Mass Effect 3 Multiplayer Review

[Darth_Dude]

I don't want to pay for xbox live gold.

Jesus shit. This makes me so angry I could spit!

Maybe you should invest in a Ps3?

trollface.jpg

Given the buttreaming SONY is trying to enact with the psvita, I suspect that free to play on the play station network won't last past the PS3.

I know my post was pretty immature, and you have a point about the PS3. It just pisses me off. I have to pay 60 bucks for a game, that makes it almost impossible to get the best ending despite the 120 hours (in liklihood FAR more) I've poured into the previous iterations, UNLESS I shell out extra for a subscription service.

I know I mean NOTHING to bioware. I know that, but I am seriously thinking about not buying any more bioware games. I've paid for the game, I should be able to access the entire thing. Stop nickle and diming me. I've never bought another Ubisoft game, and I never will, over their ridiculous DRM policies. EA is heading down the same path with me.

Again, I know they don't care, but it is getting close for me.

I totally understand how you feel, I am myself (that phrase doesn't sound right) really annoyed at EA's policies, and while I'm not about to boycott, I sure as hell am getting close.

By the way, couldn't you have bought it on PC? Or did you not buy it for PC because of the Origin brouhaha?

 

[Endocrom]

People shouldn't have flying cars-
I've been saying that for years. You would see news photos of houses on fire with a huge hole in the roof with the caption like "Texting claims family of five"

 

[vxicepickxv]

So, aside from anything else, does the day 1 DLC actually add to the total of war stuff you need?

 

[leviadragon99]

You got the Asari Vanguard unlocked on what seems to be your first "booster pack"... FUUUU!

 

[Nohra]

Vanguards once again prove to be the master race in MP. Only snipers with heavy rifles or Asari adepts can really compete with a Vanguard that's hit its stride.

I feel sorry for Sentinels though. They're extremely weak compared to every other class. At least the human ones have Throw.

 

[carpathic]

I don't want to pay for xbox live gold.

Jesus shit. This makes me so angry I could spit!

Maybe you should invest in a Ps3?

trollface.jpg

Given the buttreaming SONY is trying to enact with the psvita, I suspect that free to play on the play station network won't last past the PS3.

I know my post was pretty immature, and you have a point about the PS3. It just pisses me off. I have to pay 60 bucks for a game, that makes it almost impossible to get the best ending despite the 120 hours (in liklihood FAR more) I've poured into the previous iterations, UNLESS I shell out extra for a subscription service.

I know I mean NOTHING to bioware. I know that, but I am seriously thinking about not buying any more bioware games. I've paid for the game, I should be able to access the entire thing. Stop nickle and diming me. I've never bought another Ubisoft game, and I never will, over their ridiculous DRM policies. EA is heading down the same path with me.

Again, I know they don't care, but it is getting close for me.

I totally understand how you feel, I am myself (that phrase doesn't sound right) really annoyed at EA's policies, and while I'm not about to boycott, I sure as hell am getting close.

By the way, couldn't you have bought it on PC? Or did you not buy it for PC because of the Origin brouhaha?

I've played both games on XBOX so far, and that is where all my save info is. Added in to that are some issues I have with my wrist, I can play with an xbox controller, but the mouse/keyboard hurts like heck (I know you can attach the controller to your computer).

In answer to your second part, Origin was THE big major reason why. I simply reject companies' attempts to define me as a criminal. I am not a pirate, I even pay for all of my music online (seriously, I have more than 3k songs on itunes). I hate the basic assumption, same reason I will not go to gas stations that expect pre-pay; I am not a criminal, stop trying to treat me like one.

Are you playing on PC, or the PS3?

 

[beefpelican]

so it is almost like left4dead?

Eh, Gears of war (or Halo 3 or Call of duty) horde mode was a better analogy. Less story and movement, more staking out a position and occasionally moving around to accomplish a goal by standing next to it.

OT:I enjoy the multiplayer, and the way that your character levels up during it, but I certainly wouldn't have complained about a vs mode, that's extra content, yay! Also it would have been nice if the 'missions' you complete were a bit more story-ish, like the ones in L4D or even Wolfenstein Enemy Territory. As it was, I found myself a little suspicious that there was a reaper indoctrination device, an Alliance power generator, and a Cerberus data center all wedged into the same corner of a firebase. Do they all hire the same contractors or something?

tl;dr: It's fun, but doesn't make much story sense.

 

[Therumancer]

Perhaps I already said this in this thread... but I think there is one BIG point not being touched on in this review.

