I expect customization and lots of it. I want my multiplayer character to be my own. I want to choose my armor, my class, and my weapons. I especially want to choose my colors and not that weird "two-tint" bull. No faces are needed, but let us make our characters unique.
Absolutely - I'd like much more customisation of appearance, kit and so on for multiplayer characters so they feel more unique.
I expect the multiplayer to be much the same as ME:3's multiplayer. That game has a large following and a dedicated fanbase. Any developer will know that when you build a multiplayer like that and you have a group of players that enjoy it so thoroughly, you don't change that. You keep it much the same, and only tweak it ever so slightly so as to provide a new experience.
If they dramatically change it, they risk losing what they once had; and games like these with multiplayer functions, they very rarely last years after the games release.
<<<<<<<<<<(0)>>>>>>>>>>
"I expect the multiplayer to be much the same as ME:3's multiplayer..."
Agreed.
This means grinding for a month(s) to get decent:
1.- equipment gear and consumables
2.- in-game currency to buy the decent Packs
3.- to be able to customize your character
4.- to level up the character
5.- to unlock a handful of character classes
6.- to unlock some decent SMGs
7.- to unlock some decent Rifles
8.- to unlock some decent Shotguns
9.- to unlock some decent Sniper weapons
10.- to reach max level of supplies
11.- use micro$transaction to bypass the above.
What is helpful is the ability to use out maxed SP character in MP mode, once we finished the Single Player Campaign.
So what I actually want for ME:A MP is:
> Bring back the weekly balance changes. They kept things fresh and I suspect did a lot to keep players around.
> Free DLC again. Use the Microtransactions to pay for it if you want.
> More customization of characters and weapons. More mods(bring back armour mods from ME1). More colour options. Make Skin Colour actually significant without modifying the Coalesced file.
> Highlord Claymore
> Banter is fun to hear, but for the love of all that is holy don't make it as repetitive as DAMP's banter. I don't need to hear about how much the Elven Keeper has learned traveling with you all 50 times per match.
> I'm inclined to say make the whole thing a simulation like the Armax Arena, so that we can introduce characters and enemies that break lore simply because they're cool. I mean, ME3 MP's link to lore is already really weak and minimal anyway.
> Better netcode. Legends say that the early Vanguards are still stuck in orbit to this day.
What I expect out of it, I'm not sure. What I worry is that it will be a flop like DAMP was rather than something that recaptures the magic of ME3 MP while making refinements to some of the things that needed addressing.
What do I expect? Lots of things, TBH.
I. Game modes and missions.
ME 3 MP – being pretty interesting – IMO somewhat lacks diversity in terms of the game modes: wave survival mode (aka horde mode, exterminatus mode etc.) as the only one available is not that much, is it? I have nothing against its co-operative PvE nature, though – exactly this aspect is a very good finding, PvP one – yet again IMO – would be way less popular. What all my suggestions are all about – is adding some more pure military logic without going beyond the current model.
As for current wave defense mode itself – the only question about it is: damn, what on Earth 10 waves?! IFRL it would be 2 waves at the very most: if first wave (let’s call it “chutzpa run” or “thunder run”, a rapid attack with relatively weak forces) is somehow repelled – any normal commander will send each and every soldier and vehicle available to the second attack.
Hence – there’s no way to repel such an attack completely with 4 (6, 8) men (even such super-duper ones, as they are depicted in ME 3 MP). In most cases there’s no need in such heroic deeds either: it’s enough to hold until either your reinforcements arrive or some kind of air or orbital strike can be performed. Id est – only for certain amount of time.
So my first suggested mission type is – “Defense” with 2 subtypes:
Next mission type is – “Spearhead”, also with 2 subtypes:
Third mission type is – “Assassinate”, the name speaks for itself: break or sneak into the enemy base, find the person of interest and eliminate one (pretty much like in the Syndicate game of the very same 2012, as ME3). You should expect this person to be heavily guarded, as well as possible enemy attempts to evacuate your target (meaning limited time to fulfill the mission).
Fourth mission type could be “Snatch”: get into the enemy base (pretty often in more than one stage – pretty much like in the Brink or Syndicate, again), and:
Any of above mentioned scenarios can have additional complications like: enemy attempts to make a backup copy and erase the data, while you get through to it, tries to evacuate your person of interest or valuable asset before you capture one (which all means limited time to get to it) and, naturally, attempts to take your prey back or destroy it on your way back to the rally point.
