41 réponses à ce sujet

[Allan Schumacher]

I still would like an answer to my question.

 

Feel free to link me to it (or restate it) since a post like this doesn't tell me what your actual question was.

[Allan Schumacher]

Yeah I am repeating some things.  But at least in part because the same things are being said to me, and I feel the need to correct the inaccuracies.

Feel free to help contribute to breaking the cycle.
 

And it's not the mere presence of MP that bugs me, but the fear of a repeat performance.   I don't have to go into detail about that, you already know all the details.  And yet people keep parroting the same phrases that I heard two years ago.  I hate this feeling of deja vu.   I hate being misled, accidentally or no.  I hate the feeling of uncertainty it's causing now.

As stated, I recognize all this. There's one thing that is going to satisfy you: the game. Worst case scenario, it's a video game that won't appeal to you. Best case scenario, you'll find out from people that it's not an issue, you can pick it up and enjoy it.

[Allan Schumacher]

I also have no trouble imagining how it would play in such a scenario, and it's extremely different from how it would play in single player, at least if I was the solo player.
 
If MP and SP are similar, then SP is being played wholly differently from my preferred playstyle, because my preferred play style revolves around pause and full party control, neither of which are present in MP.  Hence my concern.

We're talking specifically from a mechanics perspective.

 

I can imagine the MP mode existing with DAO's gameplay without any difficulty as well.

 

 

Yes, it means that in MP you aren't pausing and looking at the game in frozen time.  Mechanically, why does that have to mean different gameplay mechanics.  Is there a fundamental difference towards how we see the ability to Pause and have full party control?  Because to me, an MP in DAO would simply mean "I don't have direct control of the party members the other player does" which doesn't actually change any of the game mechanics.  So I'm not sure we're seeing things from the same perspective.

[Allan Schumacher]

I think that it hits people harder is because people loved DAO and the story of DA. Alot felt disappointed by DA2 and for a lot of people DAI is the last straw or redemption for them. They want to love and have one of their favorite series shine. They have been burned my MP aspect being tacked on. Nothing can really change that now. Just it is pretty world-shaking to hear a MP with only just a few months away. Its like why were they keeping something this big hidden for the most part.

 

I want nothing more than for people to love DAI's single player.

 

 

The reality is that MP's announcement would've been bad regardless of when it happened.  Some of the same critics have, in the past, stated that it's mere inclusion would be a deal breaker.  If we had announced it earlier, then it'd just shift the concern to a different topic.

 

The solution is the game.  That's the only way we can regain the trust.  We'll either succeed or fail at it.

[Allan Schumacher]

The reason the two systems are not compatible is the same reason that purely action oriented gameplay (ala Devil May Cry) is not compatible with purely turn-based RNG driven gameplay (ala XCOM:EU).

It is always possible to automate combos to have an auto-attack that ties in with an action attack (DA2 does this relatively well).

The problem is when we start optimizing combat at high difficulty levels. In an action game that is real time there is a great deal of focus on reflex gaming - and this means making sure latency in response is limited, that enemy challenges push your reflexes and reaction time etc. Whereas in a top-down isometric game the focus is much more on strategy and number crunching - if I make move A then they will make move B which will lead to a TPK, so I will make move C which forces them into D and I can finish it with E.

 

Do you think that our Single Player is like XCOM while the Multiplayer is Devil May Cry?

 

I wouldn't consider a game like Devil May Cry to be anything like Dragon Age while unpaused.  The example has more confused me.

[Allan Schumacher]

I'm getting the distinct feeling I'm being told to shut up.

 

Fine...

 

I think he was telling you to be the more mature one.

 

I'm more saying "If people are being snarky to you, being snarky back doesn't help."  Both sides need to disengage along that perspective.  It seems we're at an impasse.  Both sides being loud about it to each other doesn't help.

[Allan Schumacher]

Fallout, as much as I love MP and co-op I would be pretty nervous if Beth said the next Fallout had MP.

 

I would pay a stupid amount of extra if I could co-op through FONV.  Absurd amounts!  My friend and I would probably not play another game....

[Allan Schumacher]

I am of the opinion of, if its gonna be bad  regardless of when it happened, then best to get it out of the way early on and be upfront about an important aspect instead of waiting till almost the last minute. At least that gives those critics or those that pre-ordered more informed news. Even the mention that DAI would have MP  capability would have been enough, since it is a huge deal for those that love or hate it.

 

I'm of the opinion that if announced early, people would assume we're focusing too much on it since the game is clearly being designed around the inclusion of MP.  Those that aren't fans of the idea will reframe a narrative to make it work.  Maybe you wouldn't, specifically, but I'm as convinced it would have happened as many of the poster's opinions of MP.  I do not think that there was an ideal solution for dealing with MP.  Just at best solutions that may or may not be more or less appealing for individuals.

