Mass Effect 3 - Multiplayer Confirmed

Originally Posted by zakhal
I never really got into the whole co-op story rpg thing. Seems like it always kill immersion.

Same. Of course I don't really do multiplayer in general either.

In any case since it's separate from the main game I don't really care.

Originally Posted by DoctorNarrative
Same. Of course I don't really do multiplayer in general either.

In any case since it's separate from the main game I don't really care.

I do play competive mps like left4dead but not really story based mps.

Simply read the Q&A over at Bioware. It's seperate 4 player co-op - you do not play Sheppy & Friends. MP is optional, but it does have influence on SP, if played.

Apparently they let BW Montreal handle the MP part without sacrificing manpower on SP. That's what they (would) say. No way of knowing if it's really the case, of course.

Man, I just wanted a nice, original conclusion to the story with some memorable sidekick interactions. Now I'm not even sure if I'd like to invest in that kind of story… again. Bugger!

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
EA/Bio decides to expend X amount of resources on Mass Effect 3.

BioWare comes up with a design document and figures it needs X amount of resources for the project, with Y amount for the multiplayer component. EA decides if they agree with their proposal. BioWare/EA set up a MP team. You seriously think EA is even qualified to tell BioWare that their project needs whatever amount of resources? Based on what, chicken bone foretellings?

Oh, to drive the point home:

Why did you decide not to include it as a part of the main campaign?

Our priority and focus with Mass Effect 3 has and always will be to deliver a complete and satisfying single player experience.

It is separate.

Originally Posted by lef
without sacrificing manpower on SP. That's what they (would) say.

…the team that does MP couldnt instead have done a lot of more content for SP instead? Ofcourse they've sacrifised manpower, but they wouldnt admit it..

My gods, I don't know if I can keep on dealing with all the cynics whenever a new game gets released.

Every game company sacrifices manpower by not hiring extra people to add more content to their games… but they never admit it. Liars and manipulators all of them!

Originally Posted by holeraw
Every game company sacrifices manpower by not hiring extra people to add more content to their games… but they never admit it. Liars and manipulators all of them!

Wow, you mean they have unlimited resources? I thought there was some kind of budget…

Originally Posted by vurt
Wow, you mean they have unlimited resources? I thought there was some kind of budget…

Of course there is… but they are lying about it.



Or if they don't, well… they could reduce payments or fire some expensive employees so they can hire more and cheaper ones.
That's a great solution I think, unless a company's budget and the number of people they have working on a game are not the only factors that influence the quantity and -above all- quality of its content.

Originally Posted by Thaurin
BioWare comes up with a design document and figures it needs X amount of resources for the project, with Y amount for the multiplayer component. EA decides if they agree with their proposal. BioWare/EA set up a MP team. You seriously think EA is even qualified to tell BioWare that their project needs whatever amount of resources? Based on what, chicken bone foretellings?

Oh, to drive the point home:

Why did you decide not to include it as a part of the main campaign?

Our priority and focus with Mass Effect 3 has and always will be to deliver a complete and satisfying single player experience.

It is separate.

First off, I freely put out there that yes I am completely cynical with regard to Bioware and EA, but not without reason I might add.

But let's for a moment just assume that multiplayer wasn't there from the beginning. Then someone high up at EA or Bioware said 'Hey, let's add multiplayer! Everyone else is doing it! It will help sell more copies!'.

If that were the case hypothetically, would you expect they would admit this? That they would say 'We did have to cut some things back from the single player campaign to create the multiplayer'? Would they then also say 'The multiplayer campaign is completely separate because it was an afterthought that we didn't create until we were well into the single player campaign's development.'

Of course they would never, ever admit to these things.

Now I obviously don't know if that was the case or if what they are saying is 100% truthful and gives a completely accurate picture of what went on. I suspect the truth lies somewhere in between.

In any case, yes I will remain cynical and refuse to take anything they say at face value because they have become such artful PR bullshit artists of late.

Originally Posted by Thaurin
My gods, I don't know if I can keep on dealing with all the cynics whenever a new game gets released.

You don't have to. These days they have tetris on web.

Really, Thaurin, if you haven't seen the decline on Bioware, you'd have to blind… Or not really have similar interests in RPGs.

Originally Posted by Thrasher
Really, Thaurin, if you haven't seen the decline on Bioware, you'd have to blind… Or not really have similar interests in RPGs.

QFT.

Could care less about MP, just a waste of resources as has been said.

I do have to wonder if ME3 really should continue to be covered here since it pretty clearly appears to be a console focused action/shooter at this point.

Originally Posted by Motoki
If that were the case hypothetically, would you expect they would admit this? That they would say 'We did have to cut some things back from the single player campaign to create the multiplayer'?

Would an experienced and well-known game development studio connected to a huge publishing house publicly admit that their multi-year project was badly planned and wasted months by not coming up with a stable design? Maybe not. That's bad publicity for all involved! But I don't go around assuming that they "slapped on" multi-player at the last minute, thrashing their already-in-place planning for the single-player campaign. This is a multi-million dollar project. Especially the high-up managers at EA would protest this.

Originally Posted by Riddam
You don't have to. These days they have tetris on web.

Awesome! Thanks a lot!

Originally Posted by Thrasher
Really, Thaurin, if you haven't seen the decline on Bioware, you'd have to blind… Or not really have similar interests in RPGs.

I have seen BioWare change, of course. If that's a decline depends on where one's interests lie. But that's not really the thing that matters here.

Originally Posted by lef
Man, I just wanted a nice, original conclusion to the story with some memorable sidekick interactions. Now I'm not even sure if I'd like to invest in that kind of story… again. Bugger!

You capture my emotions perfectly here. Despite the poor and often annoying gameplay of ME1 and ME2, I really enjoyed the story. That's really what it was to me and had I watched the whole thing as a movie it would have been almost as fine as "playing the game". All I wanted for ME3 was an end of the story and that's all. A conclusion, tying the bag together, a sense of completion and no remorse about putting the trilogy on the shelf and move on.

But except for their improved RPG-mechanics and weapon-customizations, pretty much every move they have taken and every feature they have introduced in ME and Dragon Age have had negative impact on my interest to even bother again. Bioware is McDonalds now, looking at the right amount of salt, fat and sugar to sell a product rather than create history with something new. Everything they do is reworking something else and what they used to do great they moved away from and spend every interview talking down on.

Originally Posted by JemyM
You capture my emotions perfectly here. Despite the poor and often annoying gameplay of ME1 and ME2, I really enjoyed the story. That's really what it was to me and had I watched the whole thing as a movie it would have been almost as fine as "playing the game". All I wanted for ME3 was an end of the story and that's all. A conclusion, tying the bag together, a sense of completion and no remorse about putting the trilogy on the shelf and move on.

Instead, Bioware decided to use ME3 as a "jumping board" ? For more to come ?

I'm SURE that they'd want to exploit this new and fresh franchise …

Originally Posted by JemyM
Bioware is McDonalds now,

I fear that this can also be said to many bigger gaming companies, not just Bioware …
Just look at what has become of LucasArts !