202 réponses à ce sujet

[StealthGamer92]

Games are the one of the few media where someone can blatantly rip off other products and still make a perfectly good product. So long as the developer improves or adds an interesting twist to the formula, it's fair game.

 

ME3MP succeeded because ME3's gameplay is fun and it's progression system is rewarding.

Not really, Halo ODST's firefight was better because it was still new-ish then, but in Halo4 it was dropped because it was getting old. You know speaking of Halo4 who here thinks a more Spartan ops approach could work, like a story built into the MP kinda? Larger maps, mini stories each mission(like Halo4's episodes) a cutscene storylike type of deal eact Act(5-6 missions). It is still kinda, well very, hord mode but the story and semi-uniqueness each mission hid it well in Halo for me. My opinion obviously.

[RoboticWater]

Not really, Halo ODST's firefight was better because it was still new-ish then, but in Halo4 it was dropped because it was getting old. You know speaking of Halo4 who here thinks a more Spartan ops approach could work, like a story built into the MP kinda? Larger maps, mini stories each mission(like Halo4's episodes) a cutscene storylike type of deal eact Act(5-6 missions). It is still kinda, well very, hord mode but the story and semi-uniqueness each mission hid it well in Halo for me. My opinion obviously.

ME3MP still iterated on the classic horde formula with classes and character progression. It might not be appealing to everyone, but it's original in its own way.

 

I'm fairly certain H4 dropped firefight because it was being handled by a new studio who probably didn't have the resources to make both the co-op missions and firefight. I never touched them because none of my friends ever wanted to play anything but competetive.

 

I'd like story-based co-op missions as well, but they take a lot of effort to make and would gate potentially relevant story content behind an online requirement. I would prefer as many resources as possible to go into the SP and I certainly don't want to miss out on story because none of my friends play ME.

 

Horde mode is a simple mode that lets people just fight AI. No story, no hassle, just gameplay.

[Andrew Lucas]

It's hard to compare Killing Floor, a game entirely devoted to horde mode, to ME3MP, a side mode created from an established SP only title. Of course Killing Floor is going to have a more complex horde mode, that's the only thing selling their game. It's amazing that BioWare was even able to flesh out a separate mode as well as they did.

Objectively, ME3MP isn't the best thing around, but it is still fun.

Also, I've seen it get tons of praise from plenty of sources: reviewers, reddit, gaming pundits, etc.

No, it's not, the ME3's MP is there just to be there, just because the game is not focused on that mode, doesn't mean that it can't be compared to other games who succeeded with such mode, or else, they shouldn't have done a MP in the first place, that way I wouldn't be screwed at the end of the game during the first playthrough.

Also, ME3 had a bigger budget than KF's, so I was expecting a complex thing, and not a rushed GoW rip off.

Again, the MP can be fun for some, but it's generic at it's core.

[StealthGamer92]

ME3MP still iterated on the classic horde formula with classes and character progression. It might not be appealing to everyone, but it's original in its own way.

 

I'm fairly certain H4 dropped firefight because it was being handled by a new studio who probably didn't have the resources to make both the co-op missions and firefight. I never touched them because none of my friends ever wanted to play anything but competetive.

 

I'd like story-based co-op missions as well, but they take a lot of effort to make and would gate potentially relevant story content behind an online requirement. I would prefer as many resources as possible to go into the SP and I certainly don't want to miss out on story because none of my friends play ME.

 

Horde mode is a simple mode that lets people just fight AI. No story, no hassle, just gameplay.

Honestly at it's heart H4 Spartan Ops was a prettied up Firefight, but the mini-story(i.e. a scientist team went mising investigate! You then find clues between the waves) hid the Firefight well enough you don't see it as firefight untill you take a step back and analyze it closer.

[RoboticWater]

No, it's not, the ME3's MP is there just to be there, just because the game is not focused on that mode, doesn't mean that it can't be compared to other games who succeeded with such mode, or else, they shouldn't have done a MP in the first place, that way I wouldn't be screwed at the end of the game during the first playthrough.

