171 réponses à ce sujet

[ZipZap2000]

Well there's no punchline, hence why it lacks any joke implication.

This place is still surprising me.

You took a DOS layout for Andromeda seriously?

[sjsharp2011]

Exactly my point.

Rhetorical question. Of course ME1 is still being played. Myself included.

The point is, long after support for MP is fully terminated, SP remains viable.

And me I just finished my last playthrough of ME1 about 3 days ago still got to take  my latest Shep into 2 and 3 though.

[Toddler Tosser]

You took a DOS layout for Andromeda seriously?

>Even sarcastic posts on BSN are dumb, this place still surprises me.

>sarcastic

>sarcastic

>sarcastic

 

Are all Krogan this slow?

[ZipZap2000]

>Even sarcastic posts on BSN are dumb, this place still surprises me.
>sarcastic
>sarcastic
>sarcastic

Are all Krogan this slow?

Are you forgetting the post you made that said there's was no punch line?

Asking for DOS layout in ME was the punch line.

No need for name calling, I'm not even a real a Krogan anyway.

[Toddler Tosser]

Are you forgetting the post you made that said there's was no punch line?

Asking for DOS layout in ME was the punch line.

No need for name calling, I'm not even a real a Krogan anyway.

That post was towards the poster who said I had a joke in my post. I said it had no punchline, hence why there's no joke.

 

Keep up Slowgan.

[ZipZap2000]

That post was towards the poster who said I had a joke in my post. I said it had no punchline, hence why there's no joke.

Keep up Slowgan.

Ah, so not only are you incapable of speaking clearly with a keyboard but now you're calling someone else slow.


Sounds like you need a good shot of Ryncol and a lie down.

[SKAR]

Ah, so not only are you incapable of speaking clearly with a keyboard but now you're calling someone else slow.


Sounds like you need a good shot of Ryncol and a lie down.

where's that poisoning racist batarian when you need you need him.

[Abramsrunner]

where's that poisoning racist batarian when you need you need him.

I made him drink his own poison. :3

[Toddler Tosser]

Ah, so not only are you incapable of speaking clearly with a keyboard but now you're calling someone else slow.


Sounds like you need a good shot of Ryncol and a lie down.

You mean type.

 

This place is still surprising me.

[ZipZap2000]

where's that poisoning racist batarian when you need you need him.

The Shepard got him!

[ZipZap2000]

You mean type.

This place is still surprising me.

Cling to the tattered remnants of your dignity welp, you are unworthy. I shall deliver to you the greatest insult one can give to an enemy.

To be ignored.

[Typhrus]

As usual, the statistics explain some of the story, but not all of it. Did it never occur to you that perhaps those players who prioritised SP eventually migrated over to MP, or vice versa? I'm sure there are a fair few who were very sceptical of the MP mode (myself included there) who went to try it out and found it surprisingly fun. Essentially, these statistics hide the numbers that played both, it is not an either/or situation.

 

Insanity runs? Doesn't really give a clear indication as to how many people completed the campaign, it only tells you the percentage of the people who bothered to finish an insanity run out of all the entirely completed campaign runs. One could extrapolate a more accurate answer if we had the actual numbers behind this though. Again, not an actual clear indicator of how many people finished playing SP. Also, the most that an insanity run changes are the damage tables that enemies deal and can take, it does not make the ai any smarter. I'm no game developer, but I imagine that changing those is a relatively easy thing to tweak.

 

The Wrex statistics can be dismissed with the possibility of those who began playing Mass Effect at the third instalment. I assume the default settings of the game had Wrex killed in ME1. So that little bit of information cannot really be used in a vacuum like it is here. Genophage one is interesting, as that implies that even with Wreav in control of the Krogans, the vast majority of players still chose to cure the genophage, a rather scary thought if that war monger got his ways.

 

The other statistics present interesting tid bits of information, but are not really helpful in gauging how many people played both, or purely one or the other.

 

Onto your other points,

Bioware was bought out by EA just before the release of ME1, Dragon Age Origins was their first game their first game completely published under EA (although arguably, that was ME2 as DA:O spent 5 years in development....) and was a resounding success- and purely a singleplayer game. So your point is incorrect as Bioware was a subsidiary of EA for at least 4 years prior to the release of ME3. Going on Bioware's next two releases (DA:O and ME2) would also strongly counter your claim that SP was declining rapidly within that time frame.