Also, there should be some more options for deployment to the mission - both one of your team and one of your enemies:
On the other hand - no random spawning should occur during the missions (as it currently is in the ME3 MP, where enemies can appear in any moment right behind your back): real-life military objects have limited options for getting in there. If, for instance, you defend some your base – you know its entry points. If you are about to attack the enemy one – all the more so, you should know where end how you can get in.
The very same situation - with evacuation: there should be different types of it:
Just like with dropping - no randomly generated evac zones, only ones with clear military logic in selection.
In the nutshell – there should be in various (in many ways) shorter missions with ONE main objective (as it mostly is IFRL).
II. Enemies
The element I’m a tad concerned here is a general “quantity over quality” approach: hordes of enemies which you destroy and scores like 75 kills per single mission surely feed the players’ ego (and through this - publishers' and, to some extent, developers' bank accounts), but – are fairly insane from the military point of view.
Thus – I for one would like to see on the enemy side pretty similar classes with the very same abilities as we have: normal vanguards with Biotic Charge, snipers, which can sync-kill the player (especially ones with heavy sniper rifles like Widow or Javelin, not even having to score a headshot to kill a player), engineers with Incinerate, Cryo Blast or Shield Drain, infiltrators with Tactical Cloak plus Overload or Snap Freeze et cetera. Must accent – not hordes of such enemies, there should be way less of them, but – they should be ones of higher quality: the score of 10 - 12 kills per mission should be obtainable only for fairly good players.
For instance (in ME3 terms): the Cerberus Assault Troopers should be armed with Mattocks instead of Hornets (as it is shown in the most of cut scenes), and – damn, they look pretty well-armored (not having any armor in the game), so at least some light armor would be logical on them. Practically – they should be like Dragoons with Mattocks and grenades, but without that melee jump. Respectively Centurions – as higher rank – should use the Harriers already and have both shields and armor. And so damn on
Also - they should have some kind of military organization: for instance – 1 Centurion and 9 – 10 Assault Troopers should form a squad. Special troops like Combat Engineers, Adepts, Vanguards, Sentinels or Infiltrators – should be attached to the squads. 2 – 3 such reinforced squads plus Atlas or Ymir mech (from ME2) could form a kind of strike or guard force (as it is pretty well shown in the cut scene where Shepard meets the Jacob in ME3). Or - special and support classes could form smaller (4-5 men) task groups with their own kind of sergeant each. Just imagine fighting 5 normal Vanguards with Charge and, for instance, Lash or Nova. Or 5 Black Widow - armed Infiltrators with Tactical Cloak and, say, Snap Freeze or / and some kind of grenades. I'd say, it would be pretty thrilling. For mere justice sake - there were nice attempts to add some more prominent enemies to the game - for instance, Rampant mechs, "CAT 6" mercenaries and mirror matches on the Armax Arena, but - it all took place in SP.
III. Some concerns about the combat mechanic.
Shields, barriers and armor.
Should NOT be the “absolute protection until worn out” thing. Their level of protection must be limited – pretty much like the one of the armor is. For convenience sake I’d propose to express it like thickness of the armor plate which it matches in its protective properties: for instance, “the shield resistance is 12.7 mm (or 0.5 inch) ”
.
Respectively, all weapons should, besides damage, have 2 stats for penetration - "armor penetration" and "shield penetration". Weapons with penetration higher, than shield resistance – pierce it and transfer their damage (though not entirely) to the further layers of protection (armor) or directly damage the health/system integrity. Weapons with penetration lower, than shield resistance - merely wear them out, as it is now. Situation with armor is a tad different - weapon with low penetration merely do not pierce it and don't do any damage
Some weapons – like energy (laser, plasma, particle beam) ones, melee weapons, technical and biotic abilities (except for respective explosions) – should bypass the kinetic shields: laser and particle beam weaponry merely do not have the projectiles, while plasma weapon “projectiles”, melee and technical / biotic abilities have way too low speed to trigger them.
All above mentioned things bypassing the kinetic shields (save the melee) could (I’d rather say – should) be caught by another type of shields – the energy ones. Naturally, these energy shields do not protect from any kind of mechanical damage. Thus – the only protections from melee are – yep, good old armor and body implants like "heavy bone weave".
