Dear Rockstar. What the hell?

Recommended Videos

Ickorus

New member
Mar 9, 2009
2,886
0
0
RazadaMk2 said:
This...

Hmmm.

Imagine a fat guy on a diet in Starbucks. He orders a coffee. They give him a free cookie. He didn't want the cookie because he was there for a coffee, no more, no less. He didn't want the cookie because he didn't like cookies, he was on a diet and just wanted his coffee. So he starts raging in the face of the barista for giving him a free cookie he didn't want because HE WAS THERE JUST FOR A COFFEE, WHY ARE THEY GIVING HIM THINGS THAT HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH HIS CORE COFFEE-BASED EXPERIENCE.

THAT is what this rage is like.
...I'll have the free cookie if he's not having it.

OT: Not seeing a problem here, if the base game wasn't any good you'd have a valid complaint about man-hours wasted but by all accounts Max Payne 3 isn't a bad game.
 

alrekr

New member
Mar 11, 2010
548
0
0
ResonanceSD said:
You know why it has multiplayer?

Because the old MP games were going to have but they didn't have time to do it. There you see it was a logical thing to do. Done happy?
 

GundamSentinel

The leading man, who else?
Aug 23, 2009
4,445
0
0
Senor Smoke21 said:
GundamSentinel said:
And does that work? It's balanced?
Sounds like it would be dead annoying for those not initiating it, but then I guess it pays to build it up and use it hah
Oh yes, it's quite well balanced as you can't use it that often. And there are other perks that can be more interesting than the bullet time one. (Especially the one that lets people think you're on their team. Dead useful with a shotgun in close quarters, you can clear out a room before they know what hit them.)

That said, anyone can use a slo-mo shootdodge, which can actually be just as fun for the person it's used against, trying to shoot someone out of the air who's in a slo-mo dive out the window. And knowing when and where to use it is an interesting tactical aspect. All told, I really like the way it's implemented.
 

The Last Nomad

Lost in Ethiopia
Oct 28, 2009
1,426
0
0
RazadaMk2 said:
This...

Hmmm.

Imagine a fat guy on a diet in Starbucks. He orders a coffee. They give him a free cookie. He didn't want the cookie because he was there for a coffee, no more, no less. He didn't want the cookie because he didn't like cookies, he was on a diet and just wanted his coffee. So he starts raging in the face of the barista for giving him a free cookie he didn't want because HE WAS THERE JUST FOR A COFFEE, WHY ARE THEY GIVING HIM THINGS THAT HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH HIS CORE COFFEE-BASED EXPERIENCE.

THAT is what this rage is like.
Basically this, except I can accept the mans rage at getting a cookie. He can give it back and resolve his problem.

There is really no resolution to the OPs (very stupid) problem so has no reason to even kick up a fuss about it.

EDIT: also the OPs problems with Multiplayer are nowhere near as reasonable as your example man.
 

malestrithe

New member
Aug 18, 2008
1,815
0
0
PS3 version is one disc and has all of the pre-rendered HD cinematics.

PS3: Better for you, Better for the Environment.
 

IamLEAM1983

Neloth's got swag.
Aug 22, 2011
2,578
0
0
ResonanceSD said:
Chairman Miaow said:
So you haven't even played it and are making conclusions? YAAAAY!
It's got bolt-on multiplayer. what more evidence do you need? The publisher went "here, put multiplayer into it because everyone else does, even though it adds fuck all to the game".
Newsflash: the industry has been headed in this direction for years, now. Something works? Tack multiplayer onto it. Hang around MMO communities and you'll find plenty of multiplayer-obsessed types who spit on single-player content because they're seriously missing their extra shot of nerd rage - I mean, competitive Human VS. Human gameplay.

Multiplayer isn't just a thing, anymore. It's more or less a standard, for good or ill.
 

shrekfan246

Not actually a Japanese pop star
May 26, 2011
6,367
0
0
RazadaMk2 said:
This...

Hmmm.

Imagine a fat guy on a diet in Starbucks. He orders a coffee. They give him a free cookie. He didn't want the cookie because he was there for a coffee, no more, no less. He didn't want the cookie because he didn't like cookies, he was on a diet and just wanted his coffee. So he starts raging in the face of the barista for giving him a free cookie he didn't want because HE WAS THERE JUST FOR A COFFEE, WHY ARE THEY GIVING HIM THINGS THAT HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH HIS CORE COFFEE-BASED EXPERIENCE.

THAT is what this rage is like.
Now, now, let's be fair.

It's like he was given the coffee and the free cookie, knowing he got the cookie, left, drove home/to work/to a zoo/amusement park/Statue of Liberty/Big Ben, started drinking his coffee, then got outraged over the inclusion of the cookie, and proceeded to call up Starbucks so that he could rage at the barista.

