Mass Effect 3 getting multiplayer

[Dumac]

BECAUSE IVE BEEN PLAYING VIDEO GAMES FOR 30 YEARS MATE AND BIOWARE HASNT MADE A GOOD GAME SINCE BALDURS GATE TWO AND THE ONLY GOOD GAME IN THE LAST 10 YEARS IS THE WITCHER NOT THE WITCHER 2 THAT WAS TOO MAINSTREAM FOR MY EVOLVED TASTES

caps

So you thought DA2 was good?

I'll remember to never listen to you again

 

[dpodblood]

Seems like a waste of time IMO.

 

[JTsyo]

anything but co-op is likely to suck.

 

[darkewaffle]

So you thought DA2 was good?

I'll remember to never listen to you again

I'm not sure whether I'm more puzzled by your response or by the fact you think mine may have been sersious :/

 

[JackSpadesSI]

Good lord I can't figure out if people are being sarcastic or are actually serious. Co op is always welcome, why do people assume mp must mean zomg fps shooter or that including an optional feature must mean the single player will suddenly suck.

I highly doubt that "multiplayer" means co-op. Yes, I realize that co-op is two and that two is "multi" but I just have a hunch they mean "real" multiplayer. This is EA, and like said above they are trying to make this into a sci-fi COD.

Honestly, it isn't the MP feature that pisses me off per se. Rather, it's the type of game that should be expected when a mega-publisher crams MP where it doesn't belong: lack of focus and development on SP.

I bet we'll see less well-written dialog, more action, less choices, (even) less RPG elements, and less satisfying plot points. That last one may be the worst part about this - the story won't wrap up in a nice, cohesive way, and instead it will have a cliffhanger to ensure this series becomes a money-printing IP for EA for the next decade.

 

[Dumac]

I'm not sure whether I'm more puzzled by your response or by the fact you think mine may have been sersious :/

....

Your response was sarcastic, and it implied that anyone who complains about Bioware's recent tactics is being unreasonable.

So I took that to mean you have no problems with their recent actions, i.e. DA2, which is one of the worst games I've played.

Bioware has given me little reason to trust them lately.

 

[Beev]

Yeah EA is really, really screwing up Bioware. DA2, while enjoyable, was a huge let down, and I'm very worried about TOR and ME3.

 

[American Gunner]

Yeah EA is really, really screwing up Bioware. DA2, while enjoyable, was a huge let down, and I'm very worried about TOR and ME3.

I didn't know EA made Bioware use cookie cutter dungeons.

 

[darkewaffle]

....

Your response was sarcastic, and it implied that anyone who complains about Bioware's recent tactics is being unreasonable.

So I took that to mean you have no problems with their recent actions, i.e. DA2, which is one of the worst games I've played.

Bioware has given me little reason to trust them lately.

No, it implied that complaining about Bioware lately is suddenly trendy and people love hopping on those bandwagons.

Bioware has made one game, one game ever (maybe two depending on how you feel about Jade Empire), that wasn't at least "good" and numerous that have been "great" and even better. Far as track record goes their only rivals are basically Blizzard (well, depends how you feel about WoW) and Valve and neither of them have nearly as expansive of a catalog as Bioware. Further, they both also have the luxury of income without new releases (Valve through Steam of course, Blizz through WoW subs) so they can sit on their laurels if they so choose and get by just fine.

Bioware doesn't have that luxury, at least not yet, and maybe they're looking for that in ToR. Maybe with that regular, relatively low-maintenance revenue stream they'll be more free to develop like they did with DA and build like they did with NWN.

Point being, Bioware is, what 9-1 at this point? DA2 wasn't even that bad, it just wasn't up to Bioware standards and had a lot to live up to in DA so expectations were exceptionally high, which left people feeling the game was relatively worse than it absolutely was.

 

[Beev]

I didn't know EA made Bioware use cookie cutter dungeons.

When your publisher rushes you you do what you have to. Also, you said that like it's a blanket statement that covers ALL Bioware games, and I beg to differ...

 

[American Gunner]

I was talking about DA2.

 

[Beev]

Well then my first sentence stands . I fully agree with the game as a whole being subpar, though.

 

[AstroManLuca]

When your publisher rushes you you do what you have to. Also, you said that like it's a blanket statement that covers ALL Bioware games, and I beg to differ...

Mass Effect 1 also had cookie cutter dungeons, but in general I agree that most Bioware games have been at least good. Oh, and ME1 was good despite the cookie cutter dungeons, whereas most people seem to agree that DA2 was bad and that the dungeons were only one part of that (haven't played it myself though).

 

[Dumac]

No, it implied that complaining about Bioware lately is suddenly trendy and people love hopping on those bandwagons.

