StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Well, that rumor that's been floating around since like March or some shit has now been officially confirmed by Bioware as coming in the form of co-op missions.

Bioware wrote:We can officially confirm that there will be a multiplayer feature in Mass Effect 3. However, please reserve your appraisal until we are able to give more information. Our Executive Producer Casey Hudson says it best: "Yes, co-op MP missions for ME3: they're real, and they're spectacular. Rest assured it's nothing of what you've feared. More soon..."

So, what's your guys' general opinion of the concept? I've been hoping they'd be throwing that stuff in and maybe even hopefully a Horde-style mode too, so people that aren't insane are still playing the game a year later.

Fucking finally?

The lol that Bioware can't speak about it without trying to allay nerdrage is priceless. Since ME1 heaps of games have done multiplayer in ways that would easily port to your average RPG (like Dungeon Siege 3), so it's just nerds being shutin whiners that is the problem.

Ideally it'd be gamewide integrated coop partners, but we know it won't be because nerds would fly into a nuclear rage. Co-op missions puts Bioware at the Syndicate level.

One of the best things I've seen is people going "BUT HOW WILL IT HANDLE DIALOGUE IN MULTI IT IS IMPOSSIBLE"
"Well what if it's like Army of Two where the first person to mash the button wins."
"Man that's a great idea."

'In Dungeon Siege all secondary characters can place their indicator over an option so the primary player can see the consensus, but gets the final say.'

PROBLEM: SOLVED.

If you took it and ran with it, you'd actually get lots of mileage out of the secondary character quests by having one of the players be able to alter what the 'right' and 'wrong' actions are. I know it's bioware and they never would, but it'd be COOL.

Imagine if your squadmates had actual opinions that Shep couldn't immediately reverse by going "nuh uh you're wrong."

I'd need to know more about how this will be implemented. But I'm in love with the idea on principle.

Coop seems the easiest concept to impliment. Relatively little ballance changes required since its not direct pvp combat.

Ironically, coop seems to have received the most resistance from 'fans', because it dilutes the 'I am a big strong man with a huge cock' wish-fulfillment of RPGs. Mechanically, it jsut requires rebalancing encounters, but versus multi with those powers would need a lot of work to avoid problems.

We all know fatty nerds are lame right, and the nerdrage surrounding this announcement has been predictably loud and obnoxious. But what the hell man - if you don't want to play multiplayer... um, don't play the game in multiplayer mode.

It's like everyone thinks that you somehow can only play the game in co-op mode.

In many games (not even just RPGs) there is a loud segment of the 'market' (these people are the sort that demand boycotts then make Blops the biggest game ever) who decry any game that rewards anything they can't do, because it PUNISHES THEM.

Ie, any game with multi will have multi acheivements, right? This PUNISHES NERDS because they have no friends/can't learn anything new/say multi sucks/are too afraid/etc.

I mean people hang shit on Gears 3 because it has achievements for multi. These people are fucking delusional, but their attitude is that if there is even 1 acheivement (or piece of content) only available in coop/multi, then THEY ARE BEING PUNISHED for not having friends and being giant social retards, because they will MISS OUT on STUFF.

Should we speculate on how a co-op mode might best work for ME3?

So far Mass Effect's gameplay has been you the player as Shepard + two other squadmates controlled by the AI. Would a co-op mode where two other people can join the game as those other two squadmate slots work? I'm only asking this because as far as ME2 was concerned every member of your team could potentially die. So I was thinking that there are at least 2-3 characters who can be available for the co-op mode: Liara, as she was the only character in all the previous games who cannot die, the new character Vega who's obviously safe since he didn't appear in the previous two games, and whoever was the Virmire survivor from ME1.

Or would it be more like this: whoever 'hosts' the game either uses an imported Shepard where whoever survived ME2 is available for the secondary player, or a new ME3 Shepard and the same applies. This might mean whoever plays the secondary player can play almost anyone.

On the other hand, I remember hearing that a lot of the squad members from all the previous games will only have a temporary role as dictated by the campaign story. Only a few will be permanent squad members. And there may be missions where you need to take someone temporary through a mission, so that might restrict the number of slots available for co-op (assuming Bioware sticks to the three-man squad dynamic that they've established).

2-player co-op mode is still a good idea. And I can see real weight being given to characters like Liara or either Kaidan or Ashley who can sort of stand next to Shepard as an equal rather than as a subordinate. But I guess that depends on how much of the RPG-stuff can transfer over to multiplayer and how Bioware goes about its implementation.

