57 réponses à ce sujet

[Alanah Rae]

In 2006 I was surfing the web probably after watching some "movies" and I came across an article about "the top ten most anticipated xbox 360 games for 2007".

Well I knew what number one was before even reading it, Halo 3 no doubt, what else could it be?

I cant remember the other games on the list but I was completely shocked when I got to number 2 and it was Halo 3. I thought to myself. "What could be number 1?"

I clicked the arrow and then popped up a game I never heard of entitled Mass Effect.

I read the article and was so pumped! I loved Knights of the old Republic and Jade Empire.

I then quickly googled Mass Effect and read everything I could about it. I pre ordered it and waited for November.

I absolutely love that game. And was so excited for Mass Effect 2. I must have played both of those games close to 1000 hours each.

Why do I tell you this story? Well I can tell you its not because I am drunk.

Its because I was so worried about the multiplayer for Mass Effect 3. Like many of you I feared it would just be a gimmick add on to appeal to the EA over lords to try and get the COD players to play the game. I also worried that the single player would suffer from it also, with time being split between the development teams.

I was wrong. The care they took with the multiplayer was pretty obvious. The combat in the third game, at least to me, is better than the other two by far. (That doesnt mean the other two suck. ME2 is still my favorite in the series.)

Its kind of why they have two teams. One to work only on single player and the other to work only on multiplayer.

[Dr. Rush]

Go Pats!

[Malanek]

MP does not take anything away from single player, in fact quite the opposite, it is good for it. It more than pays for itself and costs on developing shared assets (models, animations, combat gameplay etc) can be split.

[Fidite Nemini]

What exactly was your question again?

 

Because the one in the title was answered by yourself, so unless you intended this topic to be a monologue, I'm missing the question that we're supposed to discuss.

[Alanah Rae]

Go Cheaters!

FTFY

[UKStory135]

It doesn't.

[Sylvius the Mad]

There is a downside is when when the two are tied together in a way that diminishes SP.

Also, if the two share assets, if that drives the design of SP in a more MP-friendly direction, that can also be a problem.

But neither of those is mandatory. It's entirely possible to develop MP in a way that doesn't harm SP at all, so there's really no reason to oppose MP outright.

[LPPrince]

There is a downside is when when the two are tied together in a way that diminishes SP.

Also, if the two share assets, if that drives the design of SP in a more MP-friendly direction, that can also be a problem.

But neither of those is mandatory. It's entirely possible to develop MP in a way that doesn't harm SP at all, so there's really no reason to oppose MP outright.

 

Basically what Sylvius said. If MP affects SP in any way, it could be detrimental. It doesn't have to be though.

 

I'd give Mass Effect multiplayer more of my time if it was varied, full, with multiple game modes and things to do, but then it'd be rather sizable and I don't want that to conflict with single player.

 

Then again, separate budgets right? And with the Xbox One and PS4 game sizes have increased tremendously so I'd hope that I can get what I'm asking for and have a fulfilling SP and MP experience.

[Malanek]

 

I'd give Mass Effect multiplayer more of my time if it was varied, full, with multiple game modes and things to do, but then it'd be rather sizable and I don't want that to conflict with single player.

Even though there was only one game mode, ME3 MP had massive variety just due to how many different kits there were to play and how differently they played. That was the fundamental beauty of the game.

[LPPrince]

Even though there was only one game mode, ME3 MP had massive variety just due to how many different kits there were to play and how differently they played. That was the fundamental beauty of the game.

 

Not for me. It was always the same thing;Game starts, kill everything that moves, perform whatever side objective they make you do, survive to the final round, escape.

 

Great, but I'd prefer more options. Like a Search and Destroy game type from CoD(6 vs 6 PvP, one life, plant a bomb and make sure it goes off, defuse the enemy bomb, and/or kill everyone on the enemy team) or something along those lines.

 

Not sure they'll ever do PvP which is fine. But then they should have multiple game types for PvE to make things interesting.

[SofaJockey]

Yep. Multiplayer:

No harm (fun & beneficial) if done right.

[Dr. Rush]

FTFY

Kiss the rings

[Artemis_Entrari]

Even though there was only one game mode, ME3 MP had massive variety just due to how many different kits there were to play and how differently they played. That was the fundamental beauty of the game.

 

Eh, don't get me wrong.  I actually found the MP addicting.  And yes, trying out different characters was nice.  But the actual game play was very repetitive.  More game modes would have made it more fun.

 

If they've got two studios working on the different SP and MP components, I'm fine with MP.  But if MP somehow affects the SP experience, then I hope they focus on the SP first and foremost.

[Akir388]

I think MP just adds to the fun and enjoyment. Don't blame it when Bioware gets things wrong in SP.

[Alanah Rae]

Kiss the asterisk

FTFY again

[Malanek]

Eh, don't get me wrong.  I actually found the MP addicting.  And yes, trying out different characters was nice.  But the actual game play was very repetitive.  More game modes would have made it more fun.

 

If they've got two studios working on the different SP and MP components, I'm fine with MP.  But if MP somehow affects the SP experience, then I hope they focus on the SP first and foremost.

