• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

ME3 multiplayer details leak [Update 4: Game Informer Can't Read]

Jarmel

Banned
Ugh. Here's the problem I have, Bioware really doesn't have any experiences in multiplayer. The game itself would be fantastic for deathmatch if done properly but it needs ALOT of tweaks unlike Uncharted which lended itself very well to multiplayer. This also means diverting resources as well. Co-op could possibly have worked though.

I very much want multiplayer but I would have preffered a separate game for that though.
 

Nirolak

Mrgrgr
Jarmel said:
Ugh. Here's the problem I have, Bioware really doesn't have any experiences in multiplayer. The game itself would be fantastic for deathmatch if done properly but it needs ALOT of tweaks unlike Uncharted which lended itself very well to multiplayer. This also means diverting resources as well. Co-op could possibly have worked though.

I very much want multiplayer but I would have preffered a separate game for that though.
It's made by BioWare Montreal actually. They're staffed full of shooter developers like Manveer Heir from Raven.
 

Elcheris

Neo Member
I don't see how this is a bad thing really. I for one enjoyed the combat in ME2 and wished there had been an arena mode of some sort so I could mess around and blow dudes up. It may be interesting with the different combos you can do, like freezing guys and then smashing them to bits. It should be fun for a few extra hours of gameplay. I'm not so keen on the pvp modes though, I dont see how that could turn out to be very great =(
 

Owzers

Member
i was happy when multiplayer was initially rumored so i'm definitely interested, but i am pretty meh on the ME 3 trailer showed at e3 with the on rails chain gun shooting section. In a perfect world, ME 3 would be an RPG and the multiplayer would be a wacky shooterish with powers mode. Segregation time.
 

enzo_gt

tagged by Blackace
I won't say no to more stuff in my mass effect, but this game is completely not suited for MP. Its going to be Gears 1 abysmal MP clunkfest all over again.

And if the major bit is a wave based mode.. No thank you. Theres only so many wave based games I can play at once and unless it's better than the best, Firefight, which I doubt, Im not interested.
 

DjangoReinhardt

Thinks he should have been the one to kill Batman's parents.
Just because you can do something does not mean you should, EA.

There is literally no reason to believe that BioWare can make a third-person shooter that compares favorably with the dedicated shooter competition. Even if the multiplayer component was outsourced, the mechanics of Mass Effect 2 don't strike me as terribly compatible with multiplayer, anyway.
 

HK-47

Oh, bitch bitch bitch.
eznark said:
Oh. I thought you meant they were going to make them MMO's.

And honestly...they might bar BioWare from making games period should SWTOR be a colossal failure.

I think people are really started to exaggerate SWTOR's impact. So they are just gonna abandon DA and ME cause of TOR?
 

Nirolak

Mrgrgr
HK-47 said:
I think people are really started to exaggerate SWTOR's impact. So they are just gonna abandon DA and ME cause of TOR?
I think the odder thing is expecting SWTOR to megabomb when games like Rift and Aion can support themselves.
 
HK-47 said:
I think people are really started to exaggerate SWTOR's impact. So they are just gonna abandon DA and ME cause of TOR?

I don't think you can exaggerate TOR's impact. If that game doesn't do VERY well, both EA and Bioware could be in VERY big trouble.

Between TOR and Galaxies, I'm beginning to think that the Star Wars MMO is the videogame equivalent of trying to invade Russia.

Just don't do it.
 
subversus said:
Courtesy of deathberry

http://tbreak.com/megamers/29135/news/e3-11-exclusive-first-mass-effect-3-multiplayer-details/

seems to be true. May be it's the reason of delay.



Update:

Ray Muzyka has officially changed BioWare's stance on Mass Effect 3 having multiplayer to "we're not saying, but stay tuned."


Source: http://www.computerandvideogames.co...e-exploring-multiplayer-for-all-of-our-games/

You can also see Greg Zeschuk smile and look around nervously in the video when Ray is saying his last line.

Bioware is under the impression that ME makes a good shooter when they have never gotten the shooter mechanics up to par.

The Antitype said:
Fuck you EA.

Whatever market research analyst you've put in charge of game direction across the brand needs to die.

It has more to do with fans not voting with their wallets and continuing to support Bioware regardless of quality, making Bioware think they can do anything.
 
Qwomo said:
The shooting mechanics are perfectly fine. I like the Mass Effect universe, and I like playing video games with friends. A Mass Effect game with a multiplayer component is a wonderful idea, and will be great, even in spite of all the whiners.
I just don't see the appeal of playing a third person shooter online when the shooting mechanics are so clearly worse than a lot of the competition out there.
 

