2661 réponses à ce sujet

[Bayonet Hipshot]

The above example demonstrates my less than enthusiastic reception of DAMP.

 

To me good RPG's are all about Legacy. They are games that we the players love to enjoy again and again. RPGers are in for the long haul, not the newest flash in the pan current rages. I continue to play games that matter to me.

 

The Baldurs Gate Series, Icewindale, the TES Series. These games have a HUGE legacy to them.

 

We  may want to play a game YEARS after it is out of fashion.

 

Will we be able to do this with DAMP? 1 year in, how about 5 years in, heck how about 10 years on?

 

Think about firing up DAI 5 years in the future, do you think that Multi-player button will still work? Or will it be a sad testament to the current lack of foresight.

 

Let the DAMPers enjoy this obviously transient thrill they are experiencing right now, us RPGers will lovingly embrace the game long after they have moved on.

 

For those of us that care about the future of RPG gaming and the legacy of the games, Thank God for good ol' Single Player.

 

In 5 years time, you will try to log in only to find out that since the server has been taken down, the DRM mechanism now bugs out which means you have to disable your internet or be unable to fully access the game. 

[Ryzaki]

Citation needed.

 

Agreed.

 

MP keeps people playing which makes them more likely to buy stuff like DLC and the like.

 

I don't like MP but it serves a very good function.

 

Not to mention the micro-transaction cash cow. It makes perfect business sense even if I hate it personally.

[Bayonet Hipshot]

As  a constellation many people are still play me3 mp. So bw does know how to make a worth wild mp.

 

Two years ? Wow, that is a "big" achievement isn't it. 

 

Let's see if there are other RPGs that are still being played long after two years.

 

Oh look ! There's Skyrim. There is Morrowind. Heck there are a group of talented modders who are legally building Morrowind from the ground up in Skyrim's new engine, the game is called Skywind. 

 

Don't see that happening with MP and certainly don't see it happening with ME3 MP. MPs only last as long as the servers are up. You can bet that EA will take down ME3's servers when ME4 comes along. 

 

MP shortens the game longevity by making it dependent on servers. If people are looking for game longevity, games that offer toolset is the way to go, not tacked on, shoehorned, simplistic, Diablo-ripoff MP. 

[Bayonet Hipshot]

Yeah, I know lol between the Destiny forum and Dragon Age: Inquisition forum I hit my drama limit. I think a nice break from the two would do wonders for me.

 

I personally prefer the Witcher forum myself. 

[The Night Haunter]

Agreed.

 

MP keeps people playing which makes them more likely to buy stuff like DLC and the like.

 

I don't like MP but it serves a very good function.

 

Not to mention the micro-transaction cash cow. It makes perfect business sense even if I hate it personally.

I actually love this aspect of MP. If I care enough I'll earn what I need (I don't buy stuff, I'll but in the elbow grease [lol] and earn it), but everyone else that buys the stuff, well, that earns money for Bioware to make more and better games. It turns out well for me, a tax on others

[NedPepper]

I am just peeved that Bioware was clowning acting like that multiplayer was a maybe thing, they damn well knew it was gonna be in the game from the get go at least 2 years ago, MP look interesting though

 

 

I have to wonder if they were anticipating this polarizing reaction.  I think they waited as long as they could to try and build goodwill and hype.  The rage at MP in this thread has probably put a big damper on the positive hype.  This is the kind of thread where I'm glad I'm not a dev.

[The Night Haunter]

Two years ? Wow, that is a "big" achievement isn't it. 

 

Let's see if there are other RPGs that are still being played long after two years.

 

Oh look ! There's Skyrim. There is Morrowind. Heck there are a group of talented modders who are legally building Morrowind from the ground up in Skyrim's new engine, the game is called Skywind. 

 

Don't see that happening with MP and certainly don't see it happening with ME3 MP. MPs only last as long as the servers are up. You can bet that EA will take down ME3's servers when ME4 comes along. 

 

MP shortens the game longevity by making it dependent on servers. If people are looking for game longevity, games that offer toolset is the way to go, not tacked on, shoehorned, simplistic, Diablo-ripoff MP. 

Hate to tell you this my friend, but NWN is still being played. That came out over a decade ago. This is due to two factors, one the tool kit is amazing, and two the multiplayer allows friends to build entire worlds together. It is the best simulation of a true table top DnD game. Albeit limited by the time it takes to make all the scripts, etc.

