54 réponses à ce sujet

[Ajensis]

You haven't explained anything. And I'm not being the childish one here.

In all seriousness though, if "the devs said so to the fans" is your entire argument, then you have no argument.
ANYTHING companies state to the public is marketing/damage control of some kind. I doubt they would tell their fans they cut half of the SP in favor for the MP because that's where they expect the most profit. Imagine the sh*tstorm. Nor would developers ever admit they cut content to sell it as DLC later.
I'm not saying they are necessarily lying. But nothing a company says publicly is fact. That would be incredibly naive.

So unless anybody has been in the room with management when they decided on the budget, there is no proof of anything.

 

What you're saying has some degree of truth to it, but you're taking an otherwise healthy scepticism to the extreme here. Choosing to write off anything a developer posts/tweets/whatever as simply marketing is a gross overreaction and makes it very hard to discuss a topic such as this with you, simply due to having two wildly different starting points.

 

I'm curious: how do you picture the dozens of Bioware employees tweeting out stuff? Are they directed by someone up top, maybe an EA guy, or are they willingly spreading marketing ploys? If so, for what personal gain? Or perhaps they're all a front and actually written by the same person using different accounts? This isn't meant as snarky, rhetorical questions, I simply find it very hard to imagine your view of video game developers. We get most of our information, directly or indirectly, from the personal accounts of Bioware developers... Are they in on it? Doesn't that seem a tad bit unrealistic?

[Ahglock]

What you're saying has some degree of truth to it, but you're taking an otherwise healthy scepticism to the extreme here. Choosing to write off anything a developer posts/tweets/whatever as simply marketing is a gross overreaction and makes it very hard to discuss a topic such as this with you, simply due to having two wildly different starting points.
 
I'm curious: how do you picture the dozens of Bioware employees tweeting out stuff? Are they directed by someone up top, maybe an EA guy, or are they willingly spreading marketing ploys? If so, for what personal gain? Or perhaps they're all a front and actually written by the same person using different accounts? This isn't meant as snarky, rhetorical questions, I simply find it very hard to imagine your view of video game developers. We get most of our information, directly or indirectly, from the personal accounts of Bioware developers... Are they in on it? Doesn't that seem a tad bit unrealistic?

 
Things like this?

There most definitely will be party lines. I get them at my work. If people ask X, this is what you tell them. If asked X, do I tell them the party line. For the most part yes unless I find it unethical in some way. And I'm in a position that is really really hard to get fired from. So yeah, for budgets especially given the touchy nature of adding MP to single player games for the pure SP fan I expect they are all given set lines to tell people with little variation. And it could be things that are mostly true, totally true, Ben kenobi true etc.

For example its separate budgets that can be true, but what if the full truth is based on inflation etc a pure SP game would get $80 million in budget this generation of games. They give them two separate budgets one is $60 mil for SP and they get a second totally separate budget of $20mil for MP. Yup two separate budgets but it did in fact reduce the SP budget. So they tell us the truth but not the behind the scene truth.
 

[Beerfish]

And how many item packs do they have to buy before they get that Cerberus Harrier? If you want to waste your money on these item packs then it appears nothing I can say will dissuade you, but know your complicity in these services is what makes them viable, the RNG shop was never introduced for the benefit of the player but rather as a method for EA and Bioware to squeeze everything they can from player, it's sole purpose is to manipulate the player into spending more money for items that are already in the game in a game they already spent $60 on, if that is not crossing some sort of line then what does it take for you to say enough?

Hmmm, yeah those who pay cash for things makes mp games viable.  There are a whole lot of people who have had hours of enjoyment in these mo games that have never paid a cent that owe their free games to those who do pay some real money.  They should be applauded and back patted.  The alternative is no mp aspect at all.

 

If your point is that there should be no such animal then come right out and say it.  At this point in time the best, most effective and profitable way is the way it is set up now.  No fragmentation of a community, choice to pay or not.

 

The big weakness in the Rng in the past and the part that is not fair is that those that pay real cash have no better chance to get better items than those that grind. 

[Beerfish]

 
Things like this?

There most definitely will be party lines. I get them at my work. If people ask X, this is what you tell them. If asked X, do I tell them the party line. For the most part yes unless I find it unethical in some way. And I'm in a position that is really really hard to get fired from. So yeah, for budgets especially given the touchy nature of adding MP to single player games for the pure SP fan I expect they are all given set lines to tell people with little variation. And it could be things that are mostly true, totally true, Ben kenobi true etc.

For example its separate budgets that can be true, but what if the full truth is based on inflation etc a pure SP game would get $80 million in budget this generation of games. They give them two separate budgets one is $60 mil for SP and they get a second totally separate budget of $20mil for MP. Yup two separate budgets but it did in fact reduce the SP budget. So they tell us the truth but not the behind the scene truth.
 

That is not at all often how funding for projects work.  Here have 80 million dollars to spend as you wish, oh adding mp?  Then chop your sp budget to 60 million.

 

It's more along the exact lines that BioWare have stated in the past.  EA:  "How much funding is needed for ME3?"  BioWare 60 million.  Then if they are going to add another component they are confident can make more money it will get a budget.

 

Mp overall is reasonably cheap for them because they have already made the environs, models, animations etc.  It does have to make money via micro transactions however to justify the people they do have on the mp team.

[Fidite Nemini]

Considering the ME3 MP was originally a standalone multiplayer game made in a freshly opened studio in Montreal after ME2 (so it obviously had its own budget, they don't work for free in their own garages) and was only later merged into ME3 as the latter's MP component (ME3 SP was developed by a different team in Edmonton), all this nonsense about the MP taking away from SP budget is completely bonkers.

 

The MP development being changed into being its own standalone game into the MP component of the ME3 game is more likely to have taken away from the MP budget if anything.

 

 

But who cares for facts, they're all marketing lies anyway. OBVIOUSLY MP only took away precious time, manpower and money from the SP so the writers didn't have enough time to write endings that everyone and his/her mom would've loved. It's all the MP's fault. It is known.

 

 

 

*sigh*