164 réponses à ce sujet

[Tensai]

In theory i wouldn't mind a multiplayer mode (nwn/nwn2) did a great job regarding that (doing a good mp rpg which does not feel like a mmorpg is not an easy job), but MP in M3 and DA:I are plain terrible.

[Kel Eligor]

My opinion; I thought ME's multiplayer was super enjoyable. The controls and the action-pace of the gameplay made it a great diversion, you could aim, shoot, roll, sprint, e.t.c.. I also thought it gave a more genuine squad-experience than what the AI provided in singleplayer. Dragon Age doesn't feel nearly as good in MP, and thus I feel as though it's best reserved for Mass Effect. 

[Foe-jarmer]

Then it's forced. It's the same issue MMOs have. The minute engaging in a certain style of gameplay that you don't like gives advantages to the style of gameplay you do enjoy, you are going to feel forced to engage in the part you don't like.

If the marketing board is going to demand every game have MP, they need to at least keep it 100% separate from SP. I feel the same way when it comes to PvP and PvE.

No its not forced, not at all.

All that system would do is give you some extra influence and cash and/or crafting materials when you play MP. We can all agree that the single player doesn't lack for any of those things so it's not forced at all. If we were getting unique items and things of that sort for single player via MP dungeon runs THEN it would be forced.

[Chaos17]

I vote to scrap it so Bioware will focus its attention on polishing the game instead OR make a toolset for modders.

Which will greatly more favor customers.

[LinksOcarina]

I like how you all are demanding that you have a say for Multiplayer, when you really don't in the end...it's kinda cute.

 

 

The "split budget" thing is a fantasy the MP supporters have conjured from thin air.

 

Split budget is not the same thing as split development teams, they are trying to conflate the two to support their position.

 

Seriously, the big bosses say "you have X dollars to make your next title, make sure it has MP".  They don't say "you have X dollars to make your next title...and oh by the way here is Y dollars to put MP in it".

 

That is not how businesses work though.

 

This is normally what is allocated and where for a standard project.

 

Production and Development Costs: Including separate tiers of money going to developer salaries, voice actors and foley artists, music and orchestral work, licensing for the product, and in-game development split into the base game, multiplayer modes, and DLC. Now a days, all three get separate budgets. 

 

Marketing Costs: Including promotion,launch parties, events and trailer adverts.

 

Manufacturing Costs: Making disks for sale, and online distribution, that money is allocated too in initial budgeting.

 

Everything, if you have a good production team, has been budgeted out before pre-production ends on a major project. You have folks already laying groundwork with basic models and engine conversion, concept art, and maybe some mapping, so that's part of the process too, and is included in the budget. 

 

See most multiplayer modes are built concurrently with the single player game. Their budgets are often separate and not part of single player development, save for concept art and communication for continuity sake between the two teams. DLC is also the same way, often during base development. So yes, the split budget is tied to split development teams. If there was no multiplayer, the money given to the  main development team would not change, and that multiplayer team would be working on a different project with a different budget allocated to them, or let go all together because they aren't required. 

 

The only caveat to all of this is how much money was allocated, instead of whether or not resources were taken away. My guess is the multiplayer mode had half the budget of the single player game at best, and it also has it's own mechanical quirks it needs to work through to accomplish a "similar" experience, but ultimately a different one all together. 

[- Archangel -]

I don't see how those amounts of money are related. You're making the same mistake Archangel's making.

Edit: well, they can be related if the company's pushing the edge of some sort of envelope. Say, if EA itself is becoming financially overextended, the DAI project is getting so bloated that failure would raise unacceptable risks if it got any bigger, or Bio's used up the pool of potential internal and external recruits for the project.

What mistake?

 

You are the one pretending like there is some magical "multiplayer only" budget floating around.  Do you have any evidence for this at all?  And before you say "where's your evidence".  Occam's Razor, one game has a single budget split amongst it's parts.  If one part gets more, another gets less.