 

So MP (in a general sense) certainly doesn't limit a games lifespan. It can, but then so can a crappy SP game (I'm looking at you Bound in Flames, I had such high hopes  ).

[hoorayforicecream]

Two years ? Wow, that is a "big" achievement isn't it. 

 

Let's see if there are other RPGs that are still being played long after two years.

 

Oh look ! There's Skyrim. There is Morrowind. Heck there are a group of talented modders who are legally building Morrowind from the ground up in Skyrim's new engine, the game is called Skywind. 

 

Don't see that happening with MP and certainly don't see it happening with ME3 MP. MPs only last as long as the servers are up. You can bet that EA will take down ME3's servers when ME4 comes along. 

 

MP shortens the game longevity by making it dependent on servers. If people are looking for game longevity, games that offer toolset is the way to go, not tacked on, shoehorned, simplistic, Diablo-ripoff MP. 

 

I don't understand. The single player portion of ME3 is still playable offline, and will continue to be so even after EA shuts down those servers, just like the single-player portions of all of the other games that have had their MP shut down are still playable. How does that even shorten the lifetime of the game? It places a limited lifespan on the MP portion of the game, but that doesn't equate to the entire game's lifespan.

[Allan Schumacher]

What does mp have to do with making anyone skeptical, it has no integration with sp. I would understand this 6 month back when we barely had any info on dai. Why does mp make the difference with a 200+hour sp game?

 

Their skepticism exists because at the release of ME3, it was impossible to get the breath scene without doing something to improve galactic readiness.

[Ryzaki]

I actually love this aspect of MP. If I care enough I'll earn what I need (I don't buy stuff, I'll but in the elbow grease [lol] and earn it), but everyone else that buys the stuff, well, that earns money for Bioware to make more and better games. It turns out well for me, a tax on others

 

Yeah I already play SWTOR so spending time on luck based missions in MP is not my cup of tea XD

 

Plus if I want to play with friends I rather play a fps or a MMO. More fun IMO.

[Maugrim]

Look I liked DA2 a whole bunch but it just really puts a nail in the coffin of people complaining about MP affecting the quality of SP.  DA:I  is pretty clearly going to be a better game than DA2, short of half of the game code just up and vanishing once the game has shipped. Yet it has had MP built into it for years where MP for DA2 was never given more than half a thought.  Proof positive that MP does not have to mean a lesser game.  So while I didn't play ME3 MP for as long as some (certainly played it longer than I did single player considering my distaste of the ending) I am very much looking forward to MP.

[cjones91]

I don't understand. The single player portion of ME3 is still playable offline, and will continue to be so even after EA shuts down those servers, just like the single-player portions of all of the other games that have had their MP shut down are still playable. How does that even shorten the lifetime of the game? It places a limited lifespan on the MP portion of the game, but that doesn't equate to the entire game's lifespan.

It means one part of the game is lost forever,if someone wanted to play ME3 MP four years from now then they likely won't be able to because the servers are gone.

[Maria Caliban]

The above example demonstrates my less than enthusiastic reception of DAMP.
 
To me good RPG's are all about Legacy. They are games that we the players love to enjoy again and again. RPGers are in for the long haul, not the newest flash in the pan current rages. I continue to play games that matter to me.
 
The Baldurs Gate Series, Icewindale, the TES Series. These games have a HUGE legacy to them.

Baldur's Gate and Icewind Dale had MP.

Maybe when suggesting multiplayer hurts legacy, you should not include games with multiplayer as examples of games with great legacy?

[hoorayforicecream]

It means one part of the game is lost forever,if someone wanted to play ME3 MP four years from now then they likely won't be able to because the servers are gone.

 

Oh, so this is a semantic argument. You're defining the game as "the full sum of all of its parts", and if any part is no longer in service or available, then the game no longer considered to be alive. 

 

If that is the case, then single player games die when any DLC becomes no longer available. Is that correct?

[Biotic Sage]

Their skepticism exists because at the release of ME3, it was impossible to get the breath scene without doing something to improve galactic readiness.

 

And I'm confident Bioware learned from that, so I understand the skepticism regarding this aspect but I don't share in it.

[cjones91]

Oh, so this is a semantic argument. You're defining the game as "the full sum of all of its parts", and if any part is no longer in service or available, then the game no longer considered to be alive. 

 

If that is the case, then single player games die when any DLC becomes no longer available. Is that correct?

I'm just pointing out that the game's life gets shortened argument also applies to people who regularly play multiplayer.If the servers are gone then they are out of luck.

