52 réponses à ce sujet

[Fiery Phoenix]

Before DA:I was released, there was widespread speculation that a multiplayer mode was to be incorporated. While BioWare was tight-lipped about it for a good while, EA eventually confirmed the rumors. Nearly two years post-launch, how do you think that worked out?

 

Personally, I've played the game enough to actually get all achievements (including Trespasser's), and I have literally not clicked Multiplayer on the main menu once. Thus, at least as far as I'm concerned, it was completely pointless and unnecessary.

 

Having said that, one thing BioWare did right with the MP this time is to make sure it didn't affect the campaign, so at least we didn't have to resort to pointless grinding like in ME3.

 

[Beerfish]

Necessary?  Nothing is necessary.  It was desired by quite a few people. It was desired by EA and BioWare after the success of ME3MP, they just screwed up the implementation badly.  I have played it a lot and have had some degree of fun with it but the bugs and limitations were nothing short of unacceptable.

[Fiery Phoenix]

Necessary?  Nothing is necessary.  It was desired by quite a few people. It was desired by EA and BioWare after the success of ME3MP, they just screwed up the implementation badly.  I have played it a lot and have had some degree of fun with it but the bugs and limitations were nothing short of unacceptable.

Really? I didn't realize it was buggy. I remember ME3's multiplayer worked fine from what I played of it back in the day.

[AlanC9]

Is "necessary" the right metric? As opposed to, say, "fun" or 'profitable"?

[Gilli]

Really? I didn't realize it was buggy. I remember ME3's multiplayer worked fine from what I played of it back in the day.

 

I think Beerfish means the DAI Multiplayer, which is very buggy. (no UI, Narnia, Katari/Silent Sister Guard on Hit not wirking sometimes)

But also fun.

 

Played it a lot. Now less then before, but I still jump in if a Friend asks me to join.

[Fiery Phoenix]

Is "necessary" the right metric?

Probably not in the literal sense. What I mean is whether its inclusion added anything of substance to the overall experience, or if it was just tacked on.
 

I think Beerfish means the DAI Multiplayer, which is very buggy. (no UI, Narnia, Katari/Silent Sister Guard on Hit not wirking sometimes)
But also fun.

So did I! I was just drawing the comparison with ME3's multiplayer since I never touched DA's.

[Totally Not a Poodle]

I don't think so. I've only played a little of it and this has given me the impression that it's kind of just tacked on for the sake of it. With ME3, multiplayer felt like I was actually contributing to something (I am not against the multiplayer affected single player), both game wise and universe wise. DA:I's, I don't get the same feeling. You just do the levels for no real reason. Not enjoyable for me.

[PCThug]

Personally, it never felt as intuitive as ME3's multiplayer.

[Almostfaceman]

 (I am not against the multiplayer affected single player), 

 

Oh really? 

 

[Totally Not a Poodle]

Really.

[Almostfaceman]

Really.

 

Well, glad you aren't in charge since that's a crappy idea. 

[Fiskrens]

I've played quite some MP, and one thing I've noted was that you learned a thing or two game play-wise that I doubt you would from SP. Tactics, the true value of some otherwise overlooked skills, combos etc. Noted, before the final patches there weren't much need for such knowledge since SP was so easy anyway, but with Trials that became really useful.

So: necessary? No. Fun and beneficial? Yes.

[Beerfish]

I've played quite some MP, and one thing I've noted was that you learned a thing or two game play-wise that I doubt you would from SP. Tactics, the true value of some otherwise overlooked skills, combos etc. Noted, before the final patches there weren't much need for such knowledge since SP was so easy anyway, but with Trials that became really useful.

So: necessary? No. Fun and beneficial? Yes.

I for sure agree with the part about tactics and using certain abilities you might otherwise over look.

[Daerog]

I liked playing the different classes.
I liked that the MP characters were canon and in the SP.

Do I want MP in future releases? I don't care either way. However, I like the idea of seeing a side of the story where the PC is not involved.

Maybe a side story campaign with MP options would be fun. Kind of like Inquisition MP, but more emphasis on story about the dungeon with more dedication of what is faced where instead of random enemies in random location. Having the dungeon boss actually being a character like the player classes would be cool.