Armor - in term– is no way the absolute protection either: kinetic weapons with good penetration, as well as laser and plasma ones pierce it and deal damage directly to the wearer’s health. Certain biotic and cryogenic abilities can significantly weaken it (as it currently is in ME3). On the other hand fire-based abilities should not be the "armor killers" - they should bypass the protection granted by armor to certain extent (as well as cryogenic weapons).
There could be 3 levels of armor used in the hardsuits – light, medium and heavy one (marked respectively by light-yellow (lemon), dark yellow (sienna) and orange).
Biotic barriers - could be universal, i.e. protecting from both kinetic and energy weapons, but - granting weaker protection, than kinetic and energy shilds.
Shields restore, armor repair, healing and revival
Shields and barriers are pretty rapidly worn out and the very same way rapidly and automatically restored (as it is now).
Armor, on the other hand, is way harder and slower to destroy – and, respectively, way slower to restore. It does not restore by itself – there could (and should) be some kind of manually triggered “Nano – repair kit” or “Omni-repair kit” for it. Another option – there could be some omni-gel storage (of limited capacity) and dispensing system for it in the hardsuit. The dispensing of the omni-gel (and, respectively, armor repair) should be turned on and off manually.
Pretty much the same way (storage of limited capacity and manually triggered dispensing system) should work the healing and (if present) battlefield revival. They both should work pretty much like the current Bloodlust, just without buffs – restore health over time with certain speed. Healing is started by the hardsuit wearer, while revival – only by teammates ("once someone is incapacitated – no actions can be taken by oneself" is a pretty fair approach, isn't it?). Both processes spend the medi-gel. If someone is out of medi-gel on the mission (has taken too much damage) – it’s up to one’s teammates if to heal (revive) or not to heal (revive) him/her, spending their own medi-gel (healing / reviving the squadmate should not be free, as it is now).
Sync-kills must be permanent – no “rising in the end of the wave”. Currently sync-kills are mostly melee ones. I for one would like to see more of them of distant kind – like headshot from enemy sniper (especially heavy one) or direct hit from a vehicle cannon (in ME2/3 terms – Geth Armature’s one, as well as Atlas’s one must be instantly lethal). Sync-killed teammates could be replaced in-between the mission stages (and only then, no deployment into the thick of battle and death during the loading screen should take place).
stuff
Everyone don't like MP I get it, but you know there is always the option to just not play it if you don't like it, quite a lot of us enjoy it way more than SP, but most of us (other than some ironic troll threads) don't demand that SP is completely removed.
That is the problem with ME3's mp, they tied it in to the sp. They should make the mp relate to the story, but not be a part of it. In that way, those who like mp will be happy, and those who dislike it, will be happy since they do not have to play it to get a perfect ending or whatever.
Wow zipzap.
I'm the last person to write tldr. But even my eyes glazed over that length. +1 for effort. I
Might have to schedule a bit of reading for the next month.
What do I expect? Lots of things, TBH.
I. Game modes and missions.
ME 3 MP – being pretty interesting – IMO somewhat lacks diversity in terms of the game modes: wave survival mode (aka horde mode, exterminatus mode etc.) as the only one available is not that much, is it? I have nothing against its co-operative PvE nature, though – exactly this aspect is a very good finding, PvP one – yet again IMO – would be way less popular. What all my suggestions are all about – is adding some more pure military logic without going beyond the current model.
As for current wave defense mode itself – the only question about it is: damn, what on Earth 10 waves?! IFRL it would be 2 waves at the very most: if first wave (let’s call it “chutzpa run” or “thunder run”, a rapid attack with relatively weak forces) is somehow repelled – any normal commander will send each and every soldier and vehicle available to the second attack.
Hence – there’s no way to repel such an attack completely with 4 (6, 8) men (even such super-duper ones, as they are depicted in ME 3 MP). In most cases there’s no need in such heroic deeds either: it’s enough to hold until either your reinforcements arrive or some kind of air or orbital strike can be performed. Id est – only for certain amount of time.