 

The statistic on how many people are still playing ME3MP I'd like to see, otherwise it just looks like the 40,000-50,000 number looks to be pulled out from nowehere. Arguably, the only thing it tells us is how surprisingly good ME3MP is after 4 years. But 530 odd players still playing SP is still also fairly remarkable for the game of this age. While it is a point that does support your claim, it does not make for an overwhelmingly convincing argument. Also, how many people still play DAIMP? It would be interesting to compare the two and their player bases. It might not accomplish anything, but it'd be interesting none-the-less.

 

Online play/always online is kind of being enforced as a ham-fisted manner of DRM. Most Bioware games only require you to be online once (to register the game) and then you can continue offline. It is a legitimate option to those who want to play offline and not be interrupted by other people online. Not everyone wants to have to put up with the potential idiocy of people online. To argue that 'real people' want to interact with other people is not substantiated and is soo general as to be devoid of a point. Some people do, some people don't and the responses above prove that- while a general statement as well, is at least a middle ground that could go either way.

 

It is fine that you and many others enjoy ME3MP and look forward to its implementation in MEA, but to force it as something compulsory for those who have no interest in it, is the height of arrogance. I don't agree with those who argue that Bioware games should be purely SP as well, they display the same sort of arrogance (although typically, at least well argued). in short, the statistics and argument you have presented are not convincing to me and completely ignores the people who enjoyed both SP and MP. Both types bring people back to the game many years after release and that can only be a good thing. It'd just be nice if both extreme groups realised that it isn't all black and white and that people like things differently.

[Sylvius the Mad]

- only 4% ever finished Insanity.

Wait, who cares how many people finished Insanity?  I've never even played Insanity (and I can't imagine why I would).

 

Moreover, I don't play these games to finish them; I play these games to play them.

 

I'm not even convinced that the concept of finishing the game applies to an RPG.

[KaiserShep]

I'm not even convinced that the concept of finishing the game applies to an RPG.

 

In this context, it just means ticking off the boxes for the main quest. Like, if you defeat Corypheus and reach the credits in DA:I, you "completed" the game, even if you ignored a ton of optional quests along the way. 

[Bfler]

- 64%  (more than half of the SP's didn't even meet Wrex). Ponder that for a moment in terms of Lore

 

Because he is replaced with Wreav, if you don't import an old savegame (I guess the majority of of ME 3 players didn't play ME 1) or a savegame, where he is alive. If, then it is a design decision or, in the former case, a flaw and has nothing to do with multiplayer.

 

 

The thread is idiotic, if you look at the success of games like Witcher 3 or Fallout 4. (And also a clear provocation, if you look at the last sentence of the OP)

[BohemiaDrinker]

Consider the scale:

 

3.2 billion people watched the games from the last World-Cup.

 

Clearly, Mass Effect should be turned into Space-Fifa.

[Eelectrica]

We really need some more information right about now.

Liked because Dave Mustaine gif. New Megadeth album ain't half bad. I thought I'd given up on them after the horrible mess that was Super Collider.

 

Oh yeah Mass Effect. Woo! Let's go to Andromeda

[Fuenf789]

...
As usual, the statistics explain

Thank you for opening the possibility for a logical debate.
We can say a lot bad about statistics- but the fact remains that it helps us to see the wood from the trees - or clarify some patterns. No doubt it can be misinterpreted. Even something as straightforward like total number of licences are sources for conflict by those that don't want to hear it (ie number of pirate copies, inherited games, bought but never installed, endless...).

I believe people are survivors by nature - so EA withholding the large number of stats also serves a purpose : people are better off hearing no messages in a bubble - than negative public messages. That builds lore, facts doesn't.
 

...

Not everyone wants to have to put up with the potential idiocy of people online. To argue that 'real people' want to interact with other people is not substantiated and is soo general as to be devoid of a point. Some people do, some people don't and the responses above prove that- while a general statement as well, is at least a middle ground that could go either way.

Simply using this thread as an example - in the end - we all want to have a choice on the freedom of association. You have trolls in SP we have trolls in MP. I think the crux is to allow people to exercise that option - without being gnomes themselves - hence I have to agree with you that I'd like some players out with dirty laundry - or even ban some constant perpetrators . That is about the only negative thing in mp that needs to be managable to make it fun for everyone.
In constrast - Hiding in a box / cutting youself of from people is seldom healthy - and is breeding spot for mal- aligned personalities.

A large community of people is always a good feedback mechanism, even if there are some bad apples here in there.
Hence , EA have a social responsibility to erridicate such potential abcesses (ie isolating yourself over years), where possible and help to rehabilitate some back into the natural world again of interaction and human communication.