EDIT: I mean, I don't really have anything OT to add to this... most of the time, multi-player isn't even developed by the same teams working on the single-player. Regardless of my opinion on the inclusion of multi-player into games that don't need it, it's a ridiculous thing to get so worked up about.
 

shrekfan246

Not actually a Japanese pop star
May 26, 2011
6,367
0
0
RazadaMk2 said:
Actually, the metaphor doesn't quite work.

He is not raging at the barista.

It is more he started drinking the coffee at some random landmark of your choice and then promptly began to accost random strangers (Us) about the horror of being given a free cookie.
You know, I thought about that, but I decided to merely expand from your metaphor.

[sub][sub]Which made me laugh, by the way.[/sub][/sub]
 

Colodomoko

New member
Feb 22, 2008
726
0
0
Yeah, the multiplayer is pretty much tacked on and useless, don't see why anyone who enjoyed the first two would even bother playing it. I would say the multiplayer brought down the single player experience, but that's not usually the case for Rockstar. If you ever played the first two you pretty much know your in it for the gameplay; shooting up lots of baddies in bullet time and such. I will admit I think the still comic book narrations were bad ass, but after the first time you would pretty much skip them. Also to hell with anyone who spent $60 dollars on this and wasn't a reviewer. Even if the replayability of the single players gameplay is strong, you're best bet is to either rent this one or wait till it drops to like $20 dollars. In fact, if you don't have the first two, just go look for them in a bargain bin somewhere, you'll most likely get a lot more out of it for less money.
 

Chairman Miaow

CBA to change avatar
Nov 18, 2009
2,091
0
0
Eunjuay said:
Chairman Miaow said:
ResonanceSD said:
Chairman Miaow said:
So you haven't even played it and are making conclusions? YAAAAY!
It's got bolt-on multiplayer. what more evidence do you need? The publisher went "here, put multiplayer into it because everyone else does, even though it adds fuck all to the game".
Because ME3 multiplayer was completely destroyed by fans and critics alike after they actually played it wasn't it?

Yes, I also seem to recall no complaints about the ME3 single player after multiplayer was added.
I'm sorry, what? I thought we were talking about multiplayer?
 

Senor Smoke21

New member
May 23, 2008
288
0
0
GundamSentinel said:
Senor Smoke21 said:
Oh yes, it's quite well balanced as you can't use it that often. And there are other perks that can be more interesting than the bullet time one. (Especially the one that lets people think you're on their team. Dead useful with a shotgun in close quarters, you can clear out a room before they know what hit them.)

That said, anyone can use a slo-mo shootdodge, which can actually be just as fun for the person it's used against, trying to shoot someone out of the air who's in a slo-mo dive out the window. And knowing when and where to use it is an interesting tactical aspect. All told, I really like the way it's implemented.
Hah, that actually sounds pretty sick. Gonna give it a go when I've got some time!
 

Chairman Miaow

CBA to change avatar
Nov 18, 2009
2,091
0
0
Char-Nobyl said:
Chairman Miaow said:
It's got bolt-on multiplayer. what more evidence do you need? The publisher went "here, put multiplayer into it because everyone else does, even though it adds fuck all to the game".
Oh, it does? Tell me: how do you know that? Is there some sort of multiplayer printing-press that produced it? Because I've found it to be remarkably well put together and, more importantly, fun.

And it seems remarkably difficult to know, even if you could detect this sort of thing, unless you've actually played it.
You've got the wrong man I tells yah!
 

Chairman Miaow

CBA to change avatar
Nov 18, 2009
2,091
0
0
RazadaMk2 said:
shrekfan246 said:
RazadaMk2 said:
This...

Hmmm.

Imagine a fat guy on a diet in Starbucks. He orders a coffee. They give him a free cookie. He didn't want the cookie because he was there for a coffee, no more, no less. He didn't want the cookie because he didn't like cookies, he was on a diet and just wanted his coffee. So he starts raging in the face of the barista for giving him a free cookie he didn't want because HE WAS THERE JUST FOR A COFFEE, WHY ARE THEY GIVING HIM THINGS THAT HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH HIS CORE COFFEE-BASED EXPERIENCE.

THAT is what this rage is like.
Now, now, let's be fair.

It's like he was given the coffee and the free cookie, knowing he got the cookie, left, drove home/to work/to a zoo/amusement park/Statue of Liberty/Big Ben, started drinking his coffee, then got outraged over the inclusion of the cookie, and proceeded to call up Starbucks so that he could rage at the barista.

EDIT: I mean, I don't really have anything OT to add to this... most of the time, multi-player isn't even developed by the same teams working on the single-player. Regardless of my opinion on the inclusion of multi-player into games that don't need it, it's a ridiculous thing to get so worked up about.
Actually, the metaphor doesn't quite work.

He is not raging at the barista.