So my first suggested mission type is – “Defense” with 2 subtypes:
- hold the line until your reinforcements arrive or
- plant some homing beacon, defend it until the air or orbital strike is ready, and run like hell (or break through the enemy) to the nearest safe place to enjoy the fire show
- in both cases – there can be a final stage – a mopping-up operation to finish the remainders of the enemy forces;
- respectively, in none of them there will be any kind of need to evacuate;
Next mission type is – “Spearhead”, also with 2 subtypes:
- “Capture” - your group’s task is to establish a foothold on the enemy base and defend it until your main force arrives;
- “Destroy” - break into the enemy base with brute force or infiltrate by stealth, plant the big bomb or above mentioned homing beacon and get to the designated evacuation point to enjoy the fire show being aboard something fast and preferably armored. Slightly more complicated kind of such a mission – after establishing a foothold your team defends it until that big nasty bomb or homing beacon is delivered and set up.
Third mission type is – “Assassinate”, the name speaks for itself: break or sneak into the enemy base, find the person of interest and eliminate one (pretty much like in the Syndicate game of the very same 2012, as ME3). You should expect this person to be heavily guarded, as well as possible enemy attempts to evacuate your target (meaning limited time to fulfill the mission).
Fourth mission type could be “Snatch”: get into the enemy base (pretty often in more than one stage – pretty much like in the Brink or Syndicate, again), and:
- copy, move or delete some data (defending your position in process, pretty much like current “hack” special mission);
- capture some person of interest and interrogate one (no roughstuff, only “serum of truth”), defending your position in process;
- capture some material asset and deliver it to the designated zone where you (and your enemy, of course) meet either dropship covered by some gunships or, for instance, more serious landing party of yours with some mechs, Macos or Hammerheads (pretty similar to current delivery special missions, just with some more saucy ending);
- capture some person of interest (by injecting some drugs to one) and deliver one to the designated location (if anyone here had played Brink, it’s something similar – pretty much like the current drone escort, just with a good chance to lose your object merely killed by a stray (or well-placed intended) bullet, fragment or explosion)
Any of above mentioned scenarios can have additional complications like: enemy attempts to make a backup copy and erase the data, while you get through to it, tries to evacuate your person of interest or valuable asset before you capture one (which all means limited time to get to it) and, naturally, attempts to take your prey back or destroy it on your way back to the rally point.
Also, there should be some more options for deployment to the mission - both one of your team and one of your enemies:
- deployment out of the object's line of sight, probably with Mako or other transportation means to reach it;
- assault deployment - in the line of sight of the object, using the assault dropship (or shuttle with some heavy armament on board) with some gunships covering your landing and performing the initial suppression of the enemy defenses;
- stealth deployment - using stealth dropship with powerful electronic warfare equipment on it;
- air drop using the (already shown in the trailer) jetpacks or some other anti-gravity systems;
- orbital drop in drop pods - right upon the enemies' ears;
On the other hand - no random spawning should occur during the missions (as it currently is in the ME3 MP, where enemies can appear in any moment right behind your back): real-life military objects have limited options for getting in there. If, for instance, you defend some your base – you know its entry points. If you are about to attack the enemy one – all the more so, you should know where end how you can get in.
The very same situation - with evacuation: there should be different types of it:
- currently present uncovered evacuation with landing shuttle, just made a little bit more realistically - current 2 minutes to arrive are good, but "no need to get into shuttle, it's enough to be in some circle" is no good at all: there should be some limited time (I assume 30 s) to get into the shuttle under enemy fire with shuttle firing back (i.e. from the reverse side of the shuttle to avoid blocking its fire arc - pretty much like in some ME 3 SP mission with shooting the geth rocket troopers );
- covered evacuation - shuttle or dropship is covered by, say, 2 gunships. All the rest is about the same;
- stealth evacuation - by a kind of a stealth shuttle with powerful electronic warfare equipment. No need to load under enemy fire, but - way longer ETA and necessity to go beyond the enemy base;
- land evacuation - in the rally point you (and your enemy) meet some Mako or Hammerhead with pretty serious rearguard party;
- mid-air snatch - shuttle or dropship do not land, only hover for limited amount of time, and players must get aboard with their vertical mobility systems (aka jetpacks) or drawn aboard one by one with some kind of rope with homing grapple. Also can be covered or uncovered
Just like with dropping - no randomly generated evac zones, only ones with clear military logic in selection.
In the nutshell – there should be in various (in many ways) shorter missions with ONE main objective (as it mostly is IFRL).
