Does Mass Effect 3 NEED multiplayer?

[Erttheking]

You know, I don't recall asking for multiplayer in Assassin's Creed Brotherhood but that multiplayer was...to be frank it was damn good. Didn't hold my attention for as long as Halo did, but then again I don't think that it was supposed to and it was MUCH better than I was expecting. Also when I read in a Game Informer article that ME3 multiplayer was rumored, I won't lie, I got excited, so I guess I sorta DID ask for multiplayer. The way I see it,

ME3 multiplayer = more content

People need to relax, Bioware doesn't strike me as the company that goes "We've been building up to an epic climax and people are expecting the campaign of the decade FUCK THAT! WE'RE FOCUSING ON MULTIPLAYER INSTEAD AND LEAVING THE CAMPAIGN TO DIE IN A DITCH!" Hell, they flat out stated that you could play through the entire game without touching the multiplayer if you wanted to and you wouldn't miss a thing. Also what's this conception that is Bioware attempts to do more than one thing at a time they mess up everything? I don't think that with ME3's campaign they were planning on using the last dollar down to the last second, they can handle doing more. Relax.

Either way, the demo comes out on February 14th. We'll know then.

 

[Daget Sparrow]

It doesn't Need multiplayer. No games Need multiplayer. They Have multiplayer. It's just that some games Have more multiplayer than others.

I agree. Mass Effect 3 doesn't 'need' multiplayer, but it could easily turn out good in the long run. It's easy to bash as alien a concept as Mass Effect Multiplayer, but when those aliens bring you intergalactic candies as a peace offering, isn't that a good thing? Even if those candies have the potential to taste either delicious or disgusting?

...what were we talking about again?

 

[Epona]

I don't know but is the multiplayer being used to justify always online DRM? Will ME3 have always online DRM?

 

[Sniper Team 4]

If they pull this off right (no idea what constitutes 'right' in this case), it is going to be amazing. If it falls on its face, BioWare is going to lose a big chunk of the internet respect it currently has. I am optimistic about the multiplayer, but the singler player is what I really care about.

 

[Xpheyel]

Hah. I join all the other smart alecs in pointing out that if the boss-men of Bioware, whoever they may be, say something needs multiplayer, the developers probably do need to include it.

Actually it belatedly occurs to me that all the pausing in most Bioware games make them less than ideal for a multiplayer transition. It could force them to make a flexible and quickly accessed user interface though! And maybe my computer will start expelling kittens and unicorns! I'll bet they'll mess up my thermal performance! No, it doesn't need it. In fact, its kind of a silly idea unless they make a Mass Effect universe based pure shooter to go with it. And if that is what ME3 is, then the Bioware forums will actually beat John Riccitiello to death with their Tali realdoll.

What a way to go!

At any rate, to hurtle my personal peanut from the illustrious internet gallery thereof, it seems like MW3 and BF3 were dragged down a bit by their single player while Dead Space 2's multiplayer might as well have never collapsed from it's quantum state due to being unobserved. Annnd Skyrim did pretty well with no multiplayer... So maybe staying focused on what you actually intend to do well might net you a better reaction than just being able to say you did both? Oh and while I'm fantasizing, Skyrim didn't have any day one DLC either but managed to cream you in sales and review scores, so maybe you want to sit in the corner with Dragon Age 2 and think about that for a little bit EA.

I can't wait for the Dead Space flight simulator!

 

[brainslurper]

Without multiplayer, why would EA need to shove origin up our collective ass?

 

[Ragnarok185]

Without multiplayer, why would EA need to shove origin up our collective ass?

thats is the reason right here. just for origin

 

[Waaghpowa]

Very few games NEED multiplayer. Bioware, or more accurately, EA, are just trying to get as large an audience as possible. Why do you think they created that new "Difficulty" setting thing where the "Shooter" option just does the dialogue automatically so people can pew pew more? Because apparently there are people who would play the game if it weren't a pansy rpg. Now they have the choice!

 

[AD-Stu]

I don't know but is the multiplayer being used to justify always online DRM? Will ME3 have always online DRM?

I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure I remember reading that single player featured single-activation DRM and multiplayer required you to be always online... which makes sense given you have to be online to be playing multiplayer in the first place.

 

[StriderShinryu]

EA thought it would more money for the series and Bioware figured they could do it without adding too much to the developemtn cost. They came up with a way to intregrate it without really impacting the core gameplay much if at all.. and here we are.

Honestly, while I can't directly recall anyone calling for multiplayer in the ME games, I'd be shocked if it wasn't the case. The combat is already squad based as it is and, heck, people were calling for multuplayer in Skyrim to the point that it was one of the first big mods made for the PC version so there certainly is precedent for people wanting multiplayer in a singleplayer RPG.

 

[AMMO Kid]

I sure hope it doesn't need multiplayer!!!

 

[Daystar Clarion]

Why did you have to get your hands on Bioware, EA?