Overall, MP wasn't necessary, but it was fun.

[SwobyJ]

DAI was flawed, unnecessary, buggy, and lacklaster. But not terrible and I've never been against 'DA MP' in itself.

 

I indeed would like if MP for a DA game would be treated as a sort of co-op sidestory title bundled with the SP game. Don't block off any story to someone to technically solo their way through on the lowest difficulty, but provide an enriched narrative-revolving experience. Yeah, that party banter was okay (but annoying in ways that I hope never returns), and fighting versions of SP bosses wasn't too bad, but Bioware, you can do MUCH better than this. 

[AlanC9]

Probably not in the literal sense. What I mean is whether its inclusion added anything of substance to the overall experience, or if it was just tacked on.
 

What does that even mean? Besides whether playing the MP is fun or not, of course.

[KotorEffect3]

No, I thought it felt tacked on and I had more fun in ME 3's multiplayer.  Though I do like the different archtypes you can play and it is fun reading up on their backgrounds.

[Lazarillo]

The cynic in me is kind of glad they included multiplayer, since they were able to fill their RMT quota in something I didn't have any interest in, we probably got more in the single-player game for free. Of course, it also now means that I'll never get the dragon decos, given the requirements (single-player stuff requiring multiplayer is all well and good when there are lots of warm bodies, not so much a couple years after the game's cooled off).

[PsychoBlonde]

Before DA:I was released, there was widespread speculation that a multiplayer mode was to be incorporated. While BioWare was tight-lipped about it for a good while, EA eventually confirmed the rumors. Nearly two years post-launch, how do you think that worked out?

 

Personally, I've played the game enough to actually get all achievements (including Trespasser's), and I have literally not clicked Multiplayer on the main menu once. Thus, at least as far as I'm concerned, it was completely pointless and unnecessary.

 

Having said that, one thing BioWare did right with the MP this time is to make sure it didn't affect the campaign, so at least we didn't have to resort to pointless grinding like in ME3.

 

I wouldn't describe the multiplayer as "incorporated".  The correct term would be "shipped alongside".

I didn't even look at it, and I certainly don't think it improved the combat in the campaign one tiny bit--we ended up with a system geared toward you controlling ONE character in a game where you control FOUR because in the multiplayer other people are controlling the other characters.  The PC mouse/keyboard control scheme was way too limited and bad and the tactical camera was awful.

I won't complain if anyone liked the multiplayer and wants more of it, everybody's entitled to their own thing, but it could have been its own game and made zero difference.

[straykat]

I never cared for it, but I don't know? Are these people keeping the game alive? Like they do with ME3? I don't know how popular this is.

 

But I hate the whole trend to multiplayer everywhere. I play games for escapism personally. I like long, sprawling experiences to get lost in... and not be bothered in. I like stories...books/movies/games/etc.. I don't care to add to my social life. And I have to wonder how many cRPG fans are that different from me.

[AlanC9]

I
I won't complain if anyone liked the multiplayer and wants more of it, everybody's entitled to their own thing, but it could have been its own game and made zero difference.

But isn't that what we want from MP? As opposed to MP actually giving us something really important about the game world, or tying into the SP game in a serious way?

[CoM Solaufein]

Why would you need multiplayer in a single player RPG? How many Inquisitors do we need?

[straykat]

I'll say one thing... I would have rather hired some of these multiplayer characters in my core Inquisition than some of the companions. Some of our companions have little to do with an "Inquisition".. even loosely. At least the characters in multiplayer are fighting specifically for that cause. Most at least.

[Bayonet Hipshot]

No. DAI MP is not very good. If I wanted to play a game with heroes and abilities in an online match, I would play DoTA 2 or LoL or Diablo or Overwatch. DAI MP is just a cheap knockoff.

[Qis]

If it's a multiplayer like Dark Souls, it will be great, if it's just a multiplayer, better don't

 

In Dark Souls, get pvp and co-op is a a part of the whole experience playing the main game, it is not a requirement, it's only if we play online, we can play offline to play the game to the finish no problem.

 

So if it is like that, then its fine. But it must have a lore to back it up.