67 réponses à ce sujet

[TheThirdRace]

Yes it did, actually. Pre patch there was no way to get high enough galactic readiness to get the highest EMS - this was later fixed, but the mere fact it actually took community outcry for this to be removed is not a good indication. I paid £50 for mass effect 3, All mulitplayer included. Multiplayer was available from the off, it was not a free add on later or anything like that. Also note that the weapons, armor and classes in the 'free' multiplayer dlc still meant that you had to get the things in packs. Also, easily get everything? The card packs are fully randomised, so you can get a ton of repeats, it takes hundreds of hours at least to actually get everything without paying. If I pay to buy a pack, and get an objectively better weapon, and do better as a result, is that not pay to win? Oh, and my multiplayer dlc? Does it seems like, from my comments that i played much of ME3 MP? God, people defending the undefendable makes me so angry. Anyway, this is probably going to get the thread locked or whatever, so i'll drop it.

 

You're appropriating a situation to your feelings which makes your conclusion somewhat not right.

 

It was clearly stated SP would be sufficient by itselft to get the best EMS (Effective Military Strength). The fact it didn't was a bug that was patched. It wasn't a conspiracy theory to get you to play MP, it was a SP bug.

 

The store was semi-random. For example, the Specter packs were 4 level III consumables with a garanteed rare, with a very small chance of ultra-rare. You could "game" the store to have better luck unlocking everything, it was well known to those who read the forums. Following my experience (including at least 20 other friends), you could max your manifest in less than 400 hours (20 hours/week for 20 weeks isn't impossible). Still, it can be a little high, but Platinum didn't exist back then so it would be faster now. Another thing to consider, you could get everything at level 1 relatively fast with a little luck, maxing everything at level 10 was the real time sinker. So it all depends on what you consider "getting everything", is it everything at level 1 or everything at level 10. Since most guns were perfectly viable on Platinum at level 1, I'd be inclined to say it's should be the right metric.

 

I already explained earlier in this thread why Pay2Win is inaccurate in this case, go see for yourself if you want more details. But there's another argument that you can underestimate. A specter pack was something like 2$ (real money) so if I spent over 100M credits at 60K credit/pack to unlock everything, I would have paid a total of about 3334$ in real money to do the same. That's freaking ridiculous, I don't think there's someone out there that actually spent that. And even if there was someone as "generous", the only thing the guy would have over me is a bit stronger version of the same gun I have. I would still mop the floor with him on the scoresheet because since I played to get those guns and he didn't, I've got skills he'll never have unless he plays more. How is that Pay2Win? You really need to revisit the definition of Pay2Win before crying wolf.

 

The amount you paid for MP is subjective, my argument was the game would have sold the same price with or without the MP so MP is basically free. Bioware made a bet they could augment their revenue with those that played the MP and it payed off for everyone with free DLCs.

 

Don't worry about the thread being locked, it won't be as long as we stay civilized. As far as I know, we both have been so there's no reason to lock the thread.

[Reptillius]

Actually except for a couple bug situations you couldn't get repeats.  You could get better versions of something until you maxed it out but you didn't get repeats. And the more that you maxed out the more likely the things you didn't have and wanted were to come up in the packs.

 

So your basically taking all of the assumptions and arguments over ME3 and dumping them into a single shortened complaint here that isn't as accurate as you'd like to claim.

 

 

Also It actually was possible to get the perfect ending before the patch. The patch just made it a lot easier.  The problem was that you had to have a perfect playthrough of all 3 games basically to get it. And it was only figured out that it could be gotten by players once they figured out exactly what things you could "double up" on like getting both the quarians and the Geth.   As well as the fact that there is only one way to get both the Krogan and the Salarians which requires a very specific set of circumstances and character deaths in the first and second game.

[Zebrabox]

I would have liked a full coop campaign, but ME style coop is great too. This feature is massively important to me.

[laudable11]

Very popular in my opinion. Also the better I was at multiplayer (me3), the better I was at the single player. I was able to learn a lot of the powerful combos from people, and was able to implement them in single player. Biotic god indeed! Lol.
I hope I get to learn from people as well by playing dai multiplayer so I can implement strategies, combos etc into my single player playthrough.

This. I got to the point where insanity difficulty felt like easy mode.

[ev76]

This. I got to the point where insanity difficulty felt like easy mode.

Indeed!! (Krogan head butt)

[Coverage]

Meh, MP isn't really a big thing for me. It's nice that they were able to include it, but I wouldn't be upset at all if they hadn't. After a full singleplayer playthrough I might try out MP and see how it goes, but it's something that is certainly on the backburner for me.

 

Heck, I never even tried ME3 MP even though I played through the game twice. Always thought about trying it, but just never did for some reason.