II. Enemies
The element I’m a tad concerned here is a general “quantity over quality” approach: hordes of enemies which you destroy and scores like 75 kills per single mission surely feed the players’ ego (and through this - publishers' and, to some extent, developers' bank accounts), but – are fairly insane from the military point of view.
Thus – I for one would like to see on the enemy side pretty similar classes with the very same abilities as we have: normal vanguards with Biotic Charge, snipers, which can sync-kill the player (especially ones with heavy sniper rifles like Widow or Javelin, not even having to score a headshot to kill a player), engineers with Incinerate, Cryo Blast or Shield Drain, infiltrators with Tactical Cloak plus Overload or Snap Freeze et cetera. Must accent – not hordes of such enemies, there should be way less of them, but – they should be ones of higher quality: the score of 10 - 12 kills per mission should be obtainable only for fairly good players.
For instance (in ME3 terms): the Cerberus Assault Troopers should be armed with Mattocks instead of Hornets (as it is shown in the most of cut scenes), and – damn, they look pretty well-armored (not having any armor in the game), so at least some light armor would be logical on them. Practically – they should be like Dragoons with Mattocks and grenades, but without that melee jump. Respectively Centurions – as higher rank – should use the Harriers already and have both shields and armor. And so damn on
Also - they should have some kind of military organization: for instance – 1 Centurion and 9 – 10 Assault Troopers should form a squad. Special troops like Combat Engineers, Adepts, Vanguards, Sentinels or Infiltrators – should be attached to the squads. 2 – 3 such reinforced squads plus Atlas or Ymir mech (from ME2) could form a kind of strike or guard force (as it is pretty well shown in the cut scene where Shepard meets the Jacob in ME3). Or - special and support classes could form smaller (4-5 men) task groups with their own kind of sergeant each. Just imagine fighting 5 normal Vanguards with Charge and, for instance, Lash or Nova. Or 5 Black Widow - armed Infiltrators with Tactical Cloak and, say, Snap Freeze or / and some kind of grenades. I'd say, it would be pretty thrilling. For mere justice sake - there were nice attempts to add some more prominent enemies to the game - for instance, Rampant mechs, "CAT 6" mercenaries and mirror matches on the Armax Arena, but - it all took place in SP.
III. Some concerns about the combat mechanic.
Shields, barriers and armor.
Should NOT be the “absolute protection until worn out” thing. Their level of protection must be limited – pretty much like the one of the armor is. For convenience sake I’d propose to express it like thickness of the armor plate which it matches in its protective properties: for instance, “the shield resistance is 12.7 mm (or 0.5 inch) ”
.
Respectively, all weapons should, besides damage, have 2 stats for penetration - "armor penetration" and "shield penetration". Weapons with penetration higher, than shield resistance – pierce it and transfer their damage (though not entirely) to the further layers of protection (armor) or directly damage the health/system integrity. Weapons with penetration lower, than shield resistance - merely wear them out, as it is now. Situation with armor is a tad different - weapon with low penetration merely do not pierce it and don't do any damage
Some weapons – like energy (laser, plasma, particle beam) ones, melee weapons, technical and biotic abilities (except for respective explosions) – should bypass the kinetic shields: laser and particle beam weaponry merely do not have the projectiles, while plasma weapon “projectiles”, melee and technical / biotic abilities have way too low speed to trigger them.
All above mentioned things bypassing the kinetic shields (save the melee) could (I’d rather say – should) be caught by another type of shields – the energy ones. Naturally, these energy shields do not protect from any kind of mechanical damage. Thus – the only protections from melee are – yep, good old armor and body implants like "heavy bone weave".
Armor - in term– is no way the absolute protection either: kinetic weapons with good penetration, as well as laser and plasma ones pierce it and deal damage directly to the wearer’s health. Certain biotic and cryogenic abilities can significantly weaken it (as it currently is in ME3). On the other hand fire-based abilities should not be the "armor killers" - they should bypass the protection granted by armor to certain extent (as well as cryogenic weapons).
There could be 3 levels of armor used in the hardsuits – light, medium and heavy one (marked respectively by light-yellow (lemon), dark yellow (sienna) and orange).
Biotic barriers - could be universal, i.e. protecting from both kinetic and energy weapons, but - granting weaker protection, than kinetic and energy shilds.
