Mass Effect 3 Multiplayer to be released as DLC: Bioware stopping all discussion
- Thread starter TheGuy(wantstobe)
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I wish they would have some competitive mp the gameplay would be perfect for it if you can balance biotics.
I don't really care for online-multiplayer. If they use the free manpower to improve the campaign (quantity and quality), I will be satisfied. Otherwise a reduced price for the game would also be acceptable.
But it's obvious that hearing something like this, without any more information, will result in negative reactions. That's probably also the reason why they close the discussions about it.
But it's obvious that hearing something like this, without any more information, will result in negative reactions. That's probably also the reason why they close the discussions about it.
Admittedly, 6 months is a bit of an exaggeration, it is closer to 3 or 4 months. I am not sure if I miss spoke (wrote?) or just exaggerated it, but there is a gap of a couple months between when a game is finished and turned into a Master Copy that gets duplicated, packaged and shipped. And during that time the dev team is hard at work creating content for either DLC or a sequel (or just a new game in general). By the time the game comes out, the first batch of DLC is ready, or close to it.IronicBeet said:
What? No, that's wrong. Science doesn't work that way.
You don't add multiplayer as a DLC. It's technically impossible. It's like expecting to buy a gizmo for your car to make it fly.*
A single-player engine is fundamentally different from a multiplayer engine. Single-player engines don't have serialization, synchronization, a well-defined and isolated gamestate object and a lot of other stuff. Like a clear separation of clientside/serverside.
*inb4 all cars can fly it's just a matter of finding a proper cliff
You don't add multiplayer as a DLC. It's technically impossible. It's like expecting to buy a gizmo for your car to make it fly.*
A single-player engine is fundamentally different from a multiplayer engine. Single-player engines don't have serialization, synchronization, a well-defined and isolated gamestate object and a lot of other stuff. Like a clear separation of clientside/serverside.
*inb4 all cars can fly it's just a matter of finding a proper cliff
So help me God...
.. If EA ruins Mass Effect 3 by including pointless multiplayer that ruins my single player experience... Including Coop (I'm looking at you F.3.A.R.)
.. I will completely lose my faith in gaming. If they do it, this might put me over the edge.
Bioware is pretty much the only thing that keeps me buying EA games... But this will end that if they do it. I like Dead Space, also... but I can live without that.
.. If EA ruins Mass Effect 3 by including pointless multiplayer that ruins my single player experience... Including Coop (I'm looking at you F.3.A.R.)
.. I will completely lose my faith in gaming. If they do it, this might put me over the edge.
Bioware is pretty much the only thing that keeps me buying EA games... But this will end that if they do it. I like Dead Space, also... but I can live without that.
I was going to post a long and thought out reply, but Jo3bot above did it for me, it's like Yahtzee and Jim S said, stop shoehorning multiplayer into games that neither require or need it, especially if it means cutting development time of the damn regular game so you can turn it into a modded Unreal Tournament.
If anything, this will show if people really are demanding that multiplayer needs to be in everything, if ME3 flops, maybe it's that, if it's a big success but they only sell about 3 packs of the multiplayer DLC, then we've solved that dilemma
Coming soon, Catherine multiplayer DLC where you race to the top of each tower...I shouldn't give em ideas
If anything, this will show if people really are demanding that multiplayer needs to be in everything, if ME3 flops, maybe it's that, if it's a big success but they only sell about 3 packs of the multiplayer DLC, then we've solved that dilemma
Coming soon, Catherine multiplayer DLC where you race to the top of each tower...I shouldn't give em ideas
Um, Happy! Because I won't need to buy the multiplayer (I hate multiplayer)!TheGuy(wantstobe) said:
I was worried it was going to get shoe-horned in.
You guys realize, this is exactly what Extra Credits suggested, right? Well... apart from charging less for the base game, but hey, baby steps.
**dances** No stupid multiplayer! Yay!
And anyway, the 3 month delay was probably for that Kinekct support that I won't be using on the PS3. Or that as well.
Edit: Um... everyone - they AREN'T. That's the point. They're making it DLC. That will be one piece of DLC that I won't be buying.
I was afraid they were going to stick it in the main game, but they aren't! That's awesome! Why is no one else cheering? This is GOOD NEWS!
... unless you wanted Multiplayer. In that case, this kinda sucks for you. But not for the rest of us!
The simple answer here is to vote with your wallet, and dont buy the damn DLC, and if its Project $10 content, just dont ever use it.
My experince with multiplayer effing up single player is Ratchet & Clank. R&C were great on PS2 and at one point they the multi player started crushing the single player game expirnce. Multi.P was introduced in the second which had a shorter story game, and by the 3rd, the single player was mearly short but sweet...., but mostly short.