Also, ME3 had a bigger budget than KF's, so I was expecting a complex thing, and not a rushed GoW rip off.

Again, the MP can be fun for some, but it's generic at it's core.

It had a bigger budget, most of which probably went into SP.

 

Sure, it's core is generic, but It isn't trying to be competition for all multiplayer shooters, and I'm glad it isn't. Mass Effect is a singleplayer game. If the multiplayer was better than every other game's, then either BioWare's spending far too much time on the least important part of their game or the industry as a whole is doing terribly.

 

If I were in charge of EA, I wouldn't mandate a multiplayer mode, but that's the reality we're in. Horde is probably the cheapest, least invasive form of MP BioWare could have made that was still ultimately fun. It may not be revolutionary among its peers, but it's a perfectly acceptable supplement to a good game. Classic horde with Mass Effect style powers is enough.

[Andrew Lucas]

It had a bigger budget, most of which probably went into SP.
 
Sure, it's core is generic, but It isn't trying to be competition for all multiplayer shooters, and I'm glad it isn't. Mass Effect is a singleplayer game. If the multiplayer was better than every other game's, then either BioWare's spending far too much time on the least important part of their game or the industry as a whole is doing terribly.
 
If I were in charge of EA, I wouldn't mandate a multiplayer mode, but that's the reality we're in. Horde is probably the cheapest, least invasive form of MP BioWare could have made that was still ultimately fun. It may not be revolutionary among its peers, but it's a perfectly acceptable supplement to a good game. Classic horde with Mass Effect style powers is enough.

Yep. It's totally understandable why it's very entertaining for some players, even if I can't play more than three matches in a row, but the MP is not essential and it's not something out of this world like some like to say say. You said it yourself, it's a perfectly acceptable supplement to the game.

[AlanC9]

Right, but I think you're forgetting where these guys came from.  These people came from neckbeards writing code in their basement all day until somebody said, "Hey, you should publish that."  I'm talking in the '70s - early '80s.  I mean, I don't wanna pick a scab...   But look at Atari.  Not great.
 
The industry has gone through drastic swings and has mostly stabilized now.

Ah, now I see what you were getting at. Yeah, that development model worked before, and can still work now. (FTL comes to mind) But I don't think it can work at the budgeting level Bio wants to play at.

[wolfhowwl]

It had a bigger budget, most of which probably went into SP.

 

Sure, it's core is generic, but It isn't trying to be competition for all multiplayer shooters, and I'm glad it isn't. Mass Effect is a singleplayer game. If the multiplayer was better than every other game's, then either BioWare's spending far too much time on the least important part of their game or the industry as a whole is doing terribly.

 

If I were in charge of EA, I wouldn't mandate a multiplayer mode, but that's the reality we're in. Horde is probably the cheapest, least invasive form of MP BioWare could have made that was still ultimately fun. It may not be revolutionary among its peers, but it's a perfectly acceptable supplement to a good game. Classic horde with Mass Effect style powers is enough.

 

The multiplayer was a simple mode for people that liked ME3's combat. For those people it's nice, you don't have to slog through the campaign again and the MP levels are generally better than a lot of the single player stuff and the fights are harder. For what it was it was fun and was well-supported by BioWare.

 

Sure the next game could use some improvements like more objectives or maybe some new modes but I think I most people would be happy if it remained a fun supplement to the campaign that extends the life of the title for many.

 

Besides I can already hear the butthurt if BioWare poured more resources in to compete with dedicated MP games like Killing Floor or MP-centric top tier AAA titles. "BIOWER YOURE STEALING RESOURCES FROM SP AGAIN!!"

[goishen]

In all actuality, the MP modes of the game help them to stabilize the hp, damage (of both yours and the enemies), biotics, weapons, etc.   Make sure none of them are op during launch.  There will always be someone who finds a way say that a gun is op, but it's to a very minimal extent. 

 

Like the n00b stick in CS. 

 

I can't believe I just brought up CS.   Ugh.