The Multiplayer is microtransaction capable. Basically you can pay either real money or credits gained from missions to upgrade ypur gear. Gear also makes your character substantially more powerful in this mode.

By making the multiplayer mandatory to get the most out of the single player campaign (some endings are pretty much impossible without it) it creates pressure on single player gamers to do it, and if they don't like Multiplayer or are pants at shooters... well there is that giant glowing "I win" button they can hit by spending real money and making farming a few battles easier, so that guy sitting at the end of the game will be tempted to do the multiplayer thing and pay to win it if they otherwise don't really want to get into it.

This more or less taints the entire thing, as I can't see any way that the above doesn't figure into their logic. No serious multiplayer enthisiast is going to pay real money for that stuff given how relatively easy credits are to get in multiplayer, so what is the point?

What's more why the heck does your "galactic control" decay? The only reason I can think of them adding in the decay is so that single player guy who might want to do multiple play throughs will be increasingly tempted/pressured especially if he winds up having to do the multiplayer grind more than once.

See, people are looking at the multiplayer on it's own merits, as opposed to what it exactly means, or how it fits into increasingly exploitive marketing strategies. Amazingly I see very little about how Bioware has included an option to buy packs for real money, and I think that's the most important thing about this development, and where all eyes should be aimed.

This is exactly right... only the opposite of what you said.

You don't need to play multiplayer to get the best ending. Multiplayer just makes it easier.

http://www.gamezone.com/products/mass-effect-3/news/bioware-clarifies-mass-effect-3-s-perfect-ending

Your ending(s) are determined by your "Effective Military Strength" (let's call it EMS for now) bar. Focus on that bar - that is your indicator of how well you will do in the end-game.

You can maximize your EMS just by collecting War Assets in the single-player game. There is a certain threshhold of these you would need to exceed (I can't get too specific) but I can tell you there are MORE than the required amount that can be gathered in the single-player campaign.

"Galactic Readiness" is a modifier you can improve by playing multiplayer. That is to say, if you play a lot of multiplayer, you will need less War Assets from single-player to fill up your EMS bar (ie it will balance out the requirements to account for you playing in both modes). Single-player game play does not impact that bar.

EMS = success. EMS can be maximized via collecting war assets alone, even if your Galactic Readiness is 50%.

http://www.pcgamer.com/2012/03/06/mass-effect-3-war-assets-and-readiness-how-multiplayer-affects-your-ending/

It is possible to get the best ending in single player without playing multiplayer, but it?s twice as hard. All your War Assets only count for 50% of their potential value. The biggest gains in War Assets come from a culmination of your decisions in the previous games and your decisions in this one: if you?ve helped a race before, and you help them here, it?s often possible to get their full support and resolve their conflict to get someone else on your side too...


...Here?s what I recommend: don?t. Don?t do any quests that are boring, don?t play multiplayer if you don?t want to, and don?t go through old save games trying to optimise your decisions for the most War Assets. Don?t let BioWare?s seedy design decision manipulate you into playing in a way you don?t want to.

If they?ve made a game that?s brutal, harsh and dark if you don?t play multiplayer, they?ve made a game that?s brutal, harsh and dark. That?s how I reviewed it, and it?s still phenomenal.

Multiplayer stands on its own, as does single player.

Normally I'd cut the quoting but it got messed up when you quoted me.

Your missing the point in that the single player experience does NOT stand on it's own. Yes, if you had invested in previous games in the series you wind up with having a chance of doing things without the multiplayer. If you have not done so however you cannot complete the game and get a decent ending without engaging in multiplayer, which is a pretty slimy thing to do given the microtransactions.

As someone who has done both the Multiplayer (which I won't comment on, on it's own merits) and has played the other games in the series, the actual end results don't personally effect me, I can easily get the rating points I need for the best ending if I so choose. This does not however prevent me from calling EA/Bioware on slimey design desicians when I see them.

My comment here is mostly that that I notice few, if any, of the reviews on the multiplayer make mention of the inclusion of "pay to win" aspects. I do not think this is something that should be overlooked in reviews. Especially seeing as even ignoring the single player aspects of things, someone who drops real money into the multiplayer is going to come up with a decisive advantage, especially early on.

 

[Darth_Dude]

I don't want to pay for xbox live gold.

Jesus shit. This makes me so angry I could spit!

Maybe you should invest in a Ps3?

trollface.jpg

Given the buttreaming SONY is trying to enact with the psvita, I suspect that free to play on the play station network won't last past the PS3.

