It's official - Mass Effect 3 has multiplayer.

[Mark D. Stroyer]

The game is squad-based. It's always been squad-based. It fits in pretty well perfectly.

Of course, it's going to have to be 'player control of NPC' rather than 'Everybody's a Shepard!' I actually like the other-character aspect of it, given the varied and diverse skills and the asymmetrical aspect of it. Co-op could be very awesome, when different characters handle different things and you have to co-ordinate together for the win, just like you did previously, just...actually playing everything.

So stop being so twitch-reaction-y, all you people!

 

[Woodsey]

Pointless, but I don't think it'll do any particular damage. I do think its a sign BioWare need to learn who their games are catered to though.

 

[suitepee7]

As long as it is being made by a seperate group, thus no resources are detracted from making the main story, they can go ahead with that.

That contradicts itself.

If the money and staff are available for a separate group, why are those resources not available for the single player?

Their very existence means they detract from the development of the single player!

Agreed.

If it's co-op I'll be fine. But I seriously doubt it'll be that. Why in the world would they do this to the ending of a major trilogy (story wise)? Why fuck up on the story and what should amount to be a damned epic ending for a great series and waste time and money on multiplayer (mind you, multiplayer that may not even be good)?
I'm fine with Mass Effect multiplayer. That doesn't bother me. But it should have waited for a spin off game. They shouldn't be altering the ending of a story line in what is a single player experience for a multiplayer experience that the majority of Mass Effect players and fans wouldn't need. >>

Keep in mind, that when I say 'fuck up' I'm not assuming the story will be bad. I'm saying that 'fucking up' is them making a decision to take time and money from single player when single player is what Mass Effect is known for.

sounds like a fear 3 thing to me. adding in co-op when all the games so far have not been. that being said, it could be good. i mean, you have always had a team anyway, how will it affect you if the team is now person controlled. personally i'm cautious, incredibly so, but i'm not going to flame bash it just yet. at least wait until details are released before hating on it.

 

[AlternatePFG]

I hope it's co-op. Either way, I don't care, I really don't see the harm in adding multiplayer to the game.

 

[Josh123914]

I think it's a stupid idea. We're at the end of this epic trilogy, lots of pressure to finish on a high-note and they waste resources on fucking MULTIPLAYER?! REALLY?!

We don't need a fucking multiplayer section in Mass Effect! What the fuck?

I'm inclined to aagree, since when has BIOWARE of all places been known to make a decent objective based multiplayer? or even multiplayer at all? If EA just gave, say, £1,000,000 to an indie dev I'd have no problem, but if the main dev team is affected then I'm pissed.

It's still fake though, Casey Hudson, Executive producer of all things Mass Effect, has stated MULTIPLE times that there won't be multiplayer, partly because they have been trying (and failing) to create something like this since Mass Effect 2 and also partly because doing so would require MASSIVE refinement to the classes:

Soldiers: Probably would only be able to carry 2 guns at a time (plus the LAG that would be caused using their Adreneline burst.

Engineers: Cryo Blast/ Incinerate wouldn't be usefull, plus AI Hacking wont work against orgainics.

Adepts: Biotics will become more gimped than they already are (i.e Shockwave, Pull & Throw) and render Warp as the only useful move (can you imagine Wide Singularity on human players? the servers would crash!)

Vanguards: Charge spamming is one thing and their shotguns would most certainly be gimped

Infiltrators: Sniper= Useless for actual sniping or else EVERYONE will be using it, plus Cloak would probably be spawn-camp bait.

Sentinels: Just wouldn't work, Warp would be OK and maybe Overload but throw & Cryo Blast will be useless and their only redeeming quality would be Tech Armor, and even then it would need to be reduced to a Barrier Clone just to make sure everybody doesn't choose Sentinel over the other Crowd Control Classes.

 

[SidingWithTheEnemy]

Sorry, maybe I'm just oversceptic but can somebody tell why this is "official"? Is this magazine reliable? Has any of those Austrilian Escapists bought that magazine and can give a statement?
Why isn't it shown on Bioware's Mass Effect homepage?


Oh and how does it suppose to work?
Do we finally create a clone army of Shepard (much cheaper than bringing the only dead one back to life - I suppose) and wipe the galaxy clean of Reapers?
That would be intersting to see, would it not?

 

[Risingblade]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

Why! WAIT! Does this mean I can play as Legion or Garus or will it be all shepards?

 

[lovest harding]

As long as it is being made by a seperate group, thus no resources are detracted from making the main story, they can go ahead with that.

That contradicts itself.

If the money and staff are available for a separate group, why are those resources not available for the single player?

Their very existence means they detract from the development of the single player!

Agreed.