 

 

Regarding preorders, is there anything stopping people from adjusting their preorders?  I mean I don't preorder often, but I don't preorder at a place that ensures my money is gone before I actually get the product.  Does upfront, non-refundable preordering exist?

[Allan Schumacher]

Apologies if I was unclear. I just wanted to set up a contrast for the sake of intelligibility. A game that'd is played in real-time and based on action and in the moment gameplay is very different from a game based on RNG rolls and pure tactics/strategy.

On PC, DAO and DA2 were very much like the tactical/strategy type of games - and both the control scheme and the UI reflected that design. On console DA2 seems to have introduced more action elements and these created serious difficulty spikes and problems - the best examples being the Corypheus boss battle and the Ancient Rock Wraith, each of which had telegraphed attacks that had to be dodged in real time.

So far all of the gameplay videos show a stronger shift toward action combat. The top-down gameplay has only been featured from the console UI and only to pause and issue orders before "jumping back" to single character action combat. The MP video pushes this even further into solo character gameplay.

All of this introduces a problem from a challenge POV, because it pushes the design further away fr purely isometric strategy.

 

This sounds like a generalized concern that would have existed regardless of multiplayer's inclusion.  DA2's combat was deliberately changed to that way, to the plus for some and to the minus for others.

That said, I still feel like an MP mode could exist with DAO's combat style.  We just didn't go with DAO's combat style.

[Allan Schumacher]

Please keep it respectful people.

 

It's important to remember, as well, that if you are finding a poster particularly frustrating you can put them on ignore.

[Allan Schumacher]

How? Pausing is such a core part of DA:0's combat style. Unless pausing is implemented in MP, SP and MP are going to have to be designed and balanced separately. In ME, the difference is less noticeable because time dilation isn't a huge part of the combat so it's fine it they share the same combat design. In DA:I, the only way that they can share the same design is if pausing is no longer a core part of the design or pausing is implemented in MP.

 

Personally, I'm fine if pausing is no longer a core part of the combat design but I can tell you that a lot of SP people will be angry with that.

 

My only real need for pausing in DAO is when I want to give simultaneous orders to a variety of players.  If I am only controlling one character (which is often as I let tactics handle most stuff) I don't need to pause the game that often.

[Allan Schumacher]

Thing is, my RL reflexes are far, far less capable than that of most gamers, let alone my PC's. Personally, my need to look at maps for tactical positions, Spell and Talent lists, and other game minutia craves the use of Pause features.

 

Then maybe multiplayer (at least in something like a tanking role) won't be for you?

 

The single player game still has pause.  From a gameplay mechanics point of view, does this really change how combat plays?  Like, do you think that DAI's MP could be done with DA2's control scheme?

[Allan Schumacher]

That sounds fun on paper but when I actually think about it, it doesn't sound like something I would like. Games with a heavy story focus seem to lose things with co-op. I play SWTOR, and am constantly having to quiet my friends before we talk to a quest giver so that I can actually hear them. It's a minor thing but when I have to stop everything and say, "Hey guys we are about to talk to someone, lets kill it for a minute." it kind of ruins the flow. Also, games with ambient dialogue that you cannot perdict, makes it so that I would constantly worry that I missed something. But everything in between that is really fun.

 

I played through the entirety of SWTOR co-op though, so it wasn't really an issue (we didn't use VOIP though).  So I think it might just depend on the who you're playing with?

 

It's a case of different people having different tolerances for different things.  But you're right in that we wouldn't necessarily be making a game specifically for me and my group of friends.  As such, maybe co-op MP in a FO game isn't in the cards.

[Allan Schumacher]

I've often said that SWTOR is one of the best two-player games I've every played. Load up skype, and get a 4-5 hour block of time every week where you and your buddy can be online at the same time, and that's 3 years worth of fun right there. That's why I never stopped subscribing, I was having a blast.

 

I think the 2 player mode is the best (companions come along) with 4 player with friends being a close second (the lack of companions is a minor negative to it).

[Derek French]

We release MP DLC for free because charging for it has the potential for fracturing the multiplayer community in our game due to customers not having certain maps and being unable to connect and play with friends. It is why we did it in ME3 and it is why we are doing it in DAI.

[Derek French]

So why is it done differently with other EA products then ?

Sorry, but you are asking me to comment on the business practices of another studio of which I have no knowledge. You will have to ask them. I can only tell you how we do things.

[Derek French]

- MP and SP are completely separated storyline wise, ie none of the ME3 war readiness BS.

- you can buy everything with either the loot you harvest in game or with RL cash but EVERYTHING is accessible with either.

- it's co-op so you can't really play on your own.

- multiple classes with various pros and cons.

- Yes

- Yes you can purchase things for Gold or Platinum; Gold is earned, Platinum is purchased for real money

- Sorta, you can try and solo, but it will be hard; I am sure someone will pull it off

- Yes