I know my post was pretty immature, and you have a point about the PS3. It just pisses me off. I have to pay 60 bucks for a game, that makes it almost impossible to get the best ending despite the 120 hours (in liklihood FAR more) I've poured into the previous iterations, UNLESS I shell out extra for a subscription service.

I know I mean NOTHING to bioware. I know that, but I am seriously thinking about not buying any more bioware games. I've paid for the game, I should be able to access the entire thing. Stop nickle and diming me. I've never bought another Ubisoft game, and I never will, over their ridiculous DRM policies. EA is heading down the same path with me.

Again, I know they don't care, but it is getting close for me.

I totally understand how you feel, I am myself (that phrase doesn't sound right) really annoyed at EA's policies, and while I'm not about to boycott, I sure as hell am getting close.

By the way, couldn't you have bought it on PC? Or did you not buy it for PC because of the Origin brouhaha?

I've played both games on XBOX so far, and that is where all my save info is. Added in to that are some issues I have with my wrist, I can play with an xbox controller, but the mouse/keyboard hurts like heck (I know you can attach the controller to your computer).

In answer to your second part, Origin was THE big major reason why. I simply reject companies' attempts to define me as a criminal. I am not a pirate, I even pay for all of my music online (seriously, I have more than 3k songs on itunes). I hate the basic assumption, same reason I will not go to gas stations that expect pre-pay; I am not a criminal, stop trying to treat me like one.

Are you playing on PC, or the PS3?

Ps3. (I havnt bought ME3, but I finished ME2 on Ps3) My PC probably be able to run it, and besides, screw Origin.

 

[Ayay]

Nice review . Looking forward to all other games that come with a single and multiplayer option getting the same treatment of reviewing. But my guess is i have to wait until ME4 for that huh?

 

[Scott Beaulieu]

How I see ME3 Multiplayer is, while its no GoW3 Horde Mode, its a decent enough venture to play with some friends and have a blast. Now...If they had a PvP mode, the whole character customization aspect would be amazing.

 

[Muphin_Mann]

I'm defiantly in the category of it not sitting right with me. I don't have a gold account on my Xbox anymore (I play pretty much exclusively story driven games) so I can't get the full single player experience because I can't play multiplayer? That doesn't sit right with me at all.

Luckily, you, and the reviewer, are both wrong.

As a test i got the best set of endings for ME3 without any Multiplayer. Its definitly possible, just as Bioware said it would be.

Also, the multiplayer microtransactions are...why are they an issue again? I dropped ten bucks on From Ashes after all. The Multiplayer isnt head-to-head so if one guy bought more stuff, you all benefit. And while it tracks your score individually, you get XP equal to what eveyrone did. So the one thing buying packs does for the guy who did it, is give him a bigger points bar if he uses the stuff he got well. Everyone in the match gets the extra survivability and the total points bonus.

 

[Sleepless Gamer]

I really was geared up to hate the MP in mass effect 3 but...

Then i played it and aside from the annoying matchmaking system and sometimes, less than stellar random's it sets you up with i could not be happier with it. (Unless i could unlock the widow for my infiltrator >.>)

 

[Jupiter065]

Perhaps I already said this in this thread... but I think there is one BIG point not being touched on in this review.

The Multiplayer is microtransaction capable. Basically you can pay either real money or credits gained from missions to upgrade ypur gear. Gear also makes your character substantially more powerful in this mode.

By making the multiplayer mandatory to get the most out of the single player campaign (some endings are pretty much impossible without it) it creates pressure on single player gamers to do it, and if they don't like Multiplayer or are pants at shooters... well there is that giant glowing "I win" button they can hit by spending real money and making farming a few battles easier, so that guy sitting at the end of the game will be tempted to do the multiplayer thing and pay to win it if they otherwise don't really want to get into it.

This more or less taints the entire thing, as I can't see any way that the above doesn't figure into their logic. No serious multiplayer enthisiast is going to pay real money for that stuff given how relatively easy credits are to get in multiplayer, so what is the point?

What's more why the heck does your "galactic control" decay? The only reason I can think of them adding in the decay is so that single player guy who might want to do multiple play throughs will be increasingly tempted/pressured especially if he winds up having to do the multiplayer grind more than once.

See, people are looking at the multiplayer on it's own merits, as opposed to what it exactly means, or how it fits into increasingly exploitive marketing strategies. Amazingly I see very little about how Bioware has included an option to buy packs for real money, and I think that's the most important thing about this development, and where all eyes should be aimed.

5-year-old kudos to you for recognizing EA's first big foray into loot box microtransactions and calling it out for the garbage it was, and continues to be.