39 réponses à ce sujet

[Johnsen1972]

I think not many people want Pvp in the multiplayer.

[Oldren Shepard]

I like a lot the multiplayer, after three years and i'm still playing it, i prefer playing cooperative that pvp but if they implement something like gaining territories from other factions and with a story behind, it could be cool.

[RIPRemusTheTurian]

I'd like to see a form of PvP in which one side is the four character kits, and the other side controls enemy spawns or special enemy units (so you can yell "assuming direct control" when you control a Prime). Something like Left For Dead.

 

Basically, it'd be nice to have a few different game modes to spice things up a bit.

[Vortex13]

The biggest thing I want to see outside of unique characters such as a playable Rachni kit (so sue me, I like the Rachni  ) would be larger, more open maps, and destructible environments. BioWare is using Frostbite now, so incorporating this engine's propensity for such interaction shouldn't be too hard, especially since DICE is essentially a co-worker in the EA family. DA:I didn't really take advantage of Frostbite's strengths, but that was understandable seeing as how BioWare was laying the foundations for an action RPG framework in a brand new code library.

 

With ME:Next I would really like to see the levels become more malleable to player interaction. I would like to see a level taking place in an enclosed colony or a space station, and being able to blow a hole into the out shell, exposing the inhabitants to a vacuum or hazardous atmosphere. I would like to see the cover you dive behind as a Atlas fires at you become riddled with holes. If I shove some lowly mook with a biotic power of 2700 Newtons of force, I would expect him to break through glass or dent a wall section. Etc. 

[Beerfish]

To get me to 'support' the multi player product they need to really only do one thing well.  Game stability and matchmaking.

 

I rarely spent money on the RNG for the sake of getting items but I did contribute cash after most ME3 mp dlcs because the game was though not perfect stable enough and fun to play. 

 

So far I have contributed nothing to DAMP even with a very nice last dlc  (3 pretty good classes and new dragon fighting map).  The reason?  The p[product is simply to unstable and some design decisions were made as if the game was rock solid stable.  (You lose all exp if you leave the game early for any reason.)

 

I can deal with game play modes, characters, maps, don't even mind the RNG model, etc.  I can't abide a game that at times is barley playable in which out of every 1 hour I spend on the game I actually get productive play of about 1/2 hour, the rest being tossed, disconnected, put in games you can't finish, etc etc.

 

Out of the top 20 things the mass effect 4 mp team is looking at make the top 15, stability, performance and playability.

[NM_Che56]

"if it ain't broke, then don't fix it".

 

There are some problems here:

 

1) You assume that because you like it then that means it's good and worth keeping.  It doesn't. 

2) That mentality breeds stagnation.  Stagnation can be the death of a developer or franchise.  People will get bored if a developer doesn't mix it up and add new things.  Not to mention that creative folks like to create.  If you want a good game then the creators have to be passionate about their product and limiting yourself to doing only what a segment of the larger target audience SAYS that it wants (if it can even articulate that...) isn't a good recipe for inspiring creativity and fun.

 

Additionally, I don't like the idea of anyone doing anything just because it's "trendy". That being said, I don't think huge open world games are inherently a bad idea for a franchise that's been a little more confined and has been "faking" an open world formula.  

 

Like life, development is about taking risks.  If you don't take any because you're afraid that a smaller corner of your fans are going to (claim to) walk away, then you're doomed before you begin, I imagine. 

[NM_Che56]

And I haven't touched MP in DA:I because it never really resonated with me.   When I think of DA or other fantasy games, I think of a more solitary experience.

[Beerfish]

"if it ain't broke, then don't fix it".

 

There are some problems here:

 

1) You assume that because you like it then that means it's good and worth keeping.  It doesn't. 

2) That mentality breeds stagnation.  Stagnation can be the death of a developer or franchise.  People will get bored if a developer doesn't mix it up and add new things.  Not to mention that creative folks like to create.  If you want a good game then the creators have to be passionate about their product and limiting yourself to doing only what a segment of the larger target audience SAYS that it wants (if it can even articulate that...) isn't a good recipe for inspiring creativity and fun.

 

Additionally, I don't like the idea of anyone doing anything just because it's "trendy". That being said, I don't think huge open world games are inherently a bad idea for a franchise that's been a little more confined and has been "faking" an open world formula.  

 

Like life, development is about taking risks.  If you don't take any because you're afraid that a smaller corner of your fans are going to (claim to) walk away, then you're doomed before you begin, I imagine. 

I think the ifs it ain't broke don't fix it is totally relevant.  No game is perfect and so improvements are needed for a better gaming experience, however all too often games and other wise newer version are worse than previous versions because there seems to be a need to change everything possible.

 

DAMP has several glaring examples of this where the new and improved version was far worse than existing content.  By all means change and upgrade things as you progress, but look closely at certain features or chagnes to make sure it is not actually worse.

 

(A clear example of this would be the in game score board between MEMP and DAMP.)

[NM_Che56]

I think the ifs it ain't broke don't fix it is totally relevant.  No game is perfect and so improvements are needed for a better gaming experience, however all too often games and other wise newer version are worse than previous versions because there seems to be a need to change everything possible.

 

DAMP has several glaring examples of this where the new and improved version was far worse than existing content.  By all means change and upgrade things as you progress, but look closely at certain features or chagnes to make sure it is not actually worse.