[SofaJockey]

I'd never played multiplayer before ME3 MP.

The idea of being stomped by another player while I'm learning the game doesn't appear - and I still don't like PvP.

 

But ME3 multiplayer was a revelation for me.

Having real-live teammates added an immediacy I found addictive and I put 880hours into in and still play occasionally.

 

The pack drop rate is miserly.

I did spend a little on packs mid-game (though less than the cost of the game itself).

In my opinion pack purchase only has purpose if a pack guarantees a rarity level you want - I bought some packs to up my rare weapons.

Buying packs like lottery tickets in the hope of snagging ultra-rares is a dangerous practice.

 

So pack purchase has to be reasonable.

The way DAMP is approaching it, with the ability to break down unwanted items into useful components seems a good way to go.

 

In any case, as I understand it most revenue comes from the minority of players, so most will buy no or few microtransactions:

 

"The thing to remember is that this whole stinking model revolves around social gaming’s “whales.” (They're apparently called "superfans" now). These are the roughly 2% of gamers who spend money way, way out of proportion to everyone else -- and in doing so make the bulk of the revenue for the publisher." USGamer.

 

There are several benefits to multiplayer:

• It makes you better at combat in the single player game - it really does because it hones your skills.
• It extends the value of the purchase of the game - adding hundreds of hours of extra play, if desired.
• Some missions can truly be awesome (clutching games on Gold whilst other players had bled out).
• With real people there is a random factor that challenges your skills. (I only play with random players)

I'm really looking forward to DAMP.

 

I'll play half the single player game first before dipping into it, but I totally expect to end up having spent more time in the multiplayer than in the single player overall.

[PurpGuy1]

The sooner you jump into multiplayer, the sooner you can unlock the Reaver and be the envy of pugs everywhere

 

Wait too long and no one will care "oh look, another Reaver noob"

[LightningPoodle]

Well I'm pretty sure BioWare have at least mentioned, that when the time comes for co-op story in Dragon Age, they will most likely include it. The multiplayer in DA:I is just one milestone on the road to that possibility. Depending on how many people actually wanted multiplayer is irrelevant; it's here and it's going to be great.

 

 

[VakarianCalibrator]

i love this multiplayer!

[Decepticon Leader Sully]

im looking forward to this MP more than i was ME3s

[Mission]

I don't mind that they added multiplayer. My only compaint is that they added a tacked on multiplayer mode and not a true coop mode in the main story if you wanted it. Would love to go around the main story with a party of 3 other real people with me.

[Reptillius]

I personally would rather not have a co-op storyline mode.  It's usually either a tacked on player or hurts the storyline.  Neither of which do I want.  I'd rather have multiplayer like this.

[KennyKoerperich]

IMO, MP will not hone your skills. Your now in a party of 3 real players wandering around a map. Story mode is you controlling all the action. MP will until you get used to a team, and if that team "actually" uses headsets, you may go far, or you may quit because your tired of dying because your team is a bunch of ________ (insert term) just like D3 has become. I'd rather play solo. I never died in D3 until I started running parties and with people to lazy to use a headset, or to even pay attention to whats going on around them and getting the whole team killed because they want to be _______(insert term).

 

I'd rather it not be added and just give us more storyline, w/ an option to invite friends todo story mode.....

 

MP always is a CF in any game.....

[Yobel]

The biggest reason for me to get the game.

 

If this is true, than you should play Call of Duty or Battlefield, just saying... Seriously? :/ And anwsering the question for the OP - DA went multiplayer cause a lot of people enjoy the experience given by the multi in ME3 (great!) or just the mode in other games alone. Single player didn't hurt, kinda good decision from my perspective.

[bugeyed alien xx]

I loved the me3 mp .The fact that it pits you against the various factions in the game makes it more interesting,I find the pvp style of mp as in halo or destiny quite mindless,Joining up with a group can expand your game knowledge ,getting advice on your character and hooking up with other players for a team game is so much more rewarding.

[Saboteur-6]

@Burricho You are waaaay off base. You could've played through ME3 MP without ever spending real money as everything, everything, was earnable in game. All real $ did was save you time. Either you played 2-4 matches and then opened some RNG chests or you spent $ and opened the same amount of chests instantly. It was certainly not pay to win since that implies that you HAVE to spend real $ to progress when that's fundamentally untrue. DAMP will be the same way and is following the same model. You don't like the option to microtrans? Don't use it.

 

Also your other point about Galactic Readiness was noted by Bioware as there will be no game mechanic linking the two modes so SP and MP can exist seperately.

[Orochi]

aye its a Big draw for me too everything made me 3 co op and in words of Spinal tapped cranked up too 11 with improvement on many vast areas