr]

One thing that Mass Effect 3's multiplayer made me concerned about was the stupid rule-of-cool stuff that was thrown in to spice things up, and in Dragon Age, I'd always fear that the same thing would happen to that as well. Perhaps they wouldn't, but you never know with these guys. First and foremost, I'd want it to stick to the lore of the universe, and have proper, sensible settings for co-op quests. If something like PvP were to make the scene, I'd love for that to have a convincing setting as well, like if there was some place in Thedas where you actually had arenas. Hell, Orzammar gives us the perfect opportunity with the Provings. Also, no voice chat. I'd end up abandoning the campaign if I hear somebody speaking, or worse, playing music over the mic like in ME3's MP.

I think some sort of Proving/tournament would be an interesting idea

[ElitePinecone]

Like you need excuses. The more multiplayer focused a Bioware game is, the more the campaign suffers. At one end you had BG2 (simply "had" multiplayer) -> ME3 (MP was touted as a thing, intruded into SP) -> NWN (Focused entirely around MP and the toolset, campaign took a noticeable nosedive).

 

This is:

 

1. Subjective. I thought ME3's campaign was amazing.

2. Correlation, not causation. Even if you think all those "bad" campaigns happened to occur in games that have multiplayer, it doesn't prove that they're related.

 

Do you deny the possibility that a team could create a game with both an expansive singleplayer and a multiplayer component? If so, why?

[Paul E Dangerously]

This is:

 

1. Subjective. I thought ME3's campaign was amazing.

2. Correlation, not causation. Even if you think all those "bad" campaigns happened to occur in games that have multiplayer, it doesn't prove that they're related.

 

Do you deny the possibility that a team could create a game with both an expansive singleplayer and a multiplayer component? If so, why?

 

When it comes to RPGs, arguably, yes.

 

The last time I can remember anything that had both SP and MP and was still top-tier was probably BG. It's not as much of an issue for other types of games - I love the Saints Row series to pieces - but it really doesn't seem to mesh that well when it's an RPG.

 

Like ME3, any intrusion into the campaign, any any negative effects because of it, will paint the entire thing into a negative light. Is it right? Probably not.

 

The MP intrusion into the campaign was only one of that game's flaws, but the fact anyone ever thought it was a good idea shows a fundamental misunderstanding in the design process somewhere. Which is why they eventually got rid of it, but it never should have been implemented at all.

[ElitePinecone]

So... the solution is just to make a separate game mode and not have it linked to the campaign, I guess?

 

Or, if it is linked, have it be a real alternative, rather than in ME3 when it was actually *required* to see SP content for a good three months or so.

 

I don't think anyone would have a big issue with MP if it was just one method among many to gather Inquisition power points. You could explore the maps for three hours and find ancient ruins or sidequests to add to the Inquisition's prestige, or play a few rounds of multiplayer. That doesn't seem like a bad thing as long as there's actually enough singleplayer content this time to see everything.

 

After all, it's hardly an intrusion if you don't need to use it. 

 

I'm just wondering because it seems like so many people are opposed to the idea of multiplayer in principle, as if it makes the game worse by magic.... but everything is a result of development decisions and it is definitely possible to make a game that has both modes, and that works well. 

[TRfore]

I would pre-order in a second if me3 style mutliplayer is included. 

[DisturbedJim83]

So... the solution is just to make a separate game mode and not have it linked to the campaign, I guess?

 

Or, if it is linked, have it be a real alternative, rather than in ME3 when it was actually *required* to see SP content for a good three months or so.

 

I don't think anyone would have a big issue with MP if it was just one method among many to gather Inquisition power points. You could explore the maps for three hours and find ancient ruins or sidequests to add to the Inquisition's prestige, or play a few rounds of multiplayer. That doesn't seem like a bad thing as long as there's actually enough singleplayer content this time to see everything.

 

After all, it's hardly an intrusion if you don't need to use it. 

 

I'm just wondering because it seems like so many people are opposed to the idea of multiplayer in principle, as if it makes the game worse by magic.... but everything is a result of development decisions and it is definitely possible to make a game that has both modes, and that works well. 

I'm opposed in principle because of what MP always leads to which is Micro Transaction Overload where you will have to pay for weapons and attack combo packs  and then Dragon Age becomes just another MP hack and slash it has a USP and one of the few remaining almost "Pure SP" games,what you and others are asking for is the exact same thing that happened with "Zombies" originally if you wanted to kill zombies you bought a Zombie game like Res Evil or Dead Rising then those same people started with "but I want Zombies in COD/etc it wud be awesomesauce" and now the is hardly a game around that does not have some zombie mode tacked on to please those people.While I would not be opposed to a Co-Op campaign anything else including a ME style Horde mode is a no go for me.

 

I would rather they spend time money and resources enhancing the core game or adding additional Story content improving what is already there instead of tacking on a MP mode to please 1 portion of the fanbase and their insatiable need to boast to others in a sword/staff waving contest.

[ElitePinecone]

I'm sympathetic to the concern that this will result in a compromised singleplayer, but I don't really find much that's compelling about that argument. 

 

If you're not going to use the multiplayer, why care if it's full of microtransactions? That's something for other people to weigh up, and use if they want to. If nobody buys the microtransaction packs, they'll stop including them in games. But I don't see the logic in worrying about something that would be optional. 

