Mass Effect 3 Multiplayer to be released as DLC: Bioware stopping all discussion

[neonsword13-ops]

Actually, this DLC plan isn't a bad thing.

People that want Mass Effect to be a single player experince can keep it that way. Those who want multiplayer can have it too.

I like this choice.

 

[poppabaggins]

It's EA,what did you expect? And even if they're considering it,it should be Co-op not multiplayer.

I thought it was co-op... the two terms aren't mutually exclusive.

I'm still discovering that DLC is planned before games are released. THAT ISN'T HOW IT SHOULD WORK. Gah...

Planning DLC in advance allows companies to get games out faster, something they need do do when the games have multimillion dollar budgets. If DLC get released a month after the game comes out, that means that a team could have been working on it for 2 or 3 (or more) months prior to the release of the actual game.

Also, DLC is a movement toward software-as-a-service for the game industry. It's something new, and people don't like paying more money for what they perceive as less content, but it's needed to provide the money to keep triple-A titles a viable option. Just be glad that the "licenses" we purchase to play games don't have to be renewed (unless you count buying multiple installments ala CoD or Madden).

 

[Baralak]

It's EA,what did you expect? And even if they're considering it,it should be Co-op not multiplayer.

I thought it was co-op... the two terms aren't mutually exclusive.

I'm still discovering that DLC is planned before games are released. THAT ISN'T HOW IT SHOULD WORK. Gah...

Why shouldn't it work that way?

All content should be planned well in advance.

I think it's the ideas behind it. There's a difference between

"Hey, this is really cool, I'm going to add it to this level!" "No, we'll just sell it later as DLC. Make more money that way."

and

" Hey, wouldn't this be a great idea?" "Yeah, it would, but there's no way we can put it in well with our deadlines. Work on it on your own a bit, then we'll polish it up and sell it as a DLC later on."

 

[ReaperGrimm]

I blame EA and the part of the community that thinks multiplayer needs to be in literally every-#@$%ing-thing

I know, still imam going to beat the campaign 6 times and never touch the multiplayer.

 

[Britisheagle]

Meh not really bothered by this. Those who want multiplayer can pay for it (or not) later and those who don't won't have to. I like it. Stops multiplayer taking away from the single player experience.

 

[Stammer]

Well, I hope to hell that's not the only reason they extended the release date. I wouldn't mind multiplayer if they did it in a unique and fun way (which, given that it's Mass Effect, it totally could be done).

I also don't mind if it's DLC. Again, as long as it's done right. If the game is complete in and of itself and the multiplayer DLC is a paid addition to the game that's worth the cost, I have no reason to complain. If the game is half-assed and the multiplayer obviously had more focus on it I'd be pissed. If the multiplayer was crap I just wouldn't buy it.

 

[Salad Is Murder]

For all we know it might even be free with purchase the the cerberus network from ME2. I don't know why everyone is crying about this, it's an extra feature that, from the sound of it, is completely optional. Don't we like extra stuff? The best part is, if we don't like it we don't have to buy it.

It's like the Dead Space 2 multiplayer: completely superfluous of the main game, and entirely without cost to the consumer. If you NEVER played the DS2 multiplayer you are missing no content from the main game. Also, it was free.

 

[Zhukov]

Actually, I think that's a pretty good idea.

I don't particularly want to play multiplayer ME3, so I just don't buy that DLC.

Works for me.

And now I shall sit back and enjoy a tall glass of the impotent tears that fill this thread.

 

[Magicman10893]

It's EA,what did you expect? And even if they're considering it,it should be Co-op not multiplayer.

I thought it was co-op... the two terms aren't mutually exclusive.

I'm still discovering that DLC is planned before games are released. THAT ISN'T HOW IT SHOULD WORK. Gah...

Roughly six months before a game comes out it is already finished completely. That time is used for mass producing the discs and shipping them worldwide. During that six months the dev team has nothing to do really since the people aren't playing the game yet and determining if there are bugs/exploits they missed that need to be fixed. During that time they are busy making the first batch of DLC (if there are plans for it) and that is why there is DLC so close to launch. However, in the cases where the DLC is simply content that was stripped from the game for the purpose of making DLC to charge extra for (and not content that was cut due to time constraints, there is a MAJOR difference) is when things are bullshit. In this case, however, the game is STILL being developed and has not "gone Gold" yet, so this is extremely bullshit.

All I can hope for is A) It's free (or part of Project $10) or B) Co-op (or at least really well done).