Jarmel

Banned
Nirolak said:
It's made by BioWare Montreal actually. They're staffed full of shooter developers like Manveer Heir from Raven.

In that case it might be fine. It won't be spectacular but I don't see the singleplayer suffering much than it would have otherwise.
 

man/man

Banned
Foliorum Viridum said:
I just don't see the appeal of playing a third person shooter online when the shooting mechanics are so clearly worse than a lot of the competition out there.

I agree. I wish developers would just release multiplayer-only spin-off games instead of tacking it onto singleplayers. That way they can focus their resources on fine-tuning the mechanics and crafting a deep and engaging experience.
 

eznark

Banned
Nirolak said:
I think the odder thing is expecting SWTOR to megabomb when games like Rift and Aion can support themselves.

Slight difference in resources invested, don't you think?

indeed, SW fans alone can keep it alive.

They were barely able to keep Galaxies alive and the cost to produce and operate Galaxies was orders of magnitude less, if rumors are to be believed.
 
vodka-bull said:
Wow, I'm really amazed by how much effort they put into becoming one of the worst developers. And keep in mind, they used to make top-notch games like Mass Effect 1 and Dragon Age 1.

You're wrong. The first was an RPG with shooter-elements. The second was a shooter with RPG-elements. That's why the second was so terrible compared to the first.

It doesn't matter how you categorize the first and second games, the "shooter-elements" suck regardless, it was never up to snuff for MP to begin with and the abilities were more designed to be overpowering which really don't work well in a MP setting.

eznark said:
Slight difference in resources invested, don't you think?

They'll survive even if SWTOR sells under expectations, unless EA blows so much cash on marketing and it completely bombs, which I doubt.
 

Nirolak

Mrgrgr
The Antitype said:
I don't think you can exaggerate TOR's impact. If that game doesn't do VERY well, both EA and Bioware could be in VERY big trouble.

Between TOR and Galaxies, I'm beginning to think that the Star Wars MMO is the videogame equivalent of trying to invade Russia.

Just don't do it.
So, what do we think will be the favored whipping MMO after SWTOR releases?

I'm thinking The Elder Scrolls Online. It's been in development for almost five years now with a large ass team, meaning it's likely in the $100-$200 million budget range, and will be announced after Skyrim, presenting the MMO at the height of Elder Scrolls popularity.

I eagerly await loads of posts decrying the end of ZeniMax and how the MMO will fail and take down the entire company with it.
 
man/man said:
I agree. I wish developers would just release multiplayer-only spin-off games instead of tacking it onto singleplayers. That way they can focus their resources on fine-tuning the mechanics and crafting a deep and engaging experience.

It doesn't matter in Bioware's case, the shooter-genre is not in their wheelhouse, it's like Carl Lewis trying to embark in a singing career, you have a bunch of enablers telling Bioware, "hey Bioware you're the best, if you want to make a shooter you can do it! I love pushing buttons and watching awesum happening!"
 

Mindlog

Member
So when EA inevitably shutters the studios I hope Microsoft picks up the pieces. That worked out pretty well the first time around.
 

Nirolak

Mrgrgr
eznark said:
Slight difference in resources invested, don't you think?



They were barely able to keep Galaxies alive and the cost to produce and operate Galaxies was orders of magnitude less, if rumors are to be believed.
EA has said the game would be "substantially profitable" at 500,000 subscribers: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-02-02-500k-subs-will-make-sw-tor-profitable

I imagine their break even point is well below that.

The studio that made Aion has hinted they have more subscribers than that right now and it's been months since launch: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-06-08-trion-caused-wow-subs-dip
 

Arjen

Member
As long as it doesn't cut into the length of the single player i really don't care.
Dead Space 2 had MP and was still a great single player experience. As was Bioshock 2
 

man/man

Banned
MalboroRed said:
It doesn't matter in Bioware's case, the shooter-genre is not in their wheelhouse, it's like Carl Lewis trying to embark in a singing career, you have a bunch of enablers telling Bioware, "hey Bioware you're the best, if you want to make a shooter you can do it! I love pushing buttons and watching awesum happening!"

Ha! Good point.
 

li bur

Member
I received this email in my university's job advert mailing list. Can anyone confirm this?

 
Dice AB is a Swedish game developer of titles such as Battlefield 2 and the upcoming Mass effect 3 in collaboration with Bioware. There are some job opportunities on their end.

http://www.dice.se/hiring.asp

Sincerely,

Indira Nurdiani
Software Engineering Global interAction Lab (SEGAL)
Department of Computer Science, University of Victoria
British Columbia, Canada
 

eznark

Banned
Nirolak said:
EA has said the game would be