It is more he started drinking the coffee at some random landmark of your choice and then promptly began to accost random strangers (Us) about the horror of being given a free cookie.
Actually, it's more like he was given a coupon for a free cookie, because if he wants, he never actually has to go on the multiplayer or even look at it until he wants to, whereas the cookie would go bad.
 

fozzy360

I endorse Jurassic Park
Oct 20, 2009
688
0
0
ResonanceSD said:
Ok, first of all, let's get this out of the way. Why the fuck does Max Payne have multiplayer? Have you people never played the first two? Why waste man-hours ADDING A PART TO YOUR PRODUCT THAT NO ONE FUCKING ASKED FOR? No one will not buy your product because it doesn't have multiplayer BECAUSE NO ONE IS BUYING YOUR GAME BECAUSE IT HAS MULTIPLAYER IN IT, WE'RE BUYING IT BECAUSE MAX PAAAYNE 3.

Also, FOUR DVDs? Really? Do me a favour, the DVD that loads the multiplayer assets? Yeah, you can leave that out.


Publishers, stop putting multiplayer into things that don't need it.

NO MP IN MP!

YEAAH!

Anyone else pissed? Or is it just me?

Edit: Turns out Primeape was a fitting choice for today -_-
It might be just you. I've always been a bit dubious about putting multi in franchises that haven't had it, but as long as the single player doesn't suffer, then there's nothing to complain about other than just a pointless multiplayer. MP3's single player took me well over 12 hrs., and I'm starting a second run though (something I don't do often). Plus there's the arcade mode with New York Minute and score attack, and you see there's a lot to do without having to touch multiplayer.

That said, I'm having a fucking blast in MP3's multiplayer. Dual PT92s all day, everyday.
 

neonsword13-ops

~ Struck by a Smooth Criminal ~
Mar 28, 2011
2,771
0
0
I thoroughly enjoyed Max Payne 3.It was a good ride all the way through. The only things I had an issue with was the last two missions. Fucking body-armored goons...

Also, 4 discs, you say?

lol, Blu-ray ftw.
 

Starke

New member
Mar 6, 2008
3,876
0
0
RazadaMk2 said:
This...

Hmmm.

Imagine a fat guy on a diet in Starbucks. He orders a coffee. They give him a free cookie. He didn't want the cookie because he was there for a coffee, no more, no less. He didn't want the cookie because he didn't like cookies, he was on a diet and just wanted his coffee. So he starts raging in the face of the barista for giving him a free cookie he didn't want because HE WAS THERE JUST FOR A COFFEE, WHY ARE THEY GIVING HIM THINGS THAT HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH HIS CORE COFFEE-BASED EXPERIENCE.

THAT is what this rage is like.
Anyone else read this and immediately think of Alan Wake?

Chairman Miaow said:
RazadaMk2 said:
shrekfan246 said:
Now, now, let's be fair.

It's like he was given the coffee and the free cookie, knowing he got the cookie, left, drove home/to work/to a zoo/amusement park/Statue of Liberty/Big Ben, started drinking his coffee, then got outraged over the inclusion of the cookie, and proceeded to call up Starbucks so that he could rage at the barista.

EDIT: I mean, I don't really have anything OT to add to this... most of the time, multi-player isn't even developed by the same teams working on the single-player. Regardless of my opinion on the inclusion of multi-player into games that don't need it, it's a ridiculous thing to get so worked up about.
Actually, the metaphor doesn't quite work.

He is not raging at the barista.

It is more he started drinking the coffee at some random landmark of your choice and then promptly began to accost random strangers (Us) about the horror of being given a free cookie.
Actually, it's more like he was given a coupon for a free cookie, because if he wants, he never actually has to go on the multiplayer or even look at it until he wants to, whereas the cookie would go bad.
Honestly the original metaphor probably works better for ME3, where it was, "YOU WILL PLAY OUR MULTIPLAYER OR GET A BAD ENDING!" Just saying.
 

Starke

New member
Mar 6, 2008
3,876
0
0
neonsword13-ops said:
I thoroughly enjoyed Max Payne 3.It was a good ride all the way through. The only things I had an issue with was the last two missions. Fucking body-armored goons...
So, like every other Max Payne game ever, only they hold out that long instead of throwing them at you at the halfway mark?
 

ChildishLegacy

New member
Apr 16, 2010
974
0
0
ResonanceSD said:
Chairman Miaow said:
So you haven't even played it and are making conclusions? YAAAAY!
It's got bolt-on multiplayer. what more evidence do you need? The publisher went "here, put multiplayer into it because everyone else does, even though it adds fuck all to the game".
Prove that adding in multiplayer took away from any of the single player game, it's most likely that there was a different team working on the multiplayer part of the game, so they probably added more resources to the game rather than leeching from the single player resources.
 

Woodsey

New member
Aug 9, 2009
14,548
0
0
neonsword13-ops said:
I thoroughly enjoyed Max Payne 3.It was a good ride all the way through. The only things I had an issue with was the last two missions. Fucking body-armored goons...

Also, 4 discs, you say?

lol, Blu-ray ftw.
They're all either one or two shot kills still with headshots.

(And discs? What is this, the 90s?)