 

(A clear example of this would be the in game score board between MEMP and DAMP.)

 

Often times, I find that "worse" is just a perception because it's different and some people do not like change.  

 

Also, I don't think talking about "fixed" or "broken" is a fair conversation when talking about two different franchises made by different teams.  They can't break what wasn't there for them.  They can't keep something the same when it was never there.

[Broganisity]

I want PvP¹ so I can make the BSN cry as I nova-cancel all of their attacks while elbowing them to death.

 

All those invulnerability frames. . .Stagger me and I just charge through it and stagger you back, then back to nova-cancel elbows of justice. . .or just claymore to the face I mean- who needs cooldown times when you've got nova-canceling. . .TGI can't do jack to someone flailing about on the ground, screaming and dodging all those bullets. . .

YOUR TEARS ARE THE SWEETEST AMBROSIA, SNIPER SCRUBS.

------------------------

The gameplay that made ME3 great would have to be sacrificed unless you want the above scenario to happen: Getting your Jugs knotted by a Juggernaut grab, Novaguards dancing through walls of bullets and charging if you stagger them. . .just wouldn't be fair for you silly 'soldier boys' and infiltrators. Now, you could sacrifice the gameplay if you REALLY wanted, and just have a shooter with powers that aren't all that they're cracked up to be. . .what good is 'throw' if it can't throw people?

 

You'd have to redesign how the classes work, the way the kits work if kits remained a thing, and the powers themselves would have to be scrapped and made anew unless you want the stun-lock game to be too strong. I mean- daaaang I could imagine all the hate people using the Falcon would get. Falcon shot, Concussive Shot (detonates ammo power), Falcon Shot, Concussive Shot (detonates ammo power).

 

-----------------------

 

Now I adore the ME3:MP just as it is, but Horde mode does get dull, and I WOULD like more modes to 'break up the boredom' as it were:

 

1) Progress through a five 'zone' map with non-required objectives in the second and fourth zone, fighting through enemies and then a boss accompanied by henchmen at the end.

 

2) One 'long' map that requires players to retreat to an evac zone, fighting enemies the whole way and with non-required objectives for bonus credits. There is a timer, encouraging speed but requiring teamwork for maximum credits.

 

3) Endless Survival Mode. No objectives.

 

4) Standard Horde Mode with objectives. Ends either with a final boss (securing the station), or evac (fleeing the station). . .perhaps chosen based on if the objectives are completed? (would likely require harder objectives that aren't mandatory.)

 

-- Fight a 'final boss' and secure the area. Requires all objectives complete. Bonus experience awarded. "Take out their leader, and secure the area!"

-- Fight a final timed wave and get to the evac. Did not accomplish all objectives or teammates have died throughout mission too much. "We can't hold the area, fall back to the evac zone!"

 

It always bothered me how we had to leave after killing all those things. . .I mean- weren't we supposed to secure the area? Why are we leaving now? Should a new team at least be sent to make sure everything's alright?

------------------------

1) I don't want PvP, especially the 'standard' variety of it.

[TruthSerum]

I would like co-operative multiplayer (like in ME3) and competitive PvP. I think they could make it work.

 

No no no. I don't what pvp anywhere near ME. There are plenty of pvp games out there to play and not nearly enough good co-op action games out there. 

 

Besides they would have to balance the weapons to accommodate for pvp which would completely ruin the near perfection that is ME mp. 

[TruthSerum]

I think the ifs it ain't broke don't fix it is totally relevant.  No game is perfect and so improvements are needed for a better gaming experience, however all too often games and other wise newer version are worse than previous versions because there seems to be a need to change everything possible.

 

DAMP has several glaring examples of this where the new and improved version was far worse than existing content.  By all means change and upgrade things as you progress, but look closely at certain features or chagnes to make sure it is not actually worse.

 

(A clear example of this would be the in game score board between MEMP and DAMP.)

 

 

I think it's pretty clear that the DAI team are not as good at coding good second to second twitch gameplay as the certified master level programmers that made ME3 mp. 

 

There are just so many things that could go wrong by making changes if the people making ME4 mp are not performing at the top of their game. Although I would like a separate mode where players moved forward through multi-staged levels in addition to the current format. It's just that after the mediocrity of DAI I'm just a tad bit worried. 

[Johnsen1972]

I think it's pretty clear that the DAI team are not as good at coding good second to second twitch gameplay as the certified master level programmers that made ME3 mp. 

 

There are just so many things that could go wrong by making changes if the people making ME4 mp are not performing at the top of their game. Although I would like a separate mode where players moved forward through multi-staged levels in addition to the current format. It's just that after the mediocrity of DAI I'm just a tad bit worried. 

 

Im worried too. Thats the reason for my post 

 

I really hope the MP in ME4 will be at least as good as in ME3. DAIMP had no priority and a very small team worked on bugfixes and DLC's. 

[NM_Che56]

I know this is a novel concept, but if it's there and you don't want it then don't play it.

[Johnsen1972]

I know this is a novel concept, but if it's there and you don't want it then don't play it.

 

Before ME3 I didnt care about MP, but after I played it for years, now I want it and I want it to be good so I can play it!

So yeah, Bioware please make it good