361 réponses à ce sujet

[xkg]

^
If this had seperate budget, and it is completly separated there should be 2 versons to chose from.
I would gladly pay even 1$ less for version without multiplayer built-in, just to show how I not care about that.

You could also look at this from two separate point of views.

Would the game cost less without it?

1. No. Then you're getting something extra for the same amount of money as I have to pay.
2. Yes. Then I am paying for you to have something extra in your game.

It's very easy to say if you don't like it don't play it. But I am paying for something I am not going to play.
Make it free standalone or free DLC product you can download and all will be fine.

[Fredward]

It's hard for me to even wrap my head around some of the pettiness and childishness in this thread.

[KoorahUK]

^
If this had seperate budget, and it is completly separated there should be 2 versons to chose from.
I would gladly pay even 1$ less for version without multiplayer built-in, just to show how I not care about that.

You could also look at this from two separate point of views.

Would the game cost less without it?

1. No. Then you're getting something extra for the same amount of money as I do.
2. Yes. Then I am paying for you to have something extra in your game.

It's very easy to say if you don't like it don't play it. But I am paying for something I am not going to play.
Make it free standalone or free DLC product you can download an all will be fine.

I understand your point, but do you think the game would actually be sold any cheaper if MP didn't exist?

[xkg]

I understand your point, but do you think the game would actually be sold any cheaper if MP didn't exist?

 

Seriously I have no clue if it would. That's why talked about both cases. Deosn't seems fair, no matter how you look at it. IMO of course, as always.

[KoorahUK]

Also its a hell of a slippery slope this:

 

I don't play Mage, why do I have to pay the same price as everyone else?

I don't do romances, why do I have to pay the same price as everyone else?

I don't play females, why do i have to pay the same price as everyone else?

 

The "I am paying for something I'll never use" argument can be applied all across the shop and I for one don't want to get into a Sims style model where people buy a core game and bolt on the content they want.

 

This is the product they are selling, this is the price they are selling the package for. 

[xkg]

Also its a hell of a slippery slope this:

 

Yes it is, that's why I had to say it is just IMO. Otherwise I would say it is a fact and wouldn't let it go so easily.

All i can do in this case is to simply state my thoughts and move on.

[SomeoneStoleMyName]

Because some had to

[Nohvarr]

Also its a hell of a slippery slope this:

 

I don't play Mage, why do I have to pay the same price as everyone else?

I don't do romances, why do I have to pay the same price as everyone else?

I don't play females, why do i have to pay the same price as everyone else?

 

The "I am paying for something I'll never use" argument can be applied all across the shop and I for one don't want to get into a Sims style model where people buy a core game and bolt on the content they want.

 

This is the product they are selling, this is the price they are selling the package for. 

I would LOVE to see how well a big budge Triple A titles that sells it's game in modular elements, would go over with gamers.

 

Company X: All right, We've decided to make a big budget Dark souls like game but since we're putting 'Players First' we'll allow you to purchase elements of the game individually. So you can purchase say the Single players for $30 and the MP for $20. Now each class (Rogue, Mage, Warrior) is $5 bucks each, the crafting system is another $2 dollars. If you want Axes, Polearms, maces etc that's another $2 per weapon category.....

 

I think you see where I am going with this.....

[VikingDream]

Hell if works like ME3's MP that was better then the single player story driven campaign i played ME3 story once and then fell into a pit of hate waiting for the extended cut which i hated and never played single player again until i got MEHEM like 6 months ago.

 

The MP i played loads from finishing the campaign until they released the earth maps i think i was on on almost daily and doing gold runs for fun with any class after unlocking a fair bit the game became a grind fest with RGN look from spector packs it became less fun over time but the MP had a really good feel for months.  

[Paul E Dangerously]

The funny thing is that the game they're so heavily "inspired" by had no multiplayer at all, the series will never have multiplayer (TESO being a wholly different subsidiary and unrelated to the actual games), and sold ten million copies on one platform alone.

[xkg]

Also its a hell of a slippery slope this:

 

I don't play Mage, why do I have to pay the same price as everyone else?

I don't do romances, why do I have to pay the same price as everyone else?

I don't play females, why do i have to pay the same price as everyone else?

 

The "I am paying for something I'll never use" argument can be applied all across the shop and I for one don't want to get into a Sims style model where people buy a core game and bolt on the content they want.

 

This is the product they are selling, this is the price they are selling the package for. 

 

After some more thoughts, I have to say something more. The things you listed are integral parts of single player game. I do agree to buy the single player part of the game so I know what I am paying for. Maybe in another playthrough I'll decide to play as a Mage or to do some romances. Multiplayer I am 100% sure I am not going to touch. There are far more interesting games to play it, WOT, War Thunder etc.

 

Yes they are selling it as a package, but they do have separate packages for players to chose from. Deluxe edition costs more for a few meaningles in game stuff. You have the choice to not to pay for that. Same goes for Inquisitors edition for some physical shinies.

 

Why can't be it the same case for multiplayer ?

[thebigbad1013]

I think I write this in pretty much every single thread about multiplayer but...I honestly have zero problem with multiplayer being added to the game--as long as it is entirely seperate from the main game. I don't want to be forced to play multiplayer in order to complete the singleplayer campaign.

 

I'll definitely check multiplayer out. If I like it, great! If not, oh well.

[themageguy]

Im loving the whole idea of DAMP.
Cannot wait.