Shields restore, armor repair, healing and revival
Shields and barriers are pretty rapidly worn out and the very same way rapidly and automatically restored (as it is now).
Armor, on the other hand, is way harder and slower to destroy – and, respectively, way slower to restore. It does not restore by itself – there could (and should) be some kind of manually triggered “Nano – repair kit” or “Omni-repair kit” for it. Another option – there could be some omni-gel storage (of limited capacity) and dispensing system for it in the hardsuit. The dispensing of the omni-gel (and, respectively, armor repair) should be turned on and off manually.
Pretty much the same way (storage of limited capacity and manually triggered dispensing system) should work the healing and (if present) battlefield revival. They both should work pretty much like the current Bloodlust, just without buffs – restore health over time with certain speed. Healing is started by the hardsuit wearer, while revival – only by teammates ("once someone is incapacitated – no actions can be taken by oneself" is a pretty fair approach, isn't it?). Both processes spend the medi-gel. If someone is out of medi-gel on the mission (has taken too much damage) – it’s up to one’s teammates if to heal (revive) or not to heal (revive) him/her, spending their own medi-gel (healing / reviving the squadmate should not be free, as it is now).
Sync-kills must be permanent – no “rising in the end of the wave”. Currently sync-kills are mostly melee ones. I for one would like to see more of them of distant kind – like headshot from enemy sniper (especially heavy one) or direct hit from a vehicle cannon (in ME2/3 terms – Geth Armature’s one, as well as Atlas’s one must be instantly lethal). Sync-killed teammates could be replaced in-between the mission stages (and only then, no deployment into the thick of battle and death during the loading screen should take place).
I don't know who you are but Zaps dead! You want a job as my twin?
Nice offer :-) the only hindrance here is - that I'm not as active here, as you are (34 posts including this one versus 3138 ... slightly more, than 1%).
On the other hand - I've already got a continuation to that wall of text :-)) ... concerning my seeing of the hardsuits and weapons.
That is the problem with ME3's mp, they tied it in to the sp. They should make the mp relate to the story, but not be a part of it. In that way, those who like mp will be happy, and those who dislike it, will be happy since they do not have to play it to get a perfect ending or whatever.
They fixed that due to the epic nerd rage from the SP fans, you don't need to spend a second in MP to get it, and it's a 5 second scene extra if you chose the destroy ending.
When ME3 was launched I played it only for SP, back then I didn't care about MP at all. Did it bother me that I didn't get to see that one little scene? No not at all (just YouTube it). This whole outcry over "MP ruining my SP experience!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" is among the most ridiculous I have seen and I find it remarkable that so many put so much effort into complaining over something so trivial, guess that says a lot about people's lives these days.
I bet their MP abstinence made them just more bitter when they saw other people having fun with it.
I interpreted your sentence along a line which you probably didn't intend. My thinking after reading your post :That is the problem with ME3's mp, they tied it in to the sp. They should make the mp relate to the story, but not be a part of it. In that way, those who like mp will be happy, and those who dislike it, will be happy since they do not have to play it to get a perfect ending or whatever.
> Better netcode. Legends say that the early Vanguards are still stuck in orbit to this day.
well, not much...
boredom probably...
They fixed that due to the epic nerd rage from the SP fans, you don't need to spend a second in MP to get it, and it's a 5 second scene extra if you chose the destroy ending.
When ME3 was launched I played it only for SP, back then I didn't care about MP at all. Did it bother me that I didn't get to see that one little scene? No not at all (just YouTube it). This whole outcry over "MP ruining my SP experience!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" is among the most ridiculous I have seen and I find it remarkable that so many put so much effort into complaining over something so trivial, guess that says a lot about people's lives these days.
MP ruined my SP experience because it's so fun that I haven't had time to play through the campaign again.
Well to be honest, confession time here, I used to be oblivious to the mp, the me123 games are pretty much my favorite games I've ever played, but then once I tried the mp I was absolutely hooked. Now whenever I get on to play, I definitely want to play more sp but I can't quit that rush I get from playing mp.
I interpreted your sentence along a line which you probably didn't intend. My thinking after reading your post :
Write a story that can include /exclude components of SP and MP. The story is centre, not your preferred mode of play.