Anyone have any thoughts on how this could all work?

You are way overthinking it. Clients join, take on whoever is around, and leave whenever they want. It's only even remotely difficulty because nerds want to be in the drivers seat, but other multi RPGs (as mentioned already please pay attention) have already addressed this sort of thing.

Of course ideally it'd be story relevant (again, as already mentioned, please pay attetnion ) but it's Bioware and it's too hard for their tiny brains. Drop in/out coop with a convo contribution from other players = coop finished.

The idea that a coop player would choose who they control is bizarre to me. Other coop games don't bother to give this choice, or leave it to the host.

Yeah you're probably right in that I'm overthinking it - I guess I just want more information on how it's going to be like.

A drop-in, drop-out, take whoever's available/leave it to the host seems like the no-fuss approach.

This announcement more or less singlehandedly made me likely to buy ME3. Even if it's just side-quests where you and another specter team up to take down the villain of the week, games are more fun when you play them with others.

Stark wrote:Ironically, coop seems to have received the most resistance from 'fans', because it dilutes the 'I am a big strong man with a huge cock' wish-fulfillment of RPGs. Mechanically, it jsut requires rebalancing encounters, but versus multi with those powers would need a lot of work to avoid problems.

Keep in mind that there's a large segment of nerds who will decry any effort whatsoever that "takes away" resources from the core of the game.


IMAGINE HOW AWESOME IT WOULD'VE BEEN IF THEY DIDN'T INCLUDE STUPID MULTIPLAYOR.




With some games, this is a valid critique. Not here, though. Bioware has unlimited money/resources to sink into it. Why don't idiots "get" that?

http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic ... ex/8481789

They made an official announcement with info about all this.

Feil wrote:This announcement more or less singlehandedly made me likely to buy ME3. Even if it's just side-quests where you and another specter team up to take down the villain of the week, games are more fun when you play them with others.

Cynical guys like Los think that it's likely to be special side missions that are relatively stand alone (in which case nerds gon be pissed), and that'd be the practically easiest way, since you wouldn' thave to change anything. However, long-term, I think it'd be a bad idea; it would steer expectation away from the fun of 'everyone jump in and shoot fools' to 'lets play crafted coop shit with bizarre plot/convo stuff going on'.

4 player coop? Interesting. And integrating it into the single player campaign. If you want the best ending or the most resources, you have to use the coop squads. How very interesting indeed. And it looks like they aren't trying to alter the single player campaign. So its been constructed for 1 player.

They specifically say you do not need to co-op in order to get the most resources; it's just an option.

Alyeska wrote:And integrating it into the single player campaign.

If by "integrating" you mean "makes it easier to achieve the best ending" then yes.

Not everyone who plays these games is so fat they...

Wait.

Bioware game.

Sorry I interrupted.

A part of the nerd resistance to multi sin't just that they have no friends, or social skills, or desire to interact with anyone but Captain Picard - it's that they honestly think that there is 'role playing' involved. The constant shift from 'passable rpg with passable shooting' to 'meh rpg with good shooting' just kinda sailed past them. The idea that the actual fun in ME is the shooting - into which integrating coop is trivial - makes many 'fans' really angry.

Stofsk wrote:http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic ... ex/8481789

They made an official announcement with info about all this.

After reading the announcement and FAQ, I have the feeling that while writing it, it was like they were walking on eggshells. They were trying so hard not to piss off people.
I love single-player games like Mass Effect, Batman AA, Kotor, Splinter Cell series, etc., but you know what is better? Playing them in co-op mode. Transformers for example was a blast in co-op mode. I whish there was co-op in something like Fallout 3. I can't think of a single game were co-op wouldn't be fun. The only thing I think would be better, is if they had the cojones to also allow us to play the whole campaign in co-op mode, but still way better than not having co-op at all.

You should look at the mass effect forums. Los likes to keep me up do date on the particularly ridiculous parts, but it's absolutely full of people who hate any and all multiplayer, think coop will ruin the game, and have never played anything coop and thus have no idea what they're talking about (as discussed above). They see multi as a betrayal of Baldurs Gate.

The power of coop to be fun is best expressed by all the games that suck, but are fun with friends anyway.

There are seriously people bitching about this? Why? If you don't like co-op, or don't have anyone to play it with you, play it solo. That's what I do with Gears and CoD.

You do know we're talking gamer nerd fangirls, here, right? It's the internet; if they're not complaining, then I'm worried.