Bioware Appeals For Calm Regarding Mass Effect 3 Multiplayer

[ThriKreen]

Do they realize the reason some of us are mad is because we feel that the multiplayer is just taking resources that should be used to make sure the single player ends the story well?

So the first iteration, a team would invest a lot to develop the tools and tech to get UE3 running. The second iteration, would be refining said tools and factor in things one learns to do and not do from the first project. And if the team stays mostly the same, you can count on things to be done faster.

The third one, you've pretty much got everything down pat, so there isn't that much need for a lot of programmer or gameplay designer types, they can focus on the content creators for the plots and art assets for the new worlds to explore. So what happens to the bulk of the programmers and gameplay designers? They either work on adding new features in, or get rolled off to another project. If anything, they are not diverting resources to MP, they're retaining what would could been lost anyway.

That and it's the Bioware Montreal studio that's working on the MP portion, so they've added to the resources, not taken away.

They also lied about it repeatedly for several months following the announcement, saying they definitely weren't doing multiplayer, they definitely weren't doing multiplayer, they definitely weren't doing multiplayer--oops! They're doing multiplayer. That doesn't sow a lot of trust among a fanbase, and they haven't been throwing them a whole lot of bones with regards to details on how the game has or hasn't improved.

And what would have happened had they reported "Hey, we're looking at adding MP to the game"? You'd get people crying about diverting resources, or being hyped up over it but then what happens if they tested it out and decided it wasn't worth the work, and then reported "Yeah, multiplayer isn't happening."?

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. At least not reporting it right away until it's set in stone might help temper unrealistic expectations. Which is a pretty common occurrence of the players.

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

Do they realize the reason some of us are mad is because we feel that the multiplayer is just taking resources that should be used to make sure the single player ends the story well?

So the first iteration, a team would invest a lot to develop the tools and tech to get UE3 running. The second iteration, would be refining said tools and factor in things one learns to do and not do from the first project. And if the team stays mostly the same, you can count on things to be done faster.

The third one, you've pretty much got everything down pat, so there isn't that much need for a lot of programmer or gameplay designer types, they can focus on the content creators for the plots and art assets for the new worlds to explore. So what happens to the bulk of the programmers and gameplay designers? They either work on adding new features in, or get rolled off to another project. If anything, they are not diverting resources to MP, they're retaining what would could been lost anyway.

That and it's the Bioware Montreal studio that's working on the MP portion, so they've added to the resources, not taken away.

They also lied about it repeatedly for several months following the announcement, saying they definitely weren't doing multiplayer, they definitely weren't doing multiplayer, they definitely weren't doing multiplayer--oops! They're doing multiplayer. That doesn't sow a lot of trust among a fanbase, and they haven't been throwing them a whole lot of bones with regards to details on how the game has or hasn't improved.

And what would have happened had they reported "Hey, we're looking at adding MP to the game"? You'd get people crying about diverting resources, or being hyped up over it but then what happens if they tested it out and decided it wasn't worth the work, and then reported "Yeah, multiplayer isn't happening."?

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. At least not reporting it right away until it's set in stone might help temper unrealistic expectations. Which is a pretty common occurrence of the players.

I don't mind not being told. But I detest being lied to. To me, that's far, far worse. Again, they could have said "We don't know" or something to that effect, or flat out told people that they were considering the idea.

Regardless, if that was the reaction they expected, then they can't act surprised about this.

 

[aashell13]

as long as the singleplayer's really good then i'll happily ignore the multiplayers existence.

At this point my biggest concern is that ME3 will be origin exclusive.

off topic: WTH is up with shepard's face?

 

[ThriKreen]

I don't mind not being told. But I detest being lied to. To me, that's far, far worse. Again, they could have said "We don't know" or something to that effect, or flat out told people that they were considering the idea.

Regardless, if that was the reaction they expected, then they can't act surprised about this.

Having it being worked on isn't the same as officially included in the game. So how is it a lie when at the time it was said, it wasn't confirmed if the MP feature would be in the game or not?

Unless you're a studio president, you can't dictate how they allocate resources, nor expect them to tell every detail of the work. Not every system or feature that's worked on in a game studio is reported to the public, since it's really none of our business how they manage it.

 

[Norris IV]

So many things i want to say about this article but they are overpowered by Shepard's face!

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

I don't mind not being told. But I detest being lied to. To me, that's far, far worse. Again, they could have said "We don't know" or something to that effect, or flat out told people that they were considering the idea.

Regardless, if that was the reaction they expected, then they can't act surprised about this.