[wolfhowwl]

Within that budget (of time and money), you can only include so many features. There is a limit to how much you can pack into any one title because it has a maximum retail price. Obviously the more features you include, the more sales you (hopefully) make but there are limits. Even if EA said you can have as much money as you need to make this game, the amount of features would not dramatically increase because they cannot start selling 300 dollar games even if there is 4 times more content than a a single 70 dollar title.

 

You said it yourself, this is where the volume of sales comes in. Rockstar's games sell for the same price as BioWare's but they obviously get vastly more resources to play with since they have a proven history of delivering blockbuster titles while BioWare's titles fall towards the lower end of the AAA spectrum. Lo and behold it shows in the scope and production values of their games.

 

If Bioware were able to convince EA that they could pack a game with SP features only and still make the same (or more) sales (and back end money through DLC) than they would by including multiplayer as a feature, then we would have an SP extravaganza that I for one would be really excited to play.

 

Who is to say that they haven't already done something like that and the conclusion was to make a larger single player game and still include multiplayer anyways (like ME4 being open world and still having MP)? Why give up the revenue stream, reduced trade-ins, and longer community involvement with your IP?

 

All this also assumes that the people that run BioWare don't actually like the idea of having multiplayer, wherever it be that they agree with EA's alleged reasons or they just think it is a fun feature that complements the game.

[SlottsMachine]

While I don't particularly care one way or the other whether the next Mass Effect has MP or not, I did have a blast playing ME3MP with my peeps. And I strongly disagree with the opinion that ME3MP took any resources away from the single player experience, at least not in any meaningful sense. 

[SofaJockey]

according to that EA exec, he won't greenlight a game without it

 

I hate that it's so popular and profitable because this is what the future of AAA gaming will look like: Sports games and horde mode shooters because they sell a shitload. 

 

To be honest that EA exec comment referred to 'online content', so for example Dragon Age Keep alone would have counted for DAI.

Gaming will evolve, but that's no reason to 'hate' a format so many people enjoy.

 

The market will not sleepwalk away from interesting single player content.

If Tomb Raider's single player format hadn't been so much fun, the otherwise irrelevant multiplayer may have been criticised more.

Star Wars Battlefront is gaining criticism for the elimination of a campaign, so we'll see how that pans out...

[RiouHotaru]

The problem with DA:I's MP is that there's no incentive to do it.  It pretends like you're playing the groups you send out via the War Table but success doesn't actually mean anything.  You just rank up online characters.

 

If you're going to inclue an MP mode that's even tangentially tied to the story than I want at least some material incentive to play, whether it be resources, or things like promoting characters to add to an EMS system.  If I wanted MP for the sole purpose of MP there's plenty of other games I could go to.

[SolNebula]

Since people claim MP is a success why not charging people for it like in Battlefield? If it is all about the revenues for EA and people claim it is sooo good and fun then such fans would certainly pay for more MP content in these games. Going to see how many MP fans are going to purchase those MP expansion later on.

 

I personally haven't spent a single cent in MP nor I will in any other game because if I want to MP and co-op I go to MMORPG. Here I want a good SP RPG.

 

Also MP should be there because people like to MP and because BW can get a stream of cash out of their fans with microtransactions. No need to shove it in our SP experience IMO. DA:I MP was great for me in the sense you can easily ignore it. The best way they could implement it.

[capn233]

There are many more people who enjoyed ME3 MP than did not.

[SolNebula]

There are many more people who enjoyed ME3 MP than did not.

 

Sure then are you willing to go the next step and pay for those DLCs if you enjoyed them? If the answer is no then it means they aren't so important for your enjoyement.

[goishen]

Well, it's not very likely that BioWare can or will come out and say, "EA made us put MP in DAI....   That's the reason that it feels uninspired and lazy."   I very truthfully wish there was a way (like on Steam) that you could tell how many players were playing what. 

[SofaJockey]

The problem with DA:I's MP is that there's no incentive to do it.  It pretends like you're playing the groups you send out via the War Table but success doesn't actually mean anything.  You just rank up online characters.