Will mostly be rolling as either an elementalist, necromancer or the alchemist

[SurelyForth]

After some more thoughts, I have to say something more. The things you listed are integral parts of single player game. I do agree to buy the single player part of the game so I know what I am paying for. Maybe in another playthrough I'll decide to play as a Mage or to do some romances. Multiplayer I am 100% sure I am not going to touch. There are far more interesting games to play it, WOT, War Thunder etc.

 

Yes they are selling it as a package, but they do have separate packages for players to chose from. Deluxe edition costs more for a few meaningles in game stuff. You have the choice to not to pay for that. Same goes for Inquisitors edition for some physical shinies.

 

Why can't be it the same case for multiplayer ?

 

Because they didn't want to do it that way. Jeezie creezie, you're paying a price that is the same as other games of comparable quality (and getting more quantity from the single player module than most of them). The MP is not costing you more and it's not going to, like, punch your dog in the face or anything. Ignore it and move on. 

[Paul E Dangerously]

The game does not cost more than other games.

 

Actually, depending on where you are, it does. Pricing being what it is, and with the Origin exclusivity on PC, some regions are being charged quite a bit more than usual.

[xkg]

Because they didn't want to do it that way. 

 

Yes, it's so obvious that you didn't even have to say that.

 

Jeezie creezie, you're paying a price that is the same as other games of comparable quality (and getting more quantity from the single player module than most of them). 

 

And that is your subjective opionion, entirely. So please, use "I" instead of "you". Because "me", I don't share that feeling.

[SurelyForth]

Actually, depending on where you are, it does. Pricing being what it is, and with the Origin exclusivity on PC, some regions are being charged quite a bit more than usual.

 

Does the cost difference have any****ingthing to do with MP? No. It does not. There is no vendor in the world who is marking the game up because of DAMP.

[Vanth]

Anyone who thinks the existence of multiplayer doesn't affect the single player game clearly does not understand economics. Manpower and resources have been used to create the multiplayer, so it has a cost that the company needs to recoup. How do they do that? They either charge more for their product or cut back somewhere else (i.e. single player). 

 

Now obviously I am not privy to the extra cost of including multiplayer, but it is undeniable that DA:I is anomalously expensive in comparison to other games. Even if that entire extra cost wasn't attributable to multiplayer it is certainly a factor and they could have cut the cost by not including it.

 

So it is not valid to take the position that multiplayer doesn't affect you if you chose not to play it. 

[PinkysPain]

Who honestly want this kind of thing?

 

Me, multiplayer saved ME3.

[KoorahUK]

Anyone who thinks the existence of multiplayer doesn't affect the single player game clearly does not understand economics. Manpower and resources have been used to create the multiplayer, so it has a cost that the company needs to recoup. How do they do that? They either charge more for their product or cut back somewhere else (i.e. single player). 

 

Now obviously I am not privy to the extra cost of including multiplayer, but it is undeniable that DA:I is anomalously expensive in comparison to other games. Even if that entire extra cost wasn't attributable to multiplayer it is certainly a factor and they could have cut the cost by not including it.

 

So it is not valid to take the position that multiplayer doesn't affect you if you chose not to play it. 

This entire argument rests on the notion that EA gave BioWare a big pot of money and said, "off you go, spend that however you like". Sorry I may not be an Economist but I am involved in project management and software development, and in the real world, thats rarely how it works.  

In every software project I've been involved in, you start with a business case outlining the product to be made, the expected costs and the expected returns. You ask for the money to make the product you want, not the other way around.

It seems clear that MP was always intended to be part of DA:I, which means that it would have been costed into the original busness case. As it was a parrallel development, managed by a seperate team, it would likely have had its own budget, separate from the SP one. Even if it didn't, its costs would have been calculated in the overall project budget.

Saying "If MP had not been part of the project SP would have benefitted" is pure speculation I'm afraid. There is not a shred of evidence to say that EA would have approved the same budget for an SP only game, unless you have a copy of the initial proposals in which budgets were discussed? This is EA we are talking about - you think they'd pay a penny more than they had to get the game through the door? Especially after the huge cost of developing SWTOR? 

Its ironic that one of the complaints against MP seems to be that EA added MP to make oodles of extra money out of players. If thats true then without MP and its inherent impact on profits over the longer term, its highly likely that BW would have had a smaller budget for the SP game. 

[Vhaius]

I'd prefer it if they focused on a single player experience, but I'm not going to begrudge the few (or many) that want multiplayer. Considering in a recent interview regarding DA:I starting out as multiplayer-only; Darrah talked about eliciting the feeling of sitting around a table with friends role-playing as the same feeling they wanted to recreate for DA:I multiplayer. Sounds promising to me.

[Anzer]

After playing ME3 multiplayer, I want DA multiplayer. So, OP, I suppose you can blame me for all of your first-world problems. Don't worry, I can handle it; I'm an adult after all.

[kipac]

The multiplayer has nothing to do with singleplayer. It's an entirely seperate game mode for people that want to experience the gameplay with other people. They're not "making" you meet other players. Don't want to play the multiplayer? Don't play it. Simple as.

Not really. Having both MP and SP means the resources need to be divided, and that means lack of time and resource spent in SP development which can result in poor quality.

[Fantazm1978]

It's hard for me to even wrap my head around some of the pettiness and childishness in this thread.

 

I just wish I was surprised at it. But I'm not.

 

So many people think they should exclusively get their own way these days and throw all their toys out of the pram and have a tantrum if they don't.

[PhroXenGold]

Not really. Having both MP and SP means the resources need to be divided, and that means lack of time and resource spent in SP development which can result in poor quality.

 

For the umpteenth time, no it doesn't. MP and SP have seperate resources whcih would not be available for the other should one not exist.