Having it being worked on isn't the same as officially included in the game. So how is it a lie when at the time it was said, it wasn't confirmed if the MP feature would be in the game or not?

Unless you're a studio president, you can't dictate how they allocate resources, nor expect them to tell every detail of the work. Not every system or feature that's worked on in a game studio is reported to the public, since it's really none of our business how they manage it.

Unless I misunderstood the guy, he said that there would be no multiplayer when asked before.

 

[Sartan0]

The reason I think most people, including myself, are wary of this is because it is a move that tries to appeal to more people, people that were not that much into the first two ME´s. Kinda what they tried to do with DA2 and we all know how that went. It just seems like way too much an EA move to me, a move based on market analysis and not quality of gameplay and story. As was said, noone ever asked for an ME multiplayer...

Some of this and a general lack of trust in Bioware after Dragon Age 2.

I will wait and see. It could be just fine. In the mean time I will play more Dungeon Defender and keep on loving that silly little game.

 

[NickCaligo42]

And you DO NOT have to play it to get the best singleplayer ending! So [i/]please[/i] shut up and let the rest of us go back to deluding ourselves into thinking that humanity is actually smart.

Also, it was really hard to read this article with that image.

You don't HAVE to let me convince you not to delude yourself. You're perfectly capable of tuning out any negativity that you choose. So PLEASE shut up and let the rest of us go back to criticizing them for making stupid PR decisions!

See? "I don't want to understand your side of the argument, so PBBBBBT!" Doesn't really hold up as an argument, does it? It doesn't resolve anything or bring about understanding, it's just childish.

There's always a separate team for the single-player and a separate team for the multiplayer. It doesn't matter if they have two studios working on it or not, there's only so much budget to go around, and the tech team that both sides have to report back to has to screw around with a lot of networking tech in addition to the main engine driving the game, which they've previously stated is getting a big overhaul. It's no wonder the game had to be delayed, but the real point is, resources are resources. That extra manpower costs something--very notably something that I hear was diverted from the budget of Dragon Age 2.

And what would have happened had they reported "Hey, we're looking at adding MP to the game"? You'd get people crying about diverting resources, or being hyped up over it but then what happens if they tested it out and decided it wasn't worth the work, and then reported "Yeah, multiplayer isn't happening."?

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. At least not reporting it right away until it's set in stone might help temper unrealistic expectations. Which is a pretty common occurrence of the players.

So, you aren't trying to justify adding multiplayer, you're trying to justify Bioware lying about adding multiplayer. It seems like your goals in this argument are a might bit misplaced.

First, as someone else pointed out, they didn't have to outright lie about it when rumors about it initially popped up. They didn't have to confirm it if the development situation was fluid at the time, but they didn't have to outright deny it either--which is what they chose to do.

Second, the fan rage started when the rumor mill began churning. They had plenty of time to see this reaction coming, but chose to ignore the simmering caldera building up underneath them instead of address it directly and try to manage it while it was just starting to build up. If we go with your alternate universe where they made this reveal earlier, yes, they would have had a shotgun full of fan rage to deal with... but it'd just be about the multiplayer then, not about multiplayer and about lying.

Also, they'd have given themselves much more time to manage it and win people over, show them that it's actually worth a shit and start a dialogue with the community they're trying to start, remembering that multiplayer is about community. Epic Games? They have a very, very direct dialogue with their fanbase, such that the lead multiplayer level designer interacts directly with beta members and players alike--something they've asserted has saved many levels of their games from being unplayable messes.

Instead of clam up and ignore the concerns fans were raising until the very last minute, showing them a lot of disrespect in the process, they could have said, "well, we're adding multiplayer, so what would you guys like in a multiplayer mode for Mass Effect?" Even if that tactic had churned out loads of bad ideas from fans--and it's their job to be able to mete out poor criticism from good--their situation would be a lot better. By now, mere months before ME3's release, we'd have acclimated to it at the very least and accepted it at the very most, maybe even gotten excited. Instead, they're only just starting to deal with this problem, which is really bad PR.

 

[Krantos]

I would like to point out that they also asked for calm when people reacted negatively to the announced changes to Dragon Age 2.

Anyone else detecting a pattern?

As far as the Mass Effect Multiplayer goes, I'm of mixed opinion. On the one hand, I've accepted that Mass Effect really isn't an RPG anymore. That's fine as it is still a decent shooter, and the story/writing is still top-notch. Additionally, what I've read about the multiplayer sound's like it might be fun to play.

On the other hand, however, you can't include a feature like multiplayer without parsing down the main game. Unless they were dealing with an unlimited budget, they likely had to cut aspects on the single player campaign to fit multi into development. How much had to be cut remains to be seen.