[correctamundo]

I'm gonna laugh my azz off when all you MPers looking foward to ME3MP evolved end up with an ME equivalent to DAMP.

 

Well, they already seem very similar to me.

[78stonewobble]

1. Consider the scale - Out of the 10million ME licenses sold - there are not even more than 535 people left in the SP camp.

 

2. It has always been a dying business -

 

3. MP as the driving force:  In contrast there are ca 40k-50k me3 multiplayers online playing per week . 

 

4. The offline gaming mode is outdated anyway . Real people prefer real interactions (just look at the success of minecraft even with an extraordinary low investment in graphics. The sky is the limit. Is there a new way to put MP in the foreground and put some SP on the sideline for frivolous fooling around? MP is clearly the future - albeit the growing pains to handle truely peer-2-peer interactions. From a profitability perspective MP promises recurring revenue if executed correctly,

 

5. SP was always a once-off cash-sink.

 

6. - only 4% ever finished Insanity. Clearly, that is some unproductive investment of alternatively gameplay

 

7. - 88 million hours were spent on SP. Now first some may say that is a lot. But if you consider that there are 10m licences, it boils down to a mere average of 8 hours in total.  For mp, on average the median is between 0:50-2:30 hours every day, measured over two week intervals since 2012-2016.

 

8. - 64%  (more than half of the SP's didn't even meet Wrex). Ponder that for a moment in terms of Lore

 

9. - even in ME:A BSN forum we saw strong representation from the MP crowd : http://forum.bioware...a#entry20163544  
it goes to show that the full bouquet is not appreciated anyway - so the majority of the SP minority clearly prefers an easy way out to complete 813 steps in the shortest imaginable time : "Been there done that". 

A paradigm shift from http://forum.bioware...-compatibility/ is urgently needed to see the wood from the trees.

 

The only reason why some believe that SP players are on some map at all is because of the minuscle amount of duplicated avatars spamming "one liners" on the forum. Test theory with the anticipated responses, below, in this thread :

 

1. The scale is by itself irrelevant...

 

2. So you're saying that you wouldn't want to earn eg. 500.000.000 dollars... because it's singleplayer and outmoded and would instead earn eg. 900.000.000 dollars on multiplayer? Here's another and better suggestion... Earn both...

 

3. Are these players generating meaningfull income?

Did they become players for the singleplayer and stay around for "free" multiplayer?

Are these players likely to stay around if bioware is to generate meaningfull income from multiplayer? 

 

4. Fake people play mp, because I said so and I am obviously an allknowing and allpoerfull god... but more seriously you wanna change the core concept of the franchise based on random **** people can say? 

 

5. Yeah, no... that is flat out wrong. Untold millions have been generated in profits of the backs of singleplayer games. That is not to say that every singleplayer game will be successfull, but those that are, will generate profits. Kinda like multiplayer... ya have to be successfull to earn money, plenty of multiplayer games haven't been. 

 

6. You don't factor in whether just the option of insanity affects people's decision to buy. Do you think... possibly... that more options vs. less options generate extra sales? ... But go ahead and eliminate insanity. That's possibly 400.000 less copies sold, if we go only by the ones that finished it. 

 

7. Old play time stat vs. new licenses sold stat vs. new multiplayer stat. Incomparable... And again... How much revenue do the multiplayer players generate? Is there any stat biowares earnings on multiplayer? As compaired to selling the game? 

 

And how many mp players are willing to stick around to play, if it costs them significant amounts of money? 

 

8. At the time of the stats. Not necessarily the 10 mio. number... I think this is a question of me3 bringing in new players. 

 

9. Forum stats... That's original and totally a statistical significant non biased survey of the 10 million customers. 

 

...

 

You make it seem like the question is about 10 million 1 time paying singleplayer customers versus 10 million continiously paying multiplayer customers. 

 

It's not... As per your own stats it's about trying to generate the income that 10 million people buying a game once did, via 100.000 continiously paying customers and that's being generous... 

 

Yeah, sorry... I'm not gonna stay around in multiplayer for that pricehike. 

 

I have one spot for paid multiplayer and it's taken. 

 

And ... just for reference... 

 

Here's the 213 pages of multiplayer competition on steam.

http://store.steampo...egory3=1&page=1

[78stonewobble]

That is not to say there shouldn't be co-op or multiplayer in an mass effect game in the future...

 

The existance of which can generate more sales, since it creates more value for consumers...