Deadlock was pretty much all about multiplayer, and the single player was like a tack on more or less.
As for developing DLC durring game time, EA and Bioware have been doing that in an obvious way since ME2 and DA:O. Zaeed was clearly developed and cut soely for content for Project $10. Same thing with Shale in DA:O.
Developing DLC durring game dev time should be seen as a rip off. EA doesnt want to charge you $84.99 for Mass Effect 3 (well they do but); however, the rage for this price gougeing would cost them more sales. They have already listed the PC price at $60 bucks, and collecters at $70.
So instead of listing the game at a higher price, they excise portions of the game, levels, weapons, characters, etc. to sell after release to make up that extra money to get the price of the game up.
Selling decent but slightly overpriced DLC to customers makes the game cost more. Hell Iv bought probably another $25 dollers worth of ME2 DLC, most of it about 10 to 15% more than I thought it was worth. Thats on top of the collecters edition.
It is insulting to think that code and art is being created for the game but some asshat cuts it out just to sell it to you because they figure it will make them an extra dime.
Agreeing with game publishers and devs on this behavior will only reward them for creating 110% of the game in dev time and cutting off the extra 10% for sale post release. A more accurate description is that we infact get 90% of games from EA and the rest is doled out in 5% bits till we get the whole game, and then we start getting unplaned unpartialy developed DLC.
My experince with multiplayer effing up single player is Ratchet & Clank. R&C were great on PS2 and at one point they the multi player started crushing the single player game expirnce. Multi.P was introduced in the second which had a shorter story game, and by the 3rd, the single player was mearly short but sweet...., but mostly short.
Deadlock was pretty much all about multiplayer, and the single player was like a tack on more or less.
As for developing DLC durring game time, EA and Bioware have been doing that in an obvious way since ME2 and DA:O. Zaeed was clearly developed and cut soely for content for Project $10. Same thing with Shale in DA:O.
Developing DLC durring game dev time should be seen as a rip off. EA doesnt want to charge you $84.99 for Mass Effect 3 (well they do but); however, the rage for this price gougeing would cost them more sales. They have already listed the PC price at $60 bucks, and collecters at $70.
So instead of listing the game at a higher price, they excise portions of the game, levels, weapons, characters, etc. to sell after release to make up that extra money to get the price of the game up.
Selling decent but slightly overpriced DLC to customers makes the game cost more. Hell Iv bought probably another $25 dollers worth of ME2 DLC, most of it about 10 to 15% more than I thought it was worth. Thats on top of the collecters edition.
It is insulting to think that code and art is being created for the game but some asshat cuts it out just to sell it to you because they figure it will make them an extra dime.
Agreeing with game publishers and devs on this behavior will only reward them for creating 110% of the game in dev time and cutting off the extra 10% for sale post release. A more accurate description is that we infact get 90% of games from EA and the rest is doled out in 5% bits till we get the whole game, and then we start getting unplaned unpartialy developed DLC.
What a magical world it would be if they sold Mass Effect 3 for a lower price with the option to unlock bonus content or the multiplayer. Just like what was discussed on Extra Credits in the "Project 10 Dollar" episode.
Sounds fine to me. Keep multiplayer out of the core game (which has already had some more months added to its dev time, so we've gained content rather than lost it) but make it an option for those who want it a while after the game has been released. Bioware might make some more sales from this approach, fingers crossed.
I won't be playing MP myself, but I don't see how this takes anything away from my game experience.
I won't be playing MP myself, but I don't see how this takes anything away from my game experience.
Precisely my thoughts.WanderingFool said:
A good old third-person multiplayer shooter with RPG elements straight from singleplayer.
It would be a bit unbalanced though, since the Turians did have better technology than the humans back then... I wonder how they'd work that out if they do it.
You know, I´m an extreme EA hater and Bioware defender, and I can see this working. Don´t get me wrong, I´m not saying that it´s going to be important or even good (odds are it will be average, above average at best) but I think it can work IF they start building this DLC only after they finished the GAME.
But I don´t think it will be co-op. I was thinking more of a First Contact War mini-battlefield, or maybe even co-op, but I´m pretty sure that the First Contact War will be the center of this theoretical multiplayer DLC.
P.S. If I´m prove to be wrong, anyone that disagrees can shove in my face, if it is that important to you, hypothetical good sir.
But I don´t think it will be co-op. I was thinking more of a First Contact War mini-battlefield, or maybe even co-op, but I´m pretty sure that the First Contact War will be the center of this theoretical multiplayer DLC.
P.S. If I´m prove to be wrong, anyone that disagrees can shove in my face, if it is that important to you, hypothetical good sir.