Why couldn't you have got your grubby little claws on a developer I don't care about, like...

Actually, I can't think of any developer that deserves to be punished that much.

ME3 doesn't need multiplayer, I have no problem with multiplayer being added to things, I just won't play them.

What I do have a problem with is that in order to make the multiplayer portion, time and resources were most likely pulled away from the single player to make what will inevitably be a shitty half arsed affair similiar to Dead Space 2's multiplayer.

 

[Jadak]

pulling away valuable time and money away from the single player especially when bioware is on thin ice? brilliant move

Bioware is on thin ice? How's that, exactly? Dragon Age 2, despite all the hate it seems to get did well enough financially, the Mass Effect series up until now has been doing rather well and it'll be a while yet to see if TOR has enough lasting appeal to keep a strong subscriber base, but so far it's alright too.

So how exactly is a company that practically has people throwing money at them from all directions on thin ice?

 

[Snotnarok]

Okay I'm gonna be rude here and tell you what I see in your post.

"Do we really want Bioware giving us more ways to play our game and more content? No one asked for it and I don't think we should have this extra stuff. I'm not using it so it's stupid. I just want the one thing that they promised and this extra stuff is just needless."

 

[Laser Priest]

It doesn't need it. But I doubt it will detract from the single-player much (if at all) and it sounds awesome anyway, so I have no problem.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

Okay I'm gonna be rude here and tell you what I see in your post.

"Do we really want Bioware giving us more ways to play our game and more content? No one asked for it and I don't think we should have this extra stuff. I'm not using it so it's stupid"

It's quality over quantity my friend.

Unless ME3 really steps up it's combat, and I mean really steps it up, why would I play a mediocre third person mulitplayer shooter when I could be playing Gears 3 or Uncharted 3?

 

[MercurySteam]

Why exactly are they including multiplayer no-one asked for?

Wait till February when the demo comes out and you'll have your answer.

 

[Snotnarok]

Okay I'm gonna be rude here and tell you what I see in your post.

"Do we really want Bioware giving us more ways to play our game and more content? No one asked for it and I don't think we should have this extra stuff. I'm not using it so it's stupid"

It's quality over quantity my friend.

Unless ME3 really steps up it's combat, and I mean really steps it up, why would I play a mediocre third person mulitplayer shooter when I could be playing Gears 3 or Uncharted 3?

I don't know, I'm pretty sure ME2 had more depth in story telling, and gameplay length adventure than those games together. Okay yes Uncharted is really really good and amazingly well done (no really I do love that game, it's 3D Flashback so I'm in love). But it wasn't meant to be replayed like ME2 was, and ME3 is again stepping it up already. I'm sure at this point the multiplayer was handled by a different dev team in general so the game overall will still be fantastic.

You could call me out on assuming a lot, but I myself have no interest in the multiplayer, but Uncharted did the muliplayer thing and I don't think 2 was any worse off for it. 2 was damned amazing.

 

[Erttheking]

I really don't get why including multiplayer hits campaign with an automatic sucking curse. People say that the resources used there could have been used for the campaign, and frankly I can't see the logic in this, are you telling me that ME1 and ME2 had been worked down to the last dollar and second? If Bioware had added so much as one more thing to those games it would've taken away from someone else? Considering that half a billion dollars that they dropped for the old republic and the four month delay for this game, I think they have enough time and money to fit in multiplayer, AND the jaw dropping campaign that we've been waiting for. I think that the multiplayer is an awesome idea...but then again I think that ME2 improved on ME1 in every way shape and form, so what do I know?

 

[Daystar Clarion]

Okay I'm gonna be rude here and tell you what I see in your post.

"Do we really want Bioware giving us more ways to play our game and more content? No one asked for it and I don't think we should have this extra stuff. I'm not using it so it's stupid"

It's quality over quantity my friend.

Unless ME3 really steps up it's combat, and I mean really steps it up, why would I play a mediocre third person mulitplayer shooter when I could be playing Gears 3 or Uncharted 3?

I don't know, I'm pretty sure ME2 had more depth in story telling, and gameplay length adventure than those games together. Okay yes Uncharted is really really good and amazingly well done (no really I do love that game, it's 3D Flashback so I'm in love). But it wasn't meant to be replayed like ME2 was, and ME3 is again stepping it up already. I'm sure at this point the multiplayer was handled by a different dev team in general so the game overall will still be fantastic.

You could call me out on assuming a lot, but I myself have no interest in the multiplayer, but Uncharted did the muliplayer thing and I don't think 2 was any worse off for it. 2 was damned amazing.

Oh agree with you in terms of the single player experience, what I mean is that ME3 doesn't need multiplayer because it does the single player so well, and lets be honest, the combat in the Mass Effect series isn't the best around, but what it lacks there it makes up for with a deep story and rich universe.

Strip the story and character interaction away from Mass Effect and you've got a pretty crappy third person shooter.