The Sobriety Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 BioWare is set to announce a new feature of Mass Effect 3 next month. According to Xbox World magazine (via CVG), BioWare will be revealing a "killer new feature" in an upcoming issue. The tease has immediately led to speculation about a multiplayer mode, which a job listing hinted at last year. This isn't the first cryptic announcement for Mass Effect 3, which has already seen its share of secret projects in the past. The reveal is set to come in the next issue of Xbox World, which hits stores on October 25th. Mass Effect 3 will release on March 6, 2012. Ill Lol if its MP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lemegeton300 Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 please no mulitplayer. mass effect is one of the few great single player games we have left. dont be stupid bioware Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
007JamesBond Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 Whats so bad about MP mode? I would be okay with it, might not play it much but wouldnt hate it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cornagandarub Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 Whats so bad about MP mode? I would be okay with it, might not play it much but wouldnt hate it. No added Multiplayer obviously ruins the Single Player experience because they "wasted" time adding an additional unrelated mode, even though it was probably using a different team of internal developers. C'mon guys everyone knows that. Let's not forget the fucking stupid MP trophies right?! I'd actually love a Co-Op mode if anything, Mass Effect 2 was one of those games where Drop-In/Drop-Out Co-Op would have really been a fucking blast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lemegeton300 Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 more evidence of the multiplayer component Mass Effect 3 multiplayer pass spotted News - - Page 1 | Eurogamer.net for the record i have no problem with online co-op/co-op campaign. it would be awesome. but a competitive multiplayer mode will seriously dilute the single player content. it always happens. look at dead space. Dead Space 1 was awesome, and it had cool and unique boss fights and little diversions like zero g b'ball. Dead space 2 had multiplayer the single player clearly suffered for it. it was a much more linear guided game and there was not 1 proper boss fight i can think of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SimplySupreme Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 (edited) Let's not forget the fucking stupid MP trophies right?! That is what it literally boils down to. Every single time. People don't truly care about the fact they'e adding an MP mode, their undying hatred for MP trophies is what makes people writhe in agony about developers who try and experiment with Multiplayer......Why else would people be so openly against multiplayer on trophy/achievement-centric websites? Because an MP component always opens up the idea of MP trophies/achievements. This was just posted on the front page: Will Mass Effect 3 Have Online Multiplayer? - PlayStation 3 News At PS3Trophies.org So yes, the big reveal is most likely an MP component. Let's hope so anyway. for the record i have no problem with online co-op/co-op campaign. it would be awesome. but a competitive multiplayer mode will seriously dilute the single player content. it always happens. No it doesn't. What about Assassins Creed : Brotherhood? A unique and extremely fun MP component, with a single player that was much better than Assassins Creed 2. Lets not forget about Call of Duty either.....It was once strictly a single player game, and the introduction of its MP changed FPS games for the better.....but it still maintained a solid single player game. Edited October 3, 2011 by SimplySupreme Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angelwork Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 I honestly don't care if it's multiplayer or not, the whole trophy list can be of multiplayer trophies also for all I care. As long as the single-player is good, which I know it will be. I'm not worried at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lemegeton300 Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 That is what it literally boils down to. Every single time. People don't truly care about the fact they'e adding an MP mode, their undying hatred for MP trophies is what makes people writhe in agony about developers who try and experiment with Multiplayer......Why else would people be so openly against multiplayer on trophy/achievement-centric websites? Because an MP component always opens up the idea of MP trophies/achievements. This was just posted on the front page: Will Mass Effect 3 Have Online Multiplayer? - PlayStation 3 News At PS3Trophies.org So yes, the big reveal is most likely an MP component. Let's hope so anyway. No it doesn't. What about Assassins Creed : Brotherhood? A unique and extremely fun MP component, with a single player that was much better than Assassins Creed 2. Lets not forget about Call of Duty either.....It was once strictly a single player game, and the introduction of its MP changed FPS games for the better.....but it still maintained a solid single player game. i disagree completely with call of duty. MW redefined comptetive multiplayer for