30 réponses à ce sujet

[Jeffry]

Play with friends as companions = DAIMP, it's already here, we don't need the whole game turned into an MMORPG. There are enough of those out there. Leav Dragon Age Dragon Age. You want dragons and rifts and, mages, elves, Grey skinned giants and such in a MMORPG - Go play Rift the game. (and yes Rift is a good game, I play it too but, I don't need or want every game I play to be multi player forced on me.)

 

Ok guys, are you for real now? It is starting to look like trolling and I wish this thread will be purged / locked soon. Nobody serious in here wants to turn Dragon Age into an MMO. Well, it is already a single player MMO, but that is not the point

 

In BG2 there was a possible multiplayer. It wasn't forced on anybody and who wished so could play their game together with their friends. The host could assign who is able to control which characters, who is able to pause the game, etc. and it worked. This is the kind of co-op that would be nice to have - a completely optional one that plays exactly like the singleplayer game, since they are almost identical with the one difference that instead of 1 PCs and 5 NPCs you had for example 2 PCs and 4 NPCs in your party.

 

Learn how the co-op in BG2 worked if you wish to argue further and stop using the word "forced". Which was brought here only to create a completely different argument, since the person who used it first is not able to argue without first creating and then attacking a straw man.

[Bioware-Critic]

i would like to see coop mode even if just 2 ppl and 2 others

Laidlaw even stated during development that they would only ... "consider" ... doing mp. And if they would go for it they would take a good, long, hard look at how BG did it!

Well ...
Another really good piece of PR I swallowed - I guess!

[luism]

Yeah he did say that but I imagine EA saw that and said not just no but hell no. You can put mp but only in a way that your current fan base won't like and the fan base that doesn't even like this series or fantasy RPGs will. Also it must have micro transactions.

[Bioware-Critic]

Yeah he did say that but I imagine EA saw that and said not just no but hell no. You can put mp but only in a way that your current fan base won't like and the fan base that doesn't even like this series or fantasy RPGs will. Also it must have micro transactions.

I would recon that they make any games from now on purely for the opportunity to implement a mp that is very heavy on micro transactions !!!!!

I would say it is their main goal first and foremost for anything ...
The single-player is for attracting consumers and the mp is for making the real juice !!!
As we speak they are working on other twisted things to suck us dry with no substantial offering that can be produced in no time at all ... Like a mp game ... Or season passes or

I have seen on psn a dlc for 30 dollars (30$ !!!!) that contained only "hats"! " Hats" ... for your pc ... DUDE - WTF?

[Jeffry]

@AmberDragon

 

Hmm, it seems my last post has been deleted wihout me being warned about it, so I'll rewrite it in a slightly different way. And yeah, your post was deleted becuase I reported it for personal attacks which are against the rules of this forum. I will do so again if your next post will be the same. You claim you have been playing games since 1984, which means you are mature enough to know how to respond in at least pretended civilized manner. So if you bother responding, keep that in mind.

 

And once again, very slowly, I'll try to walk you through your mistake. OP only wished for a co-op, he didn't specify which one. You attacked his post (I also said you attacked OP's post, not OP himself) by saying there is no need to force co-op down everybody's throat. OP didn't say anything about a forced co-op. Then you said you wish people would stop trying to shoehorn multiplayer into every game and that the game would be ruined by the presence of said co-op. You have no idea what OP meant by his wish for co-op and how he envisioned it, yet you continue to attack his post as if he said it (at this time you are in fact attacking a straw man, look it up on wikipedia or elsewhere if you don't know what exactly it means and why it is wrong in any argumentation). Then you added what you think in your opinion would be wrong with OP's proposed co-op even when again you have no idea how it would have been and could be implemented.

 

You also claim to have played BG2, so you should exactly know how the co-op worked there. Was it forced upon anybody? No. Was the singleplayer campaign tainted by the presence of this co-op? It wasn't in any way. Was the game ruined? No, it is regarded as one of the best RPG games to have ever been made. Has the co-op worked ok? Somewhat yes and it was very enjoyable to share the story with a friend (or be able to create your whole party by yourself).

 

Are we clear now? I don't know in what universe is dissecting one's post to show that person's mistakes the same as trolling. I also don't know why people debunking others' argumentational fallacies should be blocked and the ones arguing in an unfair way should run free and continue in their behavior.

 

So next time try to defend your failed argumentation instead of acting like a butthurt child. It only shows you don't have anything to back your arguments with and instead of admitting you were wrong you try to shout your way through it attacking others.

 

I also hope you got a 24h ban and enjoyed it thoroughly, because if you continue posting in a similar way I can only presume it was not your last

 

Good day.

[Rawgrim]

Yes and I am guessing it was really popular that's why Bioware stopped including it. Multiplayer is enough, if you want coop go play a game where it fits instead of trying to force it where it doesn't fit.

 

Actually they didn't really stop it after BG. They did dish out NWN, and that one was made for co-op all the way.