[Pasquale1234]

I have zero interest in MP.

I can accept the notion that MP has its own separate budget and resources that don't divert attention from SP.

What is difficult for me to accept, however, is that it does not influence the design of combat in SP in any way.

I've never met a software engineer who didn't make every reasonable effort to re-use software components wherever possible. Combat in these games has a lot of moving parts, and I have to think the teams collaborated to share design elements wherever feasible.

I also believe it is in their best interests to make the move between SP and MP as seamless as possible for players - IOW, for the look and feel to be similar between the 2.

For these reasons, I suspect that combat in SP may have been very different, perhaps in some significant ways, if MP had not been introduced in this title.

[LinksOcarina]

What mistake?

 

You are the one pretending like there is some magical "multiplayer only" budget floating around.  Do you have any evidence for this at all?  And before you say "where's your evidence".  Occam's Razor, one game has a single budget split amongst it's parts.  If one part gets more, another gets less.

 

If one part doesn't exist, it get's nothing. That is more accurate. 

[Pee Jae]

I have a novel idea; if you don't like multiplayer, don't play it and stop trying to ruin the fun for those who do.

[BloodyTalon]

Talk to the big hats at EA, mp is here to stay in all EA games.

You will learn to accept it. -sage-

[- Archangel -]

Talk to the big hats at EA, mp is here to stay in all EA games.

You will learn to accept it. -sage-

I can't wait for the day we have a 15 minute single player campaign and 73 Multiplayer maps (all but 3 must be purchased from cash shop).

 

Just like Call of Duty XXXIV

[Kendaric Varkellen]

I don't see how those amounts of money are related. You're making the same mistake Archangel's making.

Edit: well, they can be related if the company's pushing the edge of some sort of envelope. Say, if EA itself is becoming financially overextended, the DAI project is getting so bloated that failure would raise unacceptable risks if it got any bigger, or Bio's used up the pool of potential internal and external recruits for the project.

 

You're jumping to conclusions about what I'm saying, quite frankly.

 

What I said was that I would have prefered that the (additional) budget would have been used for a different thing (in this case a toolset) instead of creating multiplayer. I never said or implied that a toolset got scrapped because of multiplayer. I'm quite aware they never planned on giving us a toolset, I merely wish they'd have tried to get a budget for a toolset rather than the multiplayer we have.

[TheJiveDJ]

This isn't BW's decision unfortunately. One of the talking heads from EA a while back said they were not doing any strictly single player games anymore.

[Xamufam]

the original idea was to have the singleplayer experience online

[ORTesc]

This isn't BW's decision unfortunately. One of the talking heads from EA a while back said they were not doing any strictly single player games anymore.

 

Another reason why this publisher won worst company twice.

 

I really wish the good doctors would make a new studio.

[l7986]

Wouldn't have a problem with multiplayer if single player wasn't limited because of it. Looking at you attribute points, only getting to have 8 abilities and healers getting removed.

[Sriep]

Well I am not playing MP so am farily indefference. Personally its console support that I would rather see dropped. Nothing like console support to destroy a PC game, particularly UI.

[MissOuJ]

No multiplayer =/= more money for SP production. No multiplayer = no multiplayer, and one more team not working on the game.

 

You can't just say "I don't like this, this should be cut, give us mod support and/or toolset instread," that's not how resource allocation works (not to mention the copyright and licensing issues a Frostbite toolset would cause).

 

 

EDIT: You might wanna read this. Now with a correct link and all.

 

 

This isn't BW's decision unfortunately. One of the talking heads from EA a while back said they were not doing any strictly single player games anymore.

 

The "talking head" in question was Frank Gibenau, who is the executive vice president of EA Mobile (although to be fair he used to be the president of EA Labels [ie. responsible for IP development]). Something tells me he has precious little to do with Bioware's games. Also, the backpedalling from that was pretty epic, and what he later clarified he only meant that games with no online service and/or content plan wouldn't be greenlighted, and that he didn't mean that all EA games are going to have multiplayer or similar in the future.

