992 réponses à ce sujet

[LPPrince]

It's just that, if you are going to allocate man power and financial resources to a massive side-project, which a multiplayer component certainly qualifies as, you might as well go for the toolset instead.

 

Think about what you just said though. And I'm pointing this out as someone who...well, my post on the first page says it-

 

Multiplayer- Everyone would have access to it, promotes teamwork and keeps the game being played for presumably a longer time

 

Toolset- Isn't used by everyone, completely ignores the massive console market, and only so many will use what others create

 

:/

 

Believe me if I could use mods on console I would. But yeeeah

 

I'll stick to hoping MP isn't a thing DA is picking up, and hell I'd be for PC getting a toolkit first, but I'm being realistic here.

[LPPrince]

Why should you? Because relatively few will use it, while thousands and thousands will play your MP.

Think about it from their point of view. How many products do you know of that are renowned, and often purchased for mod ability (the only one I can think of is TES, one that's less than ten years old that is), compared to products known for their multiplayer?

 

This. Of the two, MP will always be the more renowned, marketable, and profitable. Doesn't mean everyone will want it or that it should even be a part of a franchise, but from a business standpoint, having to choose one or the other is obvious.

[LPPrince]

Nothing is used by everyone. Most people don't even finish the games they purchase.

 

But its a definite that multiplayer is a safer bet when it comes to "how many consumers will use this content" than a toolkit, considering this is a multi platform title.

[Zjarcal]

Instead of tossing in some half-baked multiplayer to please the EA overlords, how about including a toolset to extend the life of the game and encourage community involvement. Larian Studios managed to do it with a budget of around $4 million. Surely Bioware's got the cash.

 
A toolset would be meaningless to all but one platform, MP would work on all.
 
A toolset doesn't lend itself well to monetizing the game past release, MP does.
 
Finally, people really need to stop being delusional in thinking BW is adding MP just to please EA. It's ridiculous this keeps being thrown around given BW's history and comments from devs themselves.
 

And I sincerely doubt the people who don't want multiplayer are in the minority.

The people who aren't interested in MP and just don't care one way or the other might indeed not be a minority, the people who are diametrically opposed to its inclusion however, definitely are.
 

This is exactly what I keep trying to tell people.  Even if multiplayer didn't affect the SP in any way, it would still be a tacked on piece of flotsam and would be utterly pointless.  150 hours for single player and you want to  even bother with MP WHY?  You could put that extra team and budget to better use!

Pointless to you, tons of fun to many others. For many players MP would be more valuable than a toolset (particularly console players).

Btw, 150 hours is nothing compared to the amount of time I spent in ME3 MP.

For the record, I would love a toolset. If I actually had to pick between MP and a toolset though... ooh, not even sure which one I'd pick, gah.

EDIT: Ninjas all over the place.

[Maria Caliban]

Modding encourages team work, community involvement and particiation, and extends the lives of games.

So does multiplayer. Only it does that while reaching a much larger audience and *making lots of money.*

[Enigmatick]

So does multiplayer. Only it does that while reaching a much larger audience and *making lots of money.*

Through microtransactions.

[AresKeith]

From a business standpoint, it makes more sense to annualize Dragon Age like Assassin's Creed and pump it out like it's fast food. That doesn't mean it makes for a better game. Look at Dragon Age II.

 

Difference is that the AC games are done by a different team each year

[aTigerslunch]

I doubt its toolsets, but maybe BW got permission from Frostbite (who doesn't want to do that).

 

I would figure on being MP as a possibility considering the way the maps are made, it could actually be done without too many problems. As long as it doesn't affect SP, that will be alright with me. I am not a big fan on being made to go online to achieve something in SP mode.

 

just in case wanted to play Watch Dogs, is very minor and very fitting to this topic, decided to close it off if someone feels it would be spoilerific, I don't think it is.

Spoiler

Actually just remembered why I quit Watch Dogs now when I had rented it. Forcing to get into MP in SP isn't my idea of a SP experience.

[pallascedar]

This is exactly what I keep trying to tell people.  Even if multiplayer didn't affect the SP in any way, it would still be a tacked on piece of flotsam and would be utterly pointless.  150 hours for single player and you want to  even bother with MP WHY?  You could put that extra team and budget to better use!