consoles but the single player portions have been very very short on content. how long does it take to finish a COD campaign now 5-6 hours. AC is the exception i will grant you but more often than not when a franchise starts including multiplayer the single player suffers. thats just how i see it. it took me 70 hours for my insanity playthough on ME2 . if bioware still deliver that kind of experience plus a multiplayer mode then by all means do it, but it rarely works out that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cornagandarub Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 (edited) more evidence of the multiplayer component Mass Effect 3 multiplayer pass spotted News - - Page 1 | Eurogamer.net for the record i have no problem with online co-op/co-op campaign. it would be awesome. but a competitive multiplayer mode will seriously dilute the single player content. it always happens. look at dead space. Dead Space 1 was awesome, and it had cool and unique boss fights and little diversions like zero g b'ball. Dead space 2 had multiplayer the single player clearly suffered for it. it was a much more linear guided game and there was not 1 proper boss fight i can think of. First of all, Dead Space 2 was not shitty because it had Multiplayer. It was mediocre. Dead Space 2 was just as linear as Dead Space was, it just wasn't scary because we've already seen all the tricks Visceral seemed to have up their sleeve. The story wasn't very interesting either. Don't try and justify the lack of a fantastic Single Player by saying it was the Multiplayer's fault, likely there was two totally different teams working on each component at the same time. What about MGS4? MGO didn't do shit to affect that single player. What about LittleBigPlanet? What about Uncharted 2? I could go on and on mentioning games that have fantastic single player experiences that were not diluted by having a Multiplayer side as well. The exception to the rule is not the good quality game, but a bad one like the previously mentioned Dead Space 2. If you seriously think Call of Duty was much better off before the Multiplayer was added, please get off the internet. A short campaign in an FPS is generally a better thing because it ends up becoming a 10+ hours repetitive shooting gallery if it's any longer. Hell, Portal 2 was the best game to come out this year and that was only around 8 hours (and it had Multiplayer, gasp!). Don't tell me Multiplayer somehow ruins the Single Player of a game when both sides are completely unrelated and often developed separately. Edited October 3, 2011 by Cornagandarub Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lemegeton300 Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 (edited) First of all, Dead Space 2 was not shitty because it had Multiplayer. It was mediocre. Dead Space 2 was just as linear as Dead Space was, it just wasn't scary because we've already seen all the tricks Visceral seemed to have up their sleeve. The story wasn't very interesting either. Don't try and justify the lack of a fantastic Single Player by saying it was the Multiplayer's fault, likely there was two totally different teams working on each component at the same time. What about MGS4? MGO didn't do shit to affect that single player. What about LittleBigPlanet? What about Uncharted 2? I could go on and on mentioning games that have fantastic single player experiences that were not diluted by having a Multiplayer side as well. The exception to the rule is not the good quality game, but a bad one like the previously mentioned Dead Space 2. If you seriously think Call of Duty was much better off before the Multiplayer was added, please get off the internet. A short campaign in an FPS is generally a better thing because it ends up becoming a 10+ hours repetitive shooting gallery if it's any longer. Hell, Portal 2 was the best game to come out this year and that was only around 8 hours (and it had Multiplayer, gasp!). Don't tell me Multiplayer somehow ruins the Single Player of a game when both sides are completely unrelated and often developed separately. where did i say COD was better off before multiplayer. Read what i said before talking shit. i simply said the single player portions were much shorter on content, i never said it was a better game. and i am sorry but dead space 1 was much more open and it had a lot more set pieces than the second. i personally feel the single player in dead space was given a lot less thought, and yes i blame the multiplayer but i still had a blast playing both modes eventhough i felt the single player lacked what the first game had. and MGS 4 are you kidding me. i loved the game and the series but take away the cutscenes and there is at best 4-5 hours of gameplay in MGS4. i still loved the game and i loved Modern Warfare but im making the point that both single player portions were very short on content when previous entries in the series had no multiplayer and much more content in the main campaign. i never said Multiplayer ruins the single player , but in some cases it is clear that less content was put into the single player portions because resources were diverted to devleop multiplayer modes and i dont want to see that happen with Mass Effect. yes there are developers that can do great multiplayer without diluting the single player experience but i find those to be the exceptions. its