Wow....so much sudden hate for BW & DA:I just over a completely optional MP mode
The new indoctrination theory rears its ugly head, Multiplayer Gate.
Something doens't make sense? Multiplayer. That one texture was really weird? Multiplayer. Theres a strange noise you can hear occasionally? Multiplayer.
MT is now DA's IT.
Perhaps not, but I'm talking about it from EAs perspective, the ones giving the money, if they hadn't decided they wanted to include mulltiplayer.
EA know that they almost blew it with DA2. EA knows when they have a good thing going (they know nothing if not how to make money). EA knew from the very start they wanted MP, I guarentee it. They however, also didn't wanna rush the game, as should be abundantly clear with the one year pushback..
It is true that in general the industry works like that but at the same time you do have stories of complete mismanagement of the budget because no stipulations were made to what parts of the budget should be spent on what, see for an example All Points Bulletin.
Yeah, but DA:I doesn't look like any of those trainwrecks. And as I feel should be pointed out BioWare aren't entirely green developers who doesn't know how to manage their funding, and EA has since those days tightened the reins on their developers significantly.
Warriors and rogues were restricted since DA2. There's no evidence they'd have brought this back without MP.
Not to mention that there are legitimate design principles behind that decision, like making each class unique and distinctive.
(Ditto for changing healing - it forces the player to consider resource management, encounter design and how they explore.)
If MP is going to be used as a scapegoat, that seems fairly irrational.
To me it just looks like ME3 style multiplayer without it being tied into the singleplayer in any way which I am thankful for.
I am personally not happy for this as this makes it so DAI has to sell even more copies to break even. Not that I'm doubting that it can't do that but I'm wondering how many extra copies is this going to get sold
And my comment was simply observing that the things we've been hearing "Single player will have no effect on MP" were the exact same assurances we heard before and even a bit after ME3's release. It's deja vu all over again, as the saying goes
the thing is, I also remember where that led. And I also remember how that was handled. Neither of which inspires trust in me.
So that leads me to: Why should I trust this time? What's so different? Things seem to be unfolding identically.
I understand what you're saying - but the fundamental difference here seems to be you believe Bioware intentionally misled us about ME3's SP/MP whereas I believe them when they say it wasn't intentional/a bug and thus was fixed. Perhaps I'm too forgiving - perhaps you're too cynical. I don't know in the end but given that it was fixed and I can legitimately reconcile to myself that it was entirely possible to be a bug, I'm ok with looking forward and accepting their statements.
Will I possibly get burned? Maybe. Do I believe I will get burned? No. Will I raise a fuss if I do? For sure xD
I don't know. I'm not looking forward to another couple of months hearing how MP has ruined everything ever. Revealing that a year ago would have just caused a year of people bickering over it.
If there was no multiplayer mode there would be people saying "where the hell is it." People bicker over banal things all the time that really serve no purpose.
I say let them, if it makes them feel better. I can ignore them anyway so no big deal.
Well that is why I said on the hardest difficulties. I don't expect there to be much skill or coordination at all on easy, but on nightmare or whatever, it should require a lot more coordination and skill. Also, unless you are min/maxing, you generally do need to use the trinity in SP too on harder difficulties. Playing DAO or 2 without a tank or a healer is a bit of a pita. I imagine MP will be similar.
DA2 was probably easiest on the highest level with 3 mages and a rogue. There were fights you needed a healer (or a healer made it much, much easier), but there were no fights you needed a tank.
Yesss! I knew we couldn't go their in SP, but, any chance to take a look at Tevinter makes me a happy camper.
Even if it simply to do damage and loot *stuff.
To me it just looks like ME3 style multiplayer without it being tied into the singleplayer in any way which I am thankful for.
I am personally not happy for this as this makes it so DAI has to sell even more copies to break even. Not that I'm doubting that it can't do that but I'm wondering how many extra copies is this going to get sold
I would leave that question and stress to EA's financial analysts.
They never said there wasn't gonna be MP. Actually from the get go, we KNEW there was gonna be some sort of MP in the game. People were just being willfully blind to the obvious.
Don't leave out the indifferent people that don't have a horse in this race.
Okay i have only 2 questions
1. why does it have to be co-op and not competitive? i hate working with others....
2. can i play it by myself
How very Ada Wong of you XD, my guess is you can, if you have a powerful character, equipments and all that stuff, you can try solo the whole thing, you could in ME3 multiplayer
If there was no multiplayer mode there would be people saying "where the hell is it." People bicker over banal things all the time that really serve no purpose.
I say let them, if it makes them feel better. I can ignore them anyway so no big deal.
The Irony of this statement 
Kind of dissapointed that it doesn't give you any bonuses in single player at all. Makes it less likely I will actually use the multiplayer.