 

But I just don't believe in fundamentally changing biowares core "business", which is a relative niche these days, it sits fairly well respected in, on the gamble that it can make it in a highly cutthroat market like multiplayer. 

 

I think that would be a huge mistake... 

 

Niches aren't bad... It means that you can do something the others can't. 

[Fuenf789]

1. The scale is by itself irrelevant...

 
Personal opinion without objective substantiation.
 

2. So you're saying that you wouldn't want to earn eg. 500.000.000 dollars... because it's singleplayer and outmoded and would instead earn eg. 900.000.000 dollars on multiplayer? Here's another and better suggestion... Earn both...

ofc earning both. Difference is a blip at the start and a continuous revenue flow until it gets hacked. MP got hacked early because their DRM was still old school. Back to the drawing board. Next time it will be even more strict - Like with any law - it restricts the majority of non-criminals to keep the minority of criminals as bay. Necessary evil. then.

 

3. Are these players generating meaningfull income?

Did they become players for the singleplayer and stay around for "free" multiplayer?
Are these players likely to stay around if bioware is to generate meaningfull income from multiplayer?

After been hacked? No, of course not. Before being hacked there are numerous accounts of players investing real dollars to catch-up with their friends. Who would give out money if the guy next door can assign himself 3 Trillion Credits.

I tried mp because it was for free after I finished SP and because I wanted to see what "readiness" will change. It really didn't make much difference. Didn't want to be forced to MP because I expected them to ridicule incompentent players. Seemed I was mostly wrong. Like most of the SP storyline, the SP choice consequences are purely superficial and finally only mean that one squad member is not there anymore. The rest continues basically quite standard with minor deviations.


 

4. Fake people play mp, because I said so and I am obviously an allknowing and allpoerfull god... but more seriously you wanna change the core concept of the franchise based on random **** people can say?

...Typical response for someone that have an imported opinion on something that they haven't checked out for themselves.
 

5. Yeah, no... that is flat out wrong. Untold millions have been generated in profits of the backs of singleplayer games. That is not to say that every singleplayer game will be successfull, but those that are, will generate profits. Kinda like multiplayer... ya have to be successfull to earn money, plenty of multiplayer games haven't been.

You contradict yourself - "Yeah, no." Make up your mind first and then speak.
 

6. You don't factor in whether just the option of insanity affects people's decision to buy. Do you think... possibly... that more options vs. less options generate extra sales? ... But go ahead and eliminate insanity. That's possibly 400.000 less copies sold, if we go only by the ones that finished it.

Who knows? Probably EA have been around a while and knows a bit about what sells to different segments. 4% is a confirmation that they miss on that gamble. Some you win some you lose.


 

7. Old play time stat vs. new licenses sold stat vs. new multiplayer stat. Incomparable... And again... How much revenue do the multiplayer players generate? Is there any stat biowares earnings on multiplayer? As compaired to selling the game? 

And how many mp players are willing to stick around to play, if it costs them significant amounts of money?

You bring emotive arguments and questions. I've put at least one objective infographic to substantiate my points. If you bring something yourself then I can expand with my other info. See it as a filter mechanism to ignore people that have no facts but still likes to blabber. Until then - talk to the hand.
 

8. At the time of the stats. Not necessarily the 10 mio. number... I think this is a question of me3 bringing in new players.

Personal opinion without objective substantiation.
 

9. Forum stats... That's original and totally a statistical significant non biased survey of the 10 million customers. 
 
...

 
You make it seem like the question is about 10 million 1 time paying singleplayer customers versus 10 million continiously paying multiplayer customers. 

 
It's not... As per your own stats it's about trying to generate the income that 10 million people buying a game once did, via 100.000 continiously paying customers and that's being generous... 
 
Yeah, sorry... I'm not gonna stay around in multiplayer for that pricehike. 
 
I have one spot for paid multiplayer and it's taken. 
 
And ... just for reference... 
 
Here's the 213 pages of multiplayer competition on steam.
http://store.steampo...egory3=1&page=1

You are contracting yourself again by thinking while typing. 5661 Multiplayer Titles - shows that many are interested in that and are willing to give out real money... But you brought your own counter argument : "Not willing to give out money and that makes me the ideal customer" - Umh. Ok...

[78stonewobble]

 
1. Personal opinion without objective substantiation.
 

2. ofc earning both. Difference is a blip at the start and a continuous revenue flow until it gets hacked. MP got hacked early because their DRM was still old school. Back to the drawing board. Next time it will be even more strict - Like with any law - it restricts the majority of non-criminals to keep the minority of criminals as bay. Necessary evil. then.