Bioware has made one game, one game ever (maybe two depending on how you feel about Jade Empire), that wasn't at least "good" and numerous that have been "great" and even better. Far as track record goes their only rivals are basically Blizzard (well, depends how you feel about WoW) and Valve and neither of them have nearly as expansive of a catalog as Bioware. Further, they both also have the luxury of income without new releases (Valve through Steam of course, Blizz through WoW subs) so they can sit on their laurels if they so choose and get by just fine.

Bioware doesn't have that luxury, at least not yet, and maybe they're looking for that in ToR. Maybe with that regular, relatively low-maintenance revenue stream they'll be more free to develop like they did with DA and build like they did with NWN.

Point being, Bioware is, what 9-1 at this point? DA2 wasn't even that bad, it just wasn't up to Bioware standards and had a lot to live up to in DA so expectations were exceptionally high, which left people feeling the game was relatively worse than it absolutely was.

DA2 was terrible. One of the worsts games I've played. If it didn't have the DA name tied to it, I could easily see it getting scores from 5-6 out of ten. I am a picky gamer that only plays good games, so it was a major letdown for me to play DA2. I couldn't even finish the game. I just can't sit down and make myself play anymore. It feels like torture.

I didn't care much for ME2 either. I didn't think it was bad - just not good. I didn't appreciate the changes from ME1, and I know there are many others who feel similarly.

I also don't like they attempt of milking the MMO cow by mutilating the KotOR series.

Furthermore, their recent DLC policies are abhorrent, and has stripped any respect that I used to have for the company.

I don't think Bioware is anyway near the respectable company it used to be. Taking a look on their forums and reading the crap the devs spew out confirms this as well.

 

[Dumac]

Mass Effect 1 also had cookie cutter dungeons, but in general I agree that most Bioware games have been at least good. Oh, and ME1 was good despite the cookie cutter dungeons, whereas most people seem to agree that DA2 was bad and that the dungeons were only one part of that (haven't played it myself though).

They took cookie cutter to a new level.

While ME1 had dungeons with similar assets, DA2 actually just had the same dungeon over and over and over again.

Made no sense at all.

Also, like you said, ME1 had redeeming qualities, while DA2 really had none.

 

[BD2003]

I'm cautiously optimistic. Although ME has always had RPG roots, ME2 was a shooter with RPG elements. And the shooting was good. Theyve got the fundamentals for a solid MP shooter, it all depends on how well they can translate it to multiplayer.

 

[Qbah]

If they add multi to ME3 it will be the last BioWare game I will ever buy. That would be the final confirmation that EA destroyed them.

Luckily that ME3 article is not about multi but it has a small section with a summary of the available rumors, a small box of text where the author believes MP is coming to ME3 with no proof or confirmation. The frontpage headline is just something to sell more copies and is very misleading.

 

[darkewaffle]

If they add multi to ME3 it will be the last BioWare game I will ever buy. That would be the final confirmation that EA destroyed them.

Why? Multiplayer was one of the best parts of NWN and BG2, and it's basically impossible to find any solid RPG with a multiplayer element anymore that isn't an MMO (ToR may bridge the gap though). I would have loved to have seen it in DA at least, and multiplayer is the only reason NWN is still limping along today. There's a lot of potential here; even the most simplistic co-op modes still tend to be pretty fun, a la Jet Force Gemini.

 

[Terzo]

A little off topic here, but I find it amusing that Bioware is pushing the shooter aspect even more (a pity as I enjoyed the combat mechanics of the first one much more) and trying to appeal to a larger market, while at the same time they will ramp up the difficulty.

I'd have thought you would reduce difficulty if you were pushing for broader appeal. Granted, Mass Effect 2 was easy peasy. I found the original to be more challenging.

 

[Pheran]

Mass Effect 3 multiplayer is now official.

However, unlike the main campaign co-op that I was hoping for (where additional players could control your 2 other party members), it sounds like some kind of co-op addon missions, which is kind of weird.

 

[purbeast0]

Mass Effect 3 multiplayer is now official.

However, unlike the main campaign co-op that I was hoping for (where additional players could control your 2 other party members), it sounds like some kind of co-op addon missions, which is kind of weird.

sounds similar to the Uncharted 2 "co-op" mode.

 

[Beev]

As long as it isn't competitive multiplayer in any form I'm fine with it.

 

[AstroManLuca]

Mass Effect 3 multiplayer is now official.

However, unlike the main campaign co-op that I was hoping for (where additional players could control your 2 other party members), it sounds like some kind of co-op addon missions, which is kind of weird.

I think it would be just as weird to have co-op in the main story, but it could still work. But you'd only be able to have one person making the decisions. So the leader would play as Shepard, make all the Paragon/Renegade decisions, and only their progress would be saved. The other people would just drop in at the same level as Shepard, pick their skills and weapons, and they'd be replaced with bots when they leave.

But that would still detract from the story I think. Anyone playing as a teammate would potentially be exposed to later parts of the story before completing earlier parts of it, and the leader wouldn't want to bore his teammates by engaging in long dialog. Probably better to stick to dedicated co-op missions.