I have nothing against more game modes, in fact I would encourage it. However I feel that the difference in gameplay they offer is normally overstated. I find the gameplay difference in playing an Asari Valkyrie compared to a Geth Juggernaut compared a Salarian Infiltrator compared to a Krogan Warlord etc etc to be greater than any other game I have played.

 

And you have to be careful when adding more and more game modes that you don't fracture the playing base too much. It sucks having to wait for a lobby to fill up. So I'm all for more variety but adding game modes needs to be done very carefully.

[That Diablo Scrub]

It doesn't. I don't think people realise how multi-national corporations are run nowadays. Chances are the MP dev team and the SP dev team would be two different studios altogether and therefore both studios will put 100% attention to their side of the game. But the butthurt is strong in this place...

I'd post Jordan Carver pics, but I doubt anyone would appreciate it here... That and some here have probably never touched a woman before... It might get them too excited...

[Alanah Rae]

It doesn't. I don't think people realise how multi-national corporations are run nowadays. Chances are the MP dev team and the SP dev team would be two different studios altogether and therefore both studios will put 100% attention to their side of the game. But the butthurt is strong in this place...

I'd post Jordan Carver pics, but I doubt anyone would appreciate it here... That and some here have probably never touched a woman before... It might get them too excited...

I would appreciate them

[That Diablo Scrub]

I would appreciate them

Maybe tomorrow...

[They call me a SpaceCowboy]

Basically what Sylvius said. If MP affects SP in any way, it could be detrimental. It doesn't have to be though.

 

I'd give Mass Effect multiplayer more of my time if it was varied, full, with multiple game modes and things to do, but then it'd be rather sizable and I don't want that to conflict with single player.

 

Then again, separate budgets right? And with the Xbox One and PS4 game sizes have increased tremendously so I'd hope that I can get what I'm asking for and have a fulfilling SP and MP experience.

 

Right, take DAI for instance. Combat was designed for MP first, and adapted to SP play, so we ended up with more concentration on action (solo control) play, less on tactical (party oriented) than in previous DA games.

 

Mass Effect, on the other hand, didn't have to compromise its playstyle at all to accommodate MP. Its SP gameplay worked fine for MP.

[LPPrince]

I can't really use DAI as a comparison for combat given how different it is and the fact that I make no attempt to play Dragon Age on its harder difficulties.

[Redbelle]

Completely separate SP and MP can be a good thing if both are done well. But in the case of ME MP......

 

The galaxy readiness score tied into the MP component giving a huge boost to galactic readiness....... And that readiness mechanic in SP was step backwards in terms of delivering narrative content to the players as instead of dialogue and recognition by NPC's.... and the change to see the assets gathered used in action, we got a points system.

 

Now MP was used to bolster that point system that interfered with how the game portrayed progress in the SP. So in this case the MP did interfere as by design, it took up time and effort to develop when the time and effort that went into connecting the two modes could have been allocated to creating a more immersive SP experience.

 

Really, while MP gave points and galactic readiness it never seemed strictly necessary to connect the two. ME MP was perfectly sound as an MP without connecting it to SP. However the MP ran a micro transaction service that applied subtle pressures. Getting more galactic readiness and points for going to war eing one of them in the same way that constraining DAI MP to two health potions encourages tactical usage and thus creates a need for HP's that encourages more spending on chests. Subtle enough to not register, but a very obvious pressure when you thin about it.

 

So in answer to the question, No, MP and SP ought not to interfere with the other. But by linking the two it creates opportunities to bypass the need to grind and work for gear in one while increasing score in another. And doing so increases the chances that someone will put money down to buy crates or chests. MP is a cash flow coming in to companies these days and I'm glad Bioware have adopted the template that isn't pay to win. But when I think of the money that went into the MP and the coders that designed those levels that got recycled into the SP with little to no story other than checkpoint and defend mechanics that didn't give the ME staple movie atmosphere interactive cut scene then in ME3's case MP did have an effect on SP in that it allowed the SP devs to change the nature of dialogue interactions. Maintaining movement camera view instead of taking it into dialogue camera view.

 

Perhaps MP wasn't the primary cause of this decision that had players run past quest givers on the Citadel.... but it hardly helped stop Bioware from continuing following this trend into some encounters with NPC's in DAI.

[Shepard-Tali]

The only thing I disliked about the Multiplayer, and this is the same for a lot of people, that it felt that we HAD to play it to get the best ending in single player.. For me, I wasn't interested in the multiplayer that much and it felt like I was just grinding to get the Galactic Readiness thing to 100%. But no, it doesn't really take away from the Single Player, it just was an annoying game mechanic

[Alanah Rae]

The only thing I disliked about the Multiplayer, and this is the same for a lot of people, that it felt that we HAD to play it to get the best ending in single player.. For me, I wasn't interested in the multiplayer that much and it felt like I was just grinding to get the Galactic Readiness thing to 100%. But no, it doesn't really take away from the Single Player, it just was an annoying game mechanic

lulz there was no "best ending"

 

[Shepard-Tali]

I'm talking about my first playthrough before I realised that they weren't that different