[AlanC9]

What mistake?
 
You are the one pretending like there is some magical "multiplayer only" budget floating around.  Do you have any evidence for this at all?  And before you say "where's your evidence".  Occam's Razor, one game has a single budget split amongst it's parts.  If one part gets more, another gets less.

You keep assuming that the budget would be the same size with or without MP, and I keep asking you how and why that would happen. Do you actually have a coherent answer to this, or are you going to keep dodging the question?

[AlanC9]

You're jumping to conclusions about what I'm saying, quite frankly.
 
What I said was that I would have prefered that the (additional) budget would have been used for a different thing (in this case a toolset) instead of creating multiplayer. I never said or implied that a toolset got scrapped because of multiplayer. I'm quite aware they never planned on giving us a toolset, I merely wish they'd have tried to get a budget for a toolset rather than the multiplayer we have.

What makes you think they didn't try? All you know is that they didn't succeed.

[NugHugs]

Lol. Definitely agree . . . Mass Effect 3's multiplayer was still fun after playing 20 games. DA:I's gets old quick.

[lady8jane]

I want to know where this fantasy that it came from a different resource pool came from?

 

1 publisher

 

1 dev

 

1 budget

 

(I don't care if they've lied somewhere and said it's separate)

 

You have clearly no idea at all how a budget works. Please go and educate yourself.

[AlanC9]

I have zero interest in MP.

I can accept the notion that MP has its own separate budget and resources that don't divert attention from SP.

What is difficult for me to accept, however, is that it does not influence the design of combat in SP in any way.

I've never met a software engineer who didn't make every reasonable effort to re-use software components wherever possible. Combat in these games has a lot of moving parts, and I have to think the teams collaborated to share design elements wherever feasible.

I also believe it is in their best interests to make the move between SP and MP as seamless as possible for players - IOW, for the look and feel to be similar between the 2.

For these reasons, I suspect that combat in SP may have been very different, perhaps in some significant ways, if MP had not been introduced in this title.

It's conceivable. This wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing even if it did happen. Both DA:O and ME2 struck me as games that could have used a bit more class balance, and that's the sort of thing you find out when testing MP.

[Realmzmaster]

I vote to scrap it so Bioware will focus its attention on polishing the game instead OR make a toolset for modders.

Which will greatly more favor customers.

 

A toolset only favors PC gamers. It does absolutely nothing for console gamers which is the larger part of the market. The  MP aspect of DAI was made by a different team. Even if MP did not exist those extra dollars would not go to polishing the game. The funds would allocated to a different prject. 

 

The budget for DAI was set at the start of development. EA/Bioware was given an extra 13 and half months more development time (therefore more money) than the previous DA title which was DA2. In fact the development time for DAI about equals the time for DAO.

 

Some of the posters here are under the assumption that the extra money for MP would go to the SP. Budgeting does not work that way. The budget for single player is set at the beginning. Any amount overruns above the budget begins to eat into any profits that may happen.

 

MP budget is set and the team for MP is selected at the start. Two separate budgets.

 

Whether one believes Bioware or not that is another issue, but that is what has been stated in regards to SP and MP.

 

No you cannot vote on MP. That is a company decision. Also a great many people like MP. It is here to stay.

 

The suggestion that can be emphasis is that MP not affect SP gameplay.

[Drone223]

No multiplayer =/= more money for SP production. No multiplayer = no multiplayer, and one more team not working on the game.

 

You can't just say "I don't like this, this should be cut, give us mod support and/or toolset instread," that's not how resource allocation works (not to mention the copyright and licensing issues a Frostbite toolset would cause).

 

 

EDIT: You might wanna read this. Now with a correct link and all.

 

 

Yep the only time MP takes away from SP is when its added late into game development, otherwise its has its own team and resources.

 

@OP: You have no say on MP being in the next game, MP being in the next game is dependent on if MP is successful in this game.