"Any real way" you know exactly what it means. As in, it's not possible without it. The rest of your rant means nothing because it isn't even addressing what I said. I'm not saying multiplayer isn't real.
No, I don't because my specialty isn't interpreting the poor diction of people crying about their irrational preferences. If you don't want to get called out for being bad at using the correct adjectives, than start choosing your words better. ME3's MP was just as "real" to the ingame universe as the vendors were. That you didn't want to play it but still wished to reap its benefits doesn't make it not exist.
Because they are two different modes. They should function independently of one another. "Because they don't want to" is a perfect reason that a person shouldn't be subjected to another mode that should be optional. With your style of argument, every person that doesn't like multiplayer in their games should just drop Bioware altogether then. That's asinine.
None of that is an actual argument using any form of reasoning or logic beyond personal prefrences; your personal preferences, which are irrelevant outside of the money you provide individually as a result of them
If people don't like multiplayer in their games, than they should probably not play games with multiplayer (i.e., current Bioware titles). That actually seems like a completely rational course of action, as would be ignoring the optional MP mode and accepting the consequences of lost content, but unfortunately many of these people are not rational. They'd rather cry on a forum about their minority fringe belief system that MP is the harbinger of gaming's destruction or some other ridiculous, psychosis motivated nonsense than simply do what they need to do and what is easily available to them get what they want (i.e, a virtually pointless 2 second easter egg ending in ME3's case, or pointless armor set in DA:I).
Sure, if the creators want it to work in a foolish way, that's their choice, and people have the choice to not buy their games which causes the company to lose money-- like what in the world are you even trying to get at here?
-snip$$$$snip-
Hahah, you're clearly detached from reality here. So the lost money of malcontented BSN forumites who buy the games anyway despite incessantly crying about their features (i.e. the money isn't actually lost at all), is greater than the amount gained from the literally millions of ME3MP accounts and their resultant participation of most of them in the store's microtransaction system? No doubt the creation of many of those accounts was motivated by the ability to get rewarded with better content in the singleplayer mode for playing the full game as the developers intended for you to. I'd say it's a brilliant system. You keep all the BSN babbies, because they're idiots who will shill for things they complain about anyway, but gain more revenue from the vast majority of normal people who have no strong ideological feelings about this issue one way or another.
Still, great work in making arguments in favour of my position. Perhaps you will learn something via this dialectic yet.
I shouldn't be almost forced to play a mode that I don't want to play to gain content in the mode I want to play in. Why is that such a hard concept for people like you to grasp?
Does the Dragon Decor a player can win in DA:I MP actually helps them in anyway the MP mode?
No, it's content that is only for the SP mode and is totally worthless in MP mode.
When I play in SP or MP the rewards I want are in that help me advance in that mode and not for the other mode and vice versa.
You aren't "almost forced" or even forced at all. That content is entirely optional. The "concept" (use of this word gives the belief way too much credit IMO) isn't hard to grasp at all, it is simply unreasonable and irrational. I grasp it fully, which is why I like deconstructing it and watching the extremist types squirm under the weight of their awful arguments.
Your last 3 statements assume that I am a player who rabidly clings to a single gamemode due to some hilarious ideology rather than getting my money's worth and experiencing all the content in the game I paid money for. Personally, I'm more than happy to see benefits from one game mode when I fire up the other, regardless of which way it is going. BF4 as a non Bioware example has a few weapons that are unlocked through the SP mode, which are arguably better than the starting ones in MP, and I loved being able to get them to improve my MP experience. Similarly, I liked my efforts in maximizing my outcomes in both SP and MP to get the best possible outcome in ME3 acknowledged. Enabling lazy malcontents to cry on a forum and get the same result takes away the exclusivity. In the same way that winners get the gold medal, and losers get slivers, bronzes and participation trophies, the natural order of glorious MP Players> SP extremist peasants should have remained as it was.
You're right. That's why to play combat MP - which is unlockable, but not unlocked - people should have to drive the Mako v.2 - across an empty terrain - for 20 hours with 4 other people online. If people didn't want to drive the Mako v. 2 across an empty terrain for 20 hours to play combat MP, then they shouldn't have bought a game with the Mako. If the consumer doesn't want it to work that way, in a free market economy they could find something else that suits their tastes.
Mockery of your silly position aside, that's not how the free market works. Developers are not psychic. They have no idea why people buy their games, or why they don't buy their games. They make marginally informed guesses.
I would be fine with it, though your analogy is extremely flawed. To date no singleplayer mode in any Bioware game has been "locked" behind multiplayer content, only very inconsequential easter eggs. You needn't play MP at to unlock SP in any of them, so I don't know where you are going with this. A better analogy would be a gun or mod that is unlocked by driving the Mako for 20 hours in SP, which I would be fine with and in fact welcome provided the Mako isn't overly boring and horribly implemented like the ME1 version (and even if it were, I wouldn't cry about it or would simply not do it at all if the cost outweighed the benefit of the item for me). It is also highly unlikely to happen unless there is potentially some revenue to be gained by encouraging people to drive the Mako in whatever model the game uses.
Easy deconstruction of your ill concieved and clearly not butthurt motivated hyperbolic analogies aside, that's exactly how a free market works. The developer is motivated primarily by two things, an artistic vision and maximizing profit. If a feature promotes or does not detract from these things it is included. Encouraging people to use their whole product is in the developer's interest, especially if there is a potential revenue stream they are missing out on. It isn't hard to comprehend at all unless you are some BSN fossil who has engaged in groupthink with like minded individuals that they managed to meet via the internet, stumbling their way forward to the ill conceived conclusion that they are not part of an extremely small minority of consumers, and further a group that will buy the games despite the inclusion of their ideological nemesis (multiplayer modes) in said games, so should not be pandered to for any reason.
Retour en haut