 

If there's a brilliant singleplayer included alongside the optional multiplayer, how does it follow that the entire game will become a hack-and-slash-fest? You'd already be getting a (hopefully) satisfying game even without playing MP for a second - but it's there for people who want to use it.

 

Also, it's already been mentioned several times that Bioware likely couldn't take the resources and money from multiplayer and use it on the singleplayer, that's not how budgets work. If EA gave them more money to make a MP mode, it's because the game was expected to earn more money and sell more copies with an MP mode. Cutting the MP doesn't mean they get to use those resources for singleplayer, it probably means they don't get to use them at all.

 

(There's probably a law of diminishing returns with singleplayer, too - at some point adding extra content is going to be more expensive than the extra profit made from doing so, because that content or feature isn't going to convince many people to play the game who aren't on board already. If 100 hours of content gets you X sales, is 110 hours really going to increase the sales figures that much? Multiplayer is, like it or not, a feature that gets people to buy games - it would likely be easier to justify spending funds on it.)

[simpatikool]

instead of tacking on a MP mode to please 1 portion of the fanbase and their insatiable need to boast to others in a sword/staff waving contest.

This is not an objective observation, rather an emotional judgement based on your own personal view.

[SofaJockey]

This matter has been kicked around at length and until BioWare confirms either way,

this discussion tends to bring out the zealots on both sides.

 

What do we know?

 

Essentially nothing, but these comments have crept out in the past - treat them with a bucket of salt:

 

Nov 2011 - http://www.eurogamer...agon-age-report

Aug 2012 - http://www.vg247.com...evealed-report/ (BioWare survey)

Sep 2013 - http://www.giantbomb...player-1428754/

Sep 2013 - http://www.computera...on-multiplayer/

Feb 2014 - http://www.gamespot....r/1100-6417567/

Jul 2014 - http://www.xbox.com/...bid=pfb2BlYOlAP ('1-4 players' line was posted then subsequently deleted)

Jul 2014 - https://twitter.com/...772596947197954 Dragon Age 'no news' tweet

Jul 2014 - http://www.examiner....age-inquisition examiner.com article

Jul 2014 - http://www.dragonage...ition--bit.html Russian unverified MP achievement

 

Other links

 

May 2014 - http://askagamedev.t...y-away-from-the Does MP steal SP resources? (part 1)

May 2014 - http://askagamedev.t...takes-away-from (part 2)

[ElitePinecone]

Hunh. That is a lot of links.

 

The Examiner isn't really a reputable news source, but apart from that there's quite a lot of good stuff there. 

 

I think the earliest Kotaku and Eurogamer reports of MP in November 2011 are the most compelling, considering that they mention the game is running on Frostbite. 

 

(We didn't find out officially that DAI was using Frostbite until September 2012 - ten months after those reports.)

[jtav]

I'm not going to play MP--bad connection and no twitch skills--but other people can knock themselves out. SP seems ridiculously meaty.

[Shapeshifter777]

Just one possibility:

http://youtu.be/xEHDjtnH024?t=3m26s

 

Holy crap.  Yes, please.  I would love to DM in the Dragon Age setting against a friend or even a bunch of bots.  Always enjoyed the DM Client in NWN.

 

Another possible implementation of multiplayer I would like to see is class-based objective based gameplay with different factions warring it out on different maps.  For example one map could be Grey Wardens vs. Dark Spawn, one could be Templars vs. Blood Mages and demons, Elves vs. Werewolves, Dwarves vs. other Dwarves and other combinations that make sense for Dragon Age's lore.  I would of course hope for the option to play offline with AI in these modes for those who don't want to play online, such as myself.

[Shapeshifter777]

 

 

Like ME3, any intrusion into the campaign, any any negative effects because of it, will paint the entire thing into a negative light. Is it right? Probably not.

 

 

This is exactly why I do not want co-op or anything like ME3's multiplayer that is in any way linked to the main single player experience.  That said, I *do* want multiplayer that tells the story of other parts of Thedas and other characters / creatures.

[AppealToReason]

thing with any dev studio when making a game if they say they arent saying anything, then it likely is there but isnt ready to talk about yet, but if it definately wasnt in then bioware would have outright said no right from the off, so give it time, there is still 3 1/2 months to wait yet

 

Bioware, is there a toolset? "No"

 

Bioware, is there a CC in the Keep? "No"

 

Bioware, is there a tactical camera? "Yes"

 

Bioware, is there day 1 story DLC? "No"

 

Bioware, is there fast travel? "Yes"

 

Bioware, is there MP? "We are not ready to comment at this time"

[NextArishok]

Bioware, is there a toolset? "No"

 

Bioware, is there a CC in the Keep? "No"

 

Bioware, is there a tactical camera? "Yes"

 

Bioware, is there day 1 story DLC? "No"

 

Bioware, is there fast travel? "Yes"

 

Bioware, is there MP? "We are not ready to comment at this time"

No swimming or walking in shin deep water.  Invisible wall.

[rafoquinha]

I will never understand why people are negative about coop. I cant remember a single game that was bad BECAUSE of coop or BECAUSE of multiplayer. I do recall, howerver, games that got  much better WITH coop and also games that were bad because they were simply bad, regardless if you were playing single or coop.