 

If you're going to inclue an MP mode that's even tangentially tied to the story than I want at least some material incentive to play, whether it be resources, or things like promoting characters to add to an EMS system.  If I wanted MP for the sole purpose of MP there's plenty of other games I could go to.

 

This runs so in the face of the angry backlash against MEMP including EMS in single player that BioWare clearly ran from the concept.

 

Personally I would not object, and indeed welcome seeing the effect of MP in the SP game if it appears 'invisibly' to SP only players. 

[davishepard]

I would love to see what they can came up with in the current generations regardings the multiplayer. The only thing I want is they to keep it coop.

[Dr. Rush]

ME4 MP should be more than just "horde mode" or "waves of enemies"

 

They should have Payday or Left4Dead-like maps and objectives. Give us something better to do than just shoot. I shoot thousands of enemies in L4D and Payday while simultaneously completing more meaningful and exciting mission objectives and in larger maps than just boxed in arenas. 

 

Give us bigger maps, more objectives and more depth. Killing waves of enemies is fun, but it doesn't stay fun for very long.

[Walker White]

Every company works differently? Ok, then this is a news report about how EA works:

http://www.destructo...es-234402.phtml

 

Gibeau no longer leads EA.  He left EA and now heads Unity (the game engine).  The current CEO of EA is Andrew Wilson, who has extremely different philosophies, as you can tell from his reports in the investor meetings.  He is much more pro-player than Gibeau was.

 

It is not a coincidence that people started to consider EA as "not so bad" (and less evil than Ubisoft) when Wilson took over.

[Vortex13]

The problem with DA:I's MP is that there's no incentive to do it. It pretends like you're playing the groups you send out via the War Table but success doesn't actually mean anything. You just rank up online characters.

If you're going to inclue an MP mode that's even tangentially tied to the story than I want at least some material incentive to play, whether it be resources, or things like promoting characters to add to an EMS system. If I wanted MP for the sole purpose of MP there's plenty of other games I could go to.

I'm not for locking story content behind any gameplay mechanic, but I agree that I would have liked to see more 'interaction' between the two modes.

Back when DA:I was coming out, and before we knew that the keep upgrade system was going to be cut and the war table missions were just going to be text based adventures, I pictured the use of agents as a perfect way to implement the SP and MP worlds.

Being able to promote your MP character and see them in cutscenes, or have them manning your captured fortresses would have been a nice touch.

Unfortunately, we got pre-made MP characters with very little actual character, and they just sit in pre-determined spots in Skyhold, unable to be interacted with and not even reflecting the armor and weapons we use for them.

[Enigmatick]

The reason DA:I's multiplayer isn't as successful as ME3's is because DA:I's combat is simple and dull as dishwater and the core fanbase of that series has absolutely no interest in a dungeon crawler multiplayer.

[wolfhowwl]

Since people claim MP is a success why not charging people for it like in Battlefield? If it is all about the revenues for EA and people claim it is sooo good and fun then such fans would certainly pay for more MP content in these games. Going to see how many MP fans are going to purchase those MP expansion later on.

 

I personally haven't spent a single cent in MP nor I will in any other game because if I want to MP and co-op I go to MMORPG. Here I want a good SP RPG.

 

Also MP should be there because people like to MP and because BW can get a stream of cash out of their fans with microtransactions. No need to shove it in our SP experience IMO. DA:I MP was great for me in the sense you can easily ignore it. The best way they could implement it.

 

That would split the fanbase and damage the community. Mass Effect isn't a sales juggernaut like Battlefield (although people complain about vanilla vs premium splitting there too).

[capn233]

Sure then are you willing to go the next step and pay for those DLCs if you enjoyed them? If the answer is no then it means they aren't so important for your enjoyement.

 

Hmmm don't see why I would need to do that when they were free, and multiplayer was included with the price of the game.

 

The main idea though is that the "don't do mp" contingent is largely a fringe minority, and I doubt that I need to worry about Bioware taking any suggestions from them.