just my opinion, there is no need to attack me for it and to attack me for things i never said Edited October 3, 2011 by Lemegeton300 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terminator Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 (edited) where did i say COD was better off before multiplayer. Read what i said before talking shit. i simply said the single player portions were much shorter on content, i never said it was a better game. and i am sorry but dead space 1 was much more open and it had a lot more set pieces than the second. i personally feel the single player in dead space was given a lot less thought, and yes i blame the multiplayer but i still had a blast playing both modes eventhough i felt the single player lacked what the first game had. and MGS 4 are you kidding me. i loved the game and the series but take away the cutscenes and there is at best 4-5 hours of gameplay in MGS4. i still loved the game and i loved Modern Warfare but im making the point that both single player portions were very short on content when previous entries in the series had no multiplayer and much more content in the main campaign. I never said Multiplayer ruins the single player, but in some cases it is clear that less content was put into the single player portions because resources were diverted to develop multiplayer modes and I don't want to see that happen with Mass Effect. yes there are developers that can do great multiplayer without diluting the single player experience but i find those to be the exceptions. its just my opinion, there is no need to attack me for it and to attack me for things i never said I completely agree with you. Providing the MP is done properly it can be a blast, take Borderlands or Nazi Zombies for example but I've played far too many games over the years where priority was given to the Multiplayer modes and the story mode suffered as a result, with Bioshock 2 being a good example. If ME3 gets a co-op mode then that'll be fun but competitive MP is a no-no for this series. Edited October 3, 2011 by Terminator Fixed typo and added extra info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cornagandarub Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 (edited) where did i say COD was better off before multiplayer. Read what i said before talking shit. i simply said the single player portions were much shorter on content, i never said it was a better game. and i am sorry but dead space 1 was much more open and it had a lot more set pieces than the second. i personally feel the single player in dead space was given a lot less thought, and yes i blame the multiplayer but i still had a blast playing both modes eventhough i felt the single player lacked what the first game had. and MGS 4 are you kidding me. i loved the game and the series but take away the cutscenes and there is at best 4-5 hours of gameplay in MGS4. i still loved the game and i loved Modern Warfare but im making the point that both single player portions were very short on content when previous entries in the series had no multiplayer and much more content in the main campaign. i never said Multiplayer ruins the single player , but in some cases it is clear that less content was put into the single player portions because resources were diverted to devleop multiplayer modes and i dont want to see that happen with Mass Effect. yes there are developers that can do great multiplayer without diluting the single player experience but i find those to be the exceptions. its just my opinion, there is no need to attack me for it and to attack me for things i never said Saying MGS4 had 4-5 hours of gameplay is stretching it. It could be beaten under that time, but that was also a requirement for the Big Boss Emblem. It's like saying ICO is a 2 hour game simply because it can be rushed fast enough to do that. You're right, it's nowhere near as long as say MGS3, but the game was still a solid ten hours on average. Dead Space still felt pretty linear to me, sure you could visit a lot of the areas whenever you wanted but there wasn't much reason to. You got all you needed following the straight line the game actually draws out for you. I'd be inclined to say Terminator is right about Bioshock 2, but Bioshock 2 was bad in the sense that it couldn't compare to Bioshock because a completely different development team who didn't know what they were doing handled the game. I cannot see the connection between added Multiplayer taking away from the Single Player experience. Let's look at Assassin's Creed II vs. Brotherhood as an example. Assassin's Creed II was made by Joe and Bob. Joe and Bob put in a lot of hard work and they ended up coming up with a tremendous product. For the sequel, their director Phil decided it would be a good idea to add something more to appeal to a wider audience. Phil hires Jim and says "Look, we feel it would be a good idea to experiment with Multiplayer". Joe and Bob still work on the game, but because a lot was already done since it used the same engine as Assassin's Creed II, there wasn't as much work to do. Meanwhile Phil is putting the finishing touches on Multiplayer. At no point did Joe and Bob drop what they were doing to help Phil, and since a lot of work was already done for Joe and Bob from the previous game they didn't have to focus on it as much. No resources are diverted or lost from the