I'll probably get the game eventually (though I'll likely wait until the price drops), and I'm sure it will be decent. I just don't expect it to light the world on fire. BioWare's star seems to be dimming.

 

[Dark Prophet]

They can yap all day about how multplayer is totally separate from the main game but I can't help the feeling that some of the Mass Effect single-player money, time and ideas went to multiplayer and that the core game may be less then it could have been. They should have finished the series and then they could have made Mass Gears of Effect War or whatever.

 

[Samurai Silhouette]

This is all I saw as soon as I opened this thread.

I'm open to this new addition to the ME series and really hope it turns out to be innovative. Other than that, I don't have much to say. I just wanted to post that image.

 

[Trishbot]

I look forward to Mass Effect 3, just like I looked forward to Metroid Prime 2.

I also expect to play and appreciate Mass Effect 3's multiplayer as much as I played and appreciated Metroid Prime 2's multiplayer... which is to say, I forget it exists sometimes.

 

[Jake0fTrades]

Are we still complaining about this? Am I the only one who can't wait to enjoy the optional co-op with a few good friends on March 6th?

 

[FarleShadow]

ME 3 will have MULTIPLAYER?!?!

And nothing of value was gained.
Except perhaps the possibility of some interstellar trolling.
To the Magnet-powered Spacecar with plants in the back!

 

[Dimitriov]

My only concern would be that the difficulty or level design would reflect that it was intended to be playable with more than one human controlled character. He can be as reassuring as he wants but the number of people definitely affects game play... And I don't see how one side of the experience won't suffer from this decision, although it may be the multi-player not the single player that suffers.

 

[The Critic]

Are we still complaining about this? Am I the only one who can't wait to enjoy the optional co-op with a few good friends on March 6th?

You are most certainly not the only one, sir. No rage from me on this issue, I'm actually looking forward to multiplayer.

Also, am I the only one who can't stop laughing at the page image?

 

[Broken Orange]

Thanks God, maybe people can stop whining about this now.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

ha.

Never will happen. Fans will always find something to complain about.

 

[kael013]

And you DO NOT have to play it to get the best singleplayer ending! So [i/]please[/i] shut up and let the rest of us go back to deluding ourselves into thinking that humanity is actually smart.

Also, it was really hard to read this article with that image.

You don't HAVE to let me convince you not to delude yourself. You're perfectly capable of tuning out any negativity that you choose. So PLEASE shut up and let the rest of us go back to criticizing them for making stupid PR decisions!

See? "I don't want to understand your side of the argument, so PBBBBBT!" Doesn't really hold up as an argument, does it? It doesn't resolve anything or bring about understanding, it's just childish.

There's always a separate team for the single-player and a separate team for the multiplayer. It doesn't matter if they have two studios working on it or not, there's only so much budget to go around, and the tech team that both sides have to report back to has to screw around with a lot of networking tech in addition to the main engine driving the game, which they've previously stated is getting a big overhaul. It's no wonder the game had to be delayed, but the real point is, resources are resources. That extra manpower costs something--very notably something that I hear was diverted from the budget of Dragon Age 2.

I know the arguments that your side keeps spouting: "It'll ruin the SP due to less resources" or "It'll ruin ME cuz I don't want MP" seem to be the most common. Where did I say I didn't want to understand the other sides argument? All I did was inform someone about what BioWare had said twice now. Then I explained in "SP terms" what ME multiplayer was for those advocates of argument #2. I know that two separate teams work on multiplayer and singleplayer, HOWEVER they are usually in the same studio. Now that BioWare has two studios working on this that means they have twice as many resources and can double the work they produce each man-hour. Regardless of that, I agree with you that resources are always limited and I'm worried about argument #1 proving true as well, but I have a cautiously optimistic outlook on things like this. You don't, that's cool, but that doesn't mean you have to insult me for having a different view on life just to make a point.

 

[Caverat]

This is one of those things that can help prove if someone has already decided to hate the game. If this is enough to make someone rage, they already hated the game and are just digging for excuses.

I don't care that they added multi-player, I'll probably not play it too much. I mean, I might, but the addition of this cannot, straight faced, be used as a point to detract from the game, as it is just a tacked-on co-op mode.

Granted, there is the whole allocated resources line of arguing, and I'd agree if this game was going to have a fully fleshed out mp experience on par with other third person shooters. It won't, so, the amount of $$$ dedicated to its mp is going to be insignificant, especially compared to the voice actor's budget. This mp probably cost us an extra 5 minutes of dialogue for the entire length of the sp campaign(VA's salary, writer's salary, studio time, etc.)