 

[Himmelgeher]

The way I see it, there are two ways this can go.
A) It's a co-op mode, similar to Splinter Cell or Portal 2 where you play as two completely different characters in a side story (obviously, you would only be able to level up/customize your character at fixed points, otherwise you would get killed mid-combat because your partner's an idiot and can't watch your back)
or
B) A token effort with a few game types, similar to Bioshock 2. Also like Bioshock 2, it would probably be shit because they'd have to gimp character customization and pause-based combat (the thing that makes both games fun) to balance things out for their shitty ten minute team deathmatch game that nobody will play because everyone else is either playing Call of Duty (PC and PS3, 12 year olds on the 360) or Halo: Reach (surprising lack of 12 year olds outside of Team Slayer) because they're the only ones who have shown any degree of competence in designing multiplayer in the history of ever.

Of course, it's possible they'd fuck up option A or somehow manage to pull off option B really well. I guess we'll know in April.

 

[Ruedyn]

Make it stay as DLC and none integral to the game and maybe the escapist won't krogan charge the shit out of EAs headquarters.

Although I am curious as to how multiplayer would work. If it's co op who would the second guy be and how would the speech system work? And if it's competitive who would the sides be? The heretical geth have been taken care of, and the harbringer died so no collectors. Would it just be reapers vs. everyone else?

 

[Magicman10893]

For all we know it might even be free with purchase the the cerberus network from ME2. I don't know why everyone is crying about this, it's an extra feature that, from the sound of it, is completely optional. Don't we like extra stuff? The best part is, if we don't like it we don't have to buy it.

It's like the Dead Space 2 multiplayer: completely superfluous of the main game, and entirely without cost to the consumer. If you NEVER played the DS2 multiplayer you are missing no content from the main game. Also, it was free.

Sorry for the double post


The point isn't that we are being forced to play it or pay for it, the REAL problem is that Bioware is diverting time and resources from making the main campaign to be perfect for a series finally, and sending them to make a multiplayer mode that is most likely not going to go well since it is first for the series.

 

[Android2137]

This reminds me of a very specific episode of The Jimquisition.

Reminds me of a very specific episode of Extra Credits. Didn't they suggest something like this? But then again, it hinged on the game being cheaper to begin with.

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

Co-op(Cooperative) is up to 4 players.

Multiplayer is up to 5+ people.

and if the DLC says "Multiplayer" its definitely not Co-op.

Where did you get that? Do you understand what the terms actually mean? The number of players has no bearing. Co-op means cooperative gameplay (as opposed to versus (or PvP)). Multiplayer simply means greater than one player. A game can be single player, multiplayer coop (2 people or more), multiplayer versus (2 people or more) or any combination of the three.

 

[Zeraki]

Non credible source starts unconfirmed rumors on the internet. Gamers begin foaming at the mouth and declaring the end times. Story at 11:00.

I'm going to wait for an official announcement to decide whether this is even true or not. And if it is, as long as it's optional and doesn't take away from the single player I don't care.

 

[AngryBritishAce]

well I don't really play multiplayer, especially shooters, so I'll probs give it a miss. However if this at all fucks about with the Single Player (cutting out story, dumbing down combat, ect) then I will not be happy.

However, I remain optimistic because they already said they will include the things I want in ME3 (good story, advanced skill trees, ect) so that SHOULD be fine. And if you're gonna get mad then you may as well kiss ME3 goodbye, tell yourself something will suck, and it will. I want to finish Mass Effect so I'm going to hang on to it and hope for the best, because what else can you do?

 

[Lethos]

I see your article and raise you one video of Casey almost (almost!) saying that MP won't be in ME3. [link]http://www.gametrailers.com/episode/gametrailers-tv/126?ch=2[/link]

Skip to 8:40 to hear him state how he doesn't believe there is a way MP can be incorporated into ME without jeopardising the single player experience.

Edit: After a little snooping on the BSN, it looks like the rumours of a mp DLC originated from a member of the forums who stated that in "his work" he met with some EA reps and they told him there would be mp DLC. The guy has yet to provide proof for his claims.

 

[Savber]

I want sources.

Whoa.. I bet that was a revolutionary concept for half of you whiners on this forum.

Yes, I want bloody sources. I was on the Bioware Social Network and I saw the original post and dismissed it as someone trolling.

So sources, please?

 

[Salad Is Murder]

/snip
Sorry for the double post


The point isn't that we are being forced to play it or pay for it, the REAL problem is that Bioware is diverting time and resources from making the main campaign to be perfect for a series finally, and sending them to make a multiplayer mode that is most likely not going to go well since it is first for the series.

I don't know, that seems like a rocky path to traverse. We don't know that they're pulling resources from the main game to make this multiplayer function, given the scale and money already involved in this game it seems to me that the more likely scenario is that they are putting additional people to work on this aspect of the project; a different team to manage the co-op functions and integrate that in with the main teams working on the game.

And honestly, these guys are not really known for fucking up. We might not like some of the stuff they do, but they do good stuff.