The IGN video made it sound like playing MP is completely pointless, that it doesn't benefit us in the game in any way. In ME3 it was a huge benefit, it helped you get the best ending. I can understand if they wanted to change that to something different, like gold, items, etc. but to change it to nothing at all, makes me wonder why I would play it? Of course it looks like fun, not questioning that, ME3's MP was fun too, but you played it not just because it was fun, since so was the main game, you played it was fun and also because it helped with your main game. If MP doesn't in ANY way help with your SP, that means you have the choice between playing something that 'will' help your game, and something that won't. Why, aside from the initial novelty of it, would I choose to play something that won't help me instead of something that will? The MP is going to have to be significantly more fun than the SP in order to get people to play it for the long term if there's not going to be any reward whatsoever for playing it. Here's hoping the IGN folks got it wrong, and there will be some reward after all, since the idea of playing something for 'loot' that you can't actually use is a truly bizarre, and self-defeating, concept indeed.
Guest_PaladinDragoon_*
It has nothing to do with Antisocial. There are gamers out there who prefer SP and strong story. For some MP take away from the story. Also to a certain extent for these SP gamers. It feel as if the gaming industry is pushing them out. Basically saying "Thanks but you are no longer wanted here."
I still consider myself a SP gamer. ME3 MP was the first MP I actually enjoyed due to the team work.
I don't know. I'm not looking forward to another couple of months hearing how MP has ruined everything ever. Revealing that a year ago would have just caused a year of people bickering over it.
I guess. Damned if you do damned if you don't
EA know that they almost blew it with DA2. EA knows when they have a good thing going (they know nothing if not how to make money). EA knew from the very start they wanted MP, I guarentee it. They however, also didn't wanna rush the game, as should be abundantly clear with the one year pushback..
.....
You seem to have much more faith in them than me....we'll see what happens I guess.
Don't leave out the indifferent people that don't have a horse in this race.
You aren't really a factor since you don't add or subtract from the issue 
You were gonna buy the game either way.
Warriors and rogues were restricted since DA2. There's no evidence they'd have brought this back without MP.
Aside from the feedback? And a game from 2009 having more player options and choice in terms of abilities, weaponry, and equipment?
But, you know, why try and keep interest in the fans you already have - or had - when you can spread yourself so thin by trying to attract everyone else?
IMPORTANT QUESTION:
During one of the demos we saw missions on the war table that had you send agents, etc that had timers on them. We were told that the time passes even if you don't play the game, but that there are ways to speed up their completion.
Are the ways to speed up their completion playing Multiplayer matches with those agents?
This is a very good question. If this is the case, then it automatically refutes any claims on MP not affecting the SP.
Wow....so much sudden hate for BW & DA:I just over a completely optional MP mode
This particular hate has been simmering for a couple of years now.
Largely because there seem to be different definitions of "optional"
I understand what you're saying - but the fundamental difference here seems to be you believe Bioware intentionally misled us about ME3's SP/MP whereas I believe them when they say it wasn't intentional/a bug and thus was fixed. Perhaps I'm too forgiving - perhaps you're too cynical. I don't know in the end but given that it was fixed and I can legitimately reconcile to myself that it was entirely possible to be a bug, I'm ok with looking forward and accepting their statements.
Will I possibly get burned? Maybe. Do I believe I will get burned? No. Will I raise a fuss if I do? For sure xD
I see it as you are both right in the end. BioWare said you can get the best endings to the game without multiplayer.
Which was the best ending then? You see the crux of the problem when some believe it to be Shepards body taking a breath. I personally don't see it that way and never even saw that ending in my playthroughs, and I did play multiplayer before the variables were fixed.
In regards to Inquisition, Iakus you are being irrational, but frankly I just don't care anymore. Believe what you want.
The IGN video made it sound like playing MP is completely pointless, that it doesn't benefit us in the game in any way. In ME3 it was a huge benefit, it helped you get the best ending. I can understand if they wanted to change that to something different, like gold, items, etc. but to change it to nothing at all, makes me wonder why I would play it? Of course it looks like fun, not questioning that, ME3's MP was fun too, but you played it not just because it was fun, since so was the main game, you played it was fun and also because it helped with your main game. If MP doesn't in ANY way help with your SP, that means you have the choice between playing something that 'will' help your game, and something that won't. Why, aside from the initial novelty of it, would I choose to play something that won't help me instead of something that will? The MP is going to have to be significantly more fun than the SP in order to get people to play it for the long term if there's not going to be any reward whatsoever for playing it. Here's hoping the IGN folks got it wrong, and there will be some reward after all, since the idea of playing something for 'loot' that you can't actually use is a truly bizarre, and self-defeating, concept indeed.
Why have MP? Because EA loves MP
Retour en haut