3. After been hacked? No, of course not. Before being hacked there are numerous accounts of players investing real dollars to catch-up with their friends. Who would give out money if the guy next door can assign himself 3 Trillion Credits.

4. I tried mp because it was for free after I finished SP and because I wanted to see what "readiness" will change. It really didn't make much difference. Didn't want to be forced to MP because I expected them to ridicule incompentent players. Seemed I was mostly wrong. Like most of the SP storyline, the SP choice consequences are purely superficial and finally only mean that one squad member is not there anymore. The rest continues basically quite standard with minor deviations.

5. ...Typical response for someone that have an imported opinion on something that they haven't checked out for themselves.
 
6. You contradict yourself - "Yeah, no." Make up your mind first and then speak.
 
7. Who knows? Probably EA have been around a while and knows a bit about what sells to different segments. 4% is a confirmation that they miss on that gamble. Some you win some you lose.

8. You bring emotive arguments and questions. I've put at least one objective infographic to substantiate my points. If you bring something yourself then I can expand with my other info. See it as a filter mechanism to ignore people that have no facts but still likes to blabber. Until then - talk to the hand.

9. Personal opinion without objective substantiation.
 
10. You are contracting yourself again by thinking while typing. 5661 Multiplayer Titles - shows that many are interested in that and are willing to give out real money... But you brought your own counter argument : "Not willing to give out money and that makes me the ideal customer" - Umh. Ok...

 

1. So was your original statement of the scale of 10 mio. sales and 535 sp players. It was just there to provoke an emotional response from large numbers vs. small. It tells us nothing.

 

2. And strict DRM has a positive effect on sales right? 

 

3. So they didn't earn alot of money on mp? And the fact that... according to you... most of their customers would rather break the EULA and possibly the law to pay money for their MP is a sign that MP is the way to go? 

 

4. You individual experience is not indicative of the majority's experience.

 

5. I don't have check it out for myself, that when someone speaks for everyone else... they are, by far, most often wrong. And the no true scotsman fallacy of "real people" kinda speaks for itself. Besides I just established you are not a real person since you enjoy MP and thus your oppinions don't matter... See the irony in presenting what you said as anything resembling a real argument? 

 

6. Maybe it was meant as a yeah? No! ... did ya think of that? But you have no disagreement with the fact that some singleplayer games earn big profits and that some multiplayer games earn so little profit the companies go belly up? And thus runs contradictory to your assertion that multiplayer is nigh automatically the right thing for mass effect and bioware. 

 

7. So multiplayer only mass effect might be a loose? Funnily you didn't mention that option before did you? There it was an "obvious" "win"? 

 

8. The demographics was objective... Your conclusions weren't. They have no factual statistical basis. Which is why you can't answer the questions, which are vital to actually making an informed decision as to whether mp is the right thing for the franchise. Without them... you are making ill informed subjective guesswork. Which is much more "emotive argumenting" than anything you can critique me for. 

 

9. So was your implied conclusions for the statistic... Show me a statistic that proves your implied conclusion or my hypothesis is equally valid as an explanation. 

 

10. No... That is not what I said and you missed the points. Which apparently I have to explain for you. 

 

A: There is alot of competition on multiplayer games. 

 

B: Very very few of them have decent active player numbers. 

 

C: To generate the equivalent of 10 million 1 time paying customers, you will have to have a very high "price" on multiplayer. Unless you wanna market your game with "pay once and then keep paying". Alot fewer companies can actually pull that off... 

 

PS: Just fyi. to generate the same amount of money with 100.000 players instead of 10 mio. buyers, each will need to pay 100 times as much. 

 

D: My experience on the other hand, while still not applicable to the majority, is indicative of the fact that you cannot assume that all 10 mio. people buying a mostly singleplayer game with free mp for only atleast a 1 time fee... can be assumed to be interested in paying for a mostly multiplayer game continiously....

 

You will at the very least have to amend your assertion of 10 mio. players to 9.999.999 and subtract anyone else, who proves you wrong. 

 

Though I'm sure we will be handwaved away as not being "real people". 

[Toddler Tosser]

wew lad

[Sylvius the Mad]

In this context, it just means ticking off the boxes for the main quest. Like, if you defeat Corypheus and reach the credits in DA:I, you "completed" the game, even if you ignored a ton of optional quests along the way.

Right, and I fail to see how that ever matters.

I also don't think it's reasonable to assume that any given player even intends to do that.