If it's co-op I'll be fine. But I seriously doubt it'll be that. Why in the world would they do this to the ending of a major trilogy (story wise)? Why fuck up on the story and what should amount to be a damned epic ending for a great series and waste time and money on multiplayer (mind you, multiplayer that may not even be good)?
I'm fine with Mass Effect multiplayer. That doesn't bother me. But it should have waited for a spin off game. They shouldn't be altering the ending of a story line in what is a single player experience for a multiplayer experience that the majority of Mass Effect players and fans wouldn't need. >>

Keep in mind, that when I say 'fuck up' I'm not assuming the story will be bad. I'm saying that 'fucking up' is them making a decision to take time and money from single player when single player is what Mass Effect is known for.

sounds like a fear 3 thing to me. adding in co-op when all the games so far have not been. that being said, it could be good. i mean, you have always had a team anyway, how will it affect you if the team is now person controlled. personally i'm cautious, incredibly so, but i'm not going to flame bash it just yet. at least wait until details are released before hating on it.

I'm hating on the idea of taking a single player game based on story and putting resources into unnecessary multiplayer especially in the final game of a single player trilogy. I'm not hating on Mass Effect 3 or it's multiplayer. I have no need to wait for details, because the details aren't important to what I was saying.
As I said, I'm not against Mass Effect multiplayer. I'm against taking away from the ending of a series I've followed since Mass Effect was first announce to add multiplayer that the fans weren't asking for (generalizing based on the fact that I have never seen or heard someone ask for Mass Effect multiplayer).

 

[lovest harding]

Sorry, maybe I'm just oversceptic but can somebody tell why this is "official"? Is this magazine reliable? Has any of those Austrilian Escapists bought that magazine and can give a statement?
Why isn't it shown on Bioware's Mass Effect homepage?

The link in the OP is to Official Xbox Magazine (not the Australian magazine). I would say that OXM is fairly trustworthy. xD

 

[Richardplex]

As long as it is being made by a seperate group, thus no resources are detracted from making the main story, they can go ahead with that.

That contradicts itself.

If the money and staff are available for a separate group, why are those resources not available for the single player?

Their very existence means they detract from the development of the single player!

That isn't how the world works. EA don't give all of their money to the Mass Effect team to go nuts, they give them a budget. If a separate team is used for the multiplayer, who have their own budget, then no resources, the most important being development time, is taken from the main Mass Effect team.

 

[Irridium]

Because there aren't enough multiplayer shooters these days.

Pointless, but I don't think it'll do any particular damage. I do think its a sign BioWare need to learn who their games are catered to though.

Also this. Seems Bioware's trying to get everyone and anyone to buy the games. Or at least the call of duty audience, since they said in the past that's the market they want. I predict this game's multiplayer dying out in a month or two.

 

[MisterShine]

If the money and staff are available for a separate group, why are those resources not available for the single player?

Their very existence means they detract from the development of the single player!

Not necessarily. EA probably doesn't just hand Bioware a million bucks and say "Okay, make what you want with this and have it in our hands by March 3rd", they budget out money for each section of the game as the numbers people tell them its needed, if they'd decided not to do multiplayer in ME3 Bioware probably wouldn't have gotten that money anyway. *Emphasis on the probably, it could be exactly as you fear, we're not privy to EA/Bioware inner workings*

Sorry, maybe I'm just oversceptic but can somebody tell why this is "official"? Is this magazine reliable?

The link in the OP is by the Editor in Chief of OXM (official Xbox magazine), so yeah, that's pretty much 99.9% confirmed. They simply don't get things this wrong without some kind of cataclysmic failure.

Oh and how does it suppose to work?

Which brings me to my feelings on the topic: We just don't know.

Bioware has a great track record, and I'm willing to wait to hear all the details before I either get excited, angry or just not care. Saying "it has multiplayer!" is way too generic.

 

[GasparNolasco]

Dunno. If they felt they had to hide the multiplayer all this time then EA just knows how bad it will be. I have no illusions about that after Dead Space 2...

 

[Simeon Ivanov]

Well my friends don't play Mass Effect and they certainly don't buy games, so I don't care at all about the multiplayer.

 

[ZeZZZZevy]

oh my god!
They're trying something different!!!!

seriously people, this could actually be really good, don't dismiss it before you even know anything about it.

 

[inFAMOUSCowZ]

I won't say any thing other then this could be interesting. I mean we haven't even seen anything yet. But who knows, it could turn out like Dead Space 2 and be decent and not really worth it. OR have the same affect as Assassins creed and be an amazing addition.

 

[scorptatious]

And do I give a shit? No. No I do not.

People in this community are far too panicky.

You can say that again.

OT: Yeah, I don't mind too much. I mean Bioware has had plenty of time to work on it's single player. This is the last game in the trilogy, so they don't need to worry about working on decisions that will carry over to the next game. Because there probably won't be one. At least not one about Shepard. So why make a fuss over whether this game is going to have multiplayer?

I do wonder what kind of multiplayer this game is going to have though. My guess will be that people will be able to play as one of the squad members.

*realizes he may play as Garrus*

:/.........8D

 

[MeSomeGuy]

YAY!!!

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

Now the question is whether the multiplayer will have an unlock code.