 

Because some people like multiplayer. Multiplayer encourages other types of gamers to buy the game who might not have otherwise bought a single player RPG. The increased revenue means that EA may be more comfortable allocating larger budgets to future DA projects.

[Thermopylae]

It could be that your Hawk and Warden characters function as NPC through a save function, the cut scenes for the latest trailers seem to suggest this.

But I am probably being overly optimistic.

I like the where the latest trailer is going...

 

[pdusen]

And I sincerely doubt the people who don't want multiplayer are in the minority.  The same thing was said about people still disliking the ME 3 endings after the EC and that was also proven to be false, contrary to BioWare's "confidential insider sources."

 

I sincerely doubt that anyone in the actual majority cares at all about whether or not this game has multiplayer.

[Maria Caliban]

I don't see why it has to be one or the other, frankly.
 
Not to sound like Larian Studio's PR rep, but they managed to include a robust co-op system and a full toolset ... and this is a Kickstarter project with a budget of 4 million euro.

Not to sound like a BioWare PR rep, but Divinity has only two followers (with a handful of conversations), Diablo 2 era graphics, a threadbare plot, fewer areas, and fewer skills and abilities. It's also PC only and shipped with a bunch of bugs (I believe they've had five patches so far.)

I've bought every Divinity game and I love them (even Beyond Divinity, which I love as one might a very ugly child) but they are not at all in the same league. If Dragon Age: Inquisition looked like Divinity, they could give us a toolset.

[Deflagratio]

Because some people like multiplayer. Multiplayer encourages other types of gamers to buy the game who might not have otherwise bought a single player RPG. The increased revenue means that EA may be more comfortable allocating larger budgets to future DA projects.

 

 

Plus, if the core mechanics, especially the combat are strong enough, Multiplayer is a great way to experience that without walking the narrative.

[Sidney]

Plus, if the core mechanics, especially the combat are strong enough, Multiplayer is a great way to experience that without walking the narrative.

 

 

MP in ME3 made me a much better player in SP for sure. It let me try out a swarm of guns and powers I might not have otherwise used.

[Han Shot First]

So does multiplayer. Only it does that while reaching a much larger audience and *making lots of money.*

 

It's all about the microtransactions.

 

Meanwhile at EA...

 

[Ryzaki]

Yeah if there somehow manages not to be a horde of micro transactions in DAI's MP I'll eat my hat.

 

I can't blame EA tho. I'd do it to if I could make money doing it.

 

I'm just hoping the MP doesn't effect the SP. As long as they're separate I will not care.

[Eelectrica]

Yeah if there somehow manages not to be a horde of micro transactions in DAI's MP I'll eat my hat.

 

I can't blame EA tho. I'd do it to if I could make money doing it.

 

I'm just hoping the MP doesn't effect the SP. As long as they're separate I will not care.

Other companies seem to get by without resorting to bleeding customers dry with microtransactions.

[Ryzaki]

Other companies seem to get by without resorting to bleeding customers dry with microtransactions.

 

True.

 

But if people didn't buy those microtransactions EA wouldn't do em.

[ElitePinecone]

Other companies seem to get by without resorting to bleeding customers dry with microtransactions.

 

That's irrelevant in this case, though. Also, they can hardly bleed you dry if you never use them.

 

Multiplayer only gets developed if they can make a profit out of it. Like anything in any business, ever. Apart from the money made by attracting new players to the series and encouraging people to keep their discs (reducing second hand sales and boosting DLC sales), microtransactions might be a significant source of income that allows them to make further DLC packs.

 

If there were no microtransactions, there'd probably be no multiplayer, or it'd be a much riskier thing to spend their money on.

 

In any event, the best way to discourage microtransactions is not to buy them. Let people who do use them subsidise future DLC packs, and enjoy playing the game.

[Maria Caliban]

Other companies seem to get by without resorting to bleeding customers dry with microtransactions.

The majority of people who played ME 3 MP never bought anything with real money. I have never heard of anyone being 'bled dry' given that everything was available though regular play.