Single Player, everyone's happy. Now obviously not every company works the same way as I described and some might have all three working together, but the idea that having a Multiplayer side to a game taking away from what could have been for the Single Player is a bit silly. Note that I also don't think every game needs Multiplayer either. Dead Space 2, Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood, and Uncharted 2 are all games that didn't need Multiplayer but the quality was clearly not affected by this addition. We're on the same side here, I wasn't trying to be so harsh and I apologize if I came across that way, I'm just pointing out that if resources are being diverted off of the Single Player to the Multiplayer, you aren't exactly missing hundreds of hours of content if that happens. Edited October 3, 2011 by Cornagandarub Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nastich88 Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 (edited) I assume that Bioware will utilize the multiplayer component in the same manner as Rage does, hence we'll probably see different missions outside of the main plot that will require co-op, which is a neat idea, i guess, and that definitely won't hinder the main, single player experience. But having a competitive multiplayer/ or campaign co-op forced upon a game that primarily revolves around the one single savior of the galaxy, as an idea just sounds ridiculous. Not to say that Bioware can't make it play incredibly good, because obviously they've got the talent and resources to make just about anything superb. Edited October 3, 2011 by nastich88 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaldWombat Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 more evidence of the multiplayer component Mass Effect 3 multiplayer pass spotted News - - Page 1 | Eurogamer.net for the record i have no problem with online co-op/co-op campaign. it would be awesome. but a competitive multiplayer mode will seriously dilute the single player content. it always happens. look at dead space. Dead Space 1 was awesome, and it had cool and unique boss fights and little diversions like zero g b'ball. Dead space 2 had multiplayer the single player clearly suffered for it. it was a much more linear guided game and there was not 1 proper boss fight i can think of. The boss fights in the first game were terrible and took you out of the experience IMO. The second game's single player was much better in its pacing. People always complain about multiplayer taking away from the single player experience but the truth of the matter is that more often than not, the multiplayer is done by a completely different team than the one working on the single player experience which means that they really don't effect each other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth_Chaos007 Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 (edited) I assume that Bioware will utilize the multiplayer component in the same manner as Rage does, hence we'll probably see different missions outside of the main plot that will require co-op, which is a neat idea, i guess, and that definitely won't hinder the main, single player experience. But having a competitive multiplayer/ or campaign co-op forced upon a game that primarily revolves around the one single savior of the galaxy, as an idea just sounds ridiculous. Not to say that Bioware can't make it play incredibly good, because obviously they've got the talent and resources to make just about anything superb. I have to disagree with your first point. Side missions that require a co-op buddy to play it would ruin the single-player experience. Few games that have separate co-op missions doesn't always ruin the game, it all depends on the game itself. Games like Splinter Cell: Conviction had a prequel story mission that was co-op, but it didn't forced you to play it and didn't ruin the main story at all. Games with drop-in/drop-out co-op also works for only a few games; i.e.: Saints Row. I agreed with your second point. Adding multiplayer to a game like Mass Effect that focuses on a single savior does sound ridiculous. Maybe if it is multiplayer, it won't be in the traditional sense. It could be something like a scoreboard that keeps track on how long it took you to beat, your class and level. Something similar to Batman: Arkham Asylum. With challenge maps/rooms or something. I'm just praying there will be no multiplayer. Edited October 4, 2011 by Darth_Chaos007 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nastich88 Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 (edited) I'm just praying there will be no multiplayer. Mass Effect 3 will/won't have multiplayer, part 5: BT Games edition | Joystiq The picture in the link indicates that there will indeed be some kind of multiplayer functionality. Hopefully it's like you said scoreboards, or some challenge maps, or maybe this "Online Multiplayer Pass" is simply an interpretation of the Cerberus network services. But the whole fuss around the multiplayer, strangely coincides with their announcement of the upcoming "Killer new feature". I think that EA has succeeded at shoving the multiplayer feature down their throats (they did it with Visceral)... so my bets are on the HORDE MODE. Yeah, everyone's doin' it! Edited October 4, 2011 by nastich88 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now