 

And as for the second part,no that's not correct.A single player game is not dependent on servers to function unlike a multiplayer game.You can play a single player game whenever you want,even years down the line.

[Gloomfrost]

Baldur's Gate and Icewind Dale had MP.

Maybe when suggesting multiplayer hurts legacy, you should not include games with multiplayer as examples of games with great legacy?

Maria please try to re-read my OP, it was heartfelt and reflects many of the joys we all share as RPGers.

 

When you think Baldurs Gate do you really think Multi-player?.....really?  i would love to see you say yes publicly.

 

come on now Maria be honest, i know you can do it!

 

Both of those examples i used are perfect examples of forgotten Multi-player, have you tried to play Baldurs Gate or Icewindale Multi-player in say oh the last 10 years?...

 

yeah i thought so

 

Come on Maria your a vet here, read don't react.

[oceanicsurvivor]

It means one part of the game is lost forever,if someone wanted to play ME3 MP four years from now then they likely won't be able to because the servers are gone.

 

There's also a good chance that in 4 years time, with PS4/XboxOne gen in full swing there will be a rerelease with visual upgrades etc, like what Halo is doing now. If there is still an audience remaining, I think the game will still be around in some form. (albeit, that would most likely mean paying for it again).

[J-Reyno]

The above example demonstrates my less than enthusiastic reception of DAMP.

 

To me good RPG's are all about Legacy. They are games that we the players love to enjoy again and again. RPGers are in for the long haul, not the newest flash in the pan current rages. I continue to play games that matter to me.

 

The Baldurs Gate Series, Icewindale, the TES Series. These games have a HUGE legacy to them.

 

We  may want to play a game YEARS after it is out of fashion.

 

Will we be able to do this with DAMP? 1 year in, how about 5 years in, heck how about 10 years on?

 

Think about firing up DAI 5 years in the future, do you think that Multi-player button will still work? Or will it be a sad testament to the current lack of foresight.

 

Let the DAMPers enjoy this obviously transient thrill they are experiencing right now, us RPGers will lovingly embrace the game long after they have moved on.

 

For those of us that care about the future of RPG gaming and the legacy of the games, Thank God for good ol' Single Player.

 

That awkward moment when you realize a single person doesn't have the power to determine what has, or should have, value to others.

 

Welp.

[Ispan]

Maria please try to re-read my OP, it was heartfelt and reflects many of the joys we all share as RPGers.

 

When you think Baldurs Gate do you really think Multi-player?.....really?  i would love to see you say yes publicly.

 

come on now Maria be honest, i know you can do it!

 

Both of those examples i used are perfect examples of forgotten Multi-player, have you tried to play Baldurs Gate or Icewindale Multi-player in say oh the last 10 years?...

 

yeah i thought so

 

Come on Maria your a vet here, read don't react.

 

The original argument appeared to be that the very existence of MP shortens the lifespan of a game as a whole.  Maria returned with examples of games with incredibly long lifespans that were not shortened in any way by the inclusion of a separate MP experience.  It seems pretty clear >.>

[hoorayforicecream]

I'm just pointing out that the game's life gets shortened argument also applies to people who regularly play multiplayer.If the servers are gone then they are out of luck.

 

And as for the second part,no that's not correct.A single player game is not dependent on servers to function unlike a multiplayer game.

 

But as we've established, a multiplayer game doesn't die when the servers go down. It just becomes a single player game. So I'm still confused as to why you think it would decrease the game's overall lifespan. Are you taking some sort of amortized average or something?

 

Not that it really matters. The goal of the extended lifespan is actually not to make a game last into perpetuity. The goal of extending the lifespan is to keep as many players playing for as many calendar days from launch as possible. It's far more valuable to have 100,000 players play for six months after launch than it is to have 10,000 players play for six years. Why? Because 100,000 players possibly buying DLC is a lot better than 10,000. Continued development for the game will only last for another six to sixteen months before the team moves on to other projects. There's a huge dropoff in the revenue stream after that first year. 

[Iakus]

Agreed.

MP keeps people playing which makes them more likely to buy stuff like DLC and the like.

I don't like MP but it serves a very good function.

Not to mention the micro-transaction cash cow. It makes perfect business sense even if I hate it personally.

As ish ten mentioned, the dependence on servers. Perhaps I should have said "this incarnation of MP". In a year, or five, or ten the servers get sunset red and then an entire feature of the game is gone, you're wondering what this "galactic readiness" thing on the main menu is. And that's assuming g the online DRM will even let you start up the game.