Explained:
Ie. If someone wants to do pure SP he get a endings of type A.
For a multiplayer, it might be B ) which is probably less than a). For those that like to totally immerse and brings friends with them C) which is way more than a) or b ) summed. Since this is the prime clientele that brings money, group pressure etc.
So you get the type of ending which you chose yourself to invest (time/money) in.
No storyline ever belonged or belongs to a single group.
You are right by thinking that that is not what I meant at all.
I dunno if I need to explain myself, but basically, have the mp relate to the story (maybe fight for a planet, or gang wars or sth), but do not have that actually show in the sp (i.e. you will not see that particular planet being occupied by whoever won in mp).
Have mp in the setting and theme of the game, but do not tie it into the sp game. No assets type of thing. Just make mp for the fun of mp, and make sp for all the other reasons (including fun of course).
Well to be honest, confession time here, I used to be oblivious to the mp, the me123 games are pretty much my favorite games I've ever played, but then once I tried the mp I was absolutely hooked. Now whenever I get on to play, I definitely want to play more sp but I can't quit that rush I get from playing mp.
I somehow feel that sp and mp are not played for the same reasons. mp is combat and quick leveling, as well as curiosity of playing as different races with all sorts of different powers, but ultimately, combat and action.
sp I feel is not focused around that action and combat feel. I feel that if the next game does not have mp, it will be missing something, but it will still be a Mass Effect game in all of its glory. Mp does not define ME for me (no pun intended), but it is a fun addition, and should be considered as such.
It was probably a nice way for me to share a different opinion.You are right by thinking that that is not what I meant at all.
I dunno if I need to explain myself, but basically, have the mp relate to the story (maybe fight for a planet, or gang wars or sth), but do not have that actually show in the sp (i.e. you will not see that particular planet being occupied by whoever won in mp).
Have mp in the setting and theme of the game, but do not tie it into the sp game. No assets type of thing. Just make mp for the fun of mp, and make sp for all the other reasons (including fun of course).
I find it remarkable that so many put so much effort into complaining over something so trivial, guess that says a lot about people's lives these days.
No, it's not about people's 'lives' at all. It's just about wanting to enjoy the game experience without a forced intrusion into one's style of play.
But you are right, it is ridiculous to argue about MP vs SP. I've been watching quite a number of Youtube vids about ME-3 MP matches in order to get a sense of what it's all about. I see it all as a pointless 'hold the line' slayfest (not role-playing at all) for hours on end, with only the gratification of spamming enemy henchmen for eternity. It's just my POV for what interests me, not a criticism of MP players. If I really wanted 10 waves for holding the line, then I'd just buy Halo or some other 'blast 'em to eternity' game. As MP play was implemented, I just don't see it as role-playing. New uniforms, different weapons, and playing as an alien (with no dialog decisions) just seems like a new paint job for any other shooter game.
At least member 'MyDamnAlterEgo' has come up with numerous ideas for great goals to achieve in MP play (Well done. I tip my chapeau). Many of these are entirely adaptable to SP play as a DLC that can be offered as a dual release - or even included as missions in the main game (as opposed to loyalty missions).
I'm really curious to see how an identical MP version and SP version release would do in the marketplace. What would be the ratio of the numbers of people who would buy the SP version compared to the numbers of players who prefer to play the MP on-line version? I wonder if BW has ever done a study of something like this. Probably.
ME-3 MP was not 'trivial' as you describe it - it cut WA to 50% for SP, That was not trivial. Obviously there is vehement protest to make it clear to BW that they shouldn't try that game mechanic ever again - not for a role-playing game. Both can certainly coexist without sabotaging SP - and that's what ME-3 MP still feels like to me. Role-playing is very personal, not trivial.
Well to be honest, confession time here, I used to be oblivious to the mp, the me123 games are pretty much my favorite games I've ever played, but then once I tried the mp I was absolutely hooked. Now whenever I get on to play, I definitely want to play more sp but I can't quit that rush I get from playing mp.
I can't agree with this more. Watching videos on youtube is great and all, but until you're in that moment, you have no idea how you'd react. Until you are in that moment. And then you go down. And then somebody from your team picks you up again, brushes you off, and sets you back on your feet again.
And then finally, something just clicks. You're all in, loving ME3MP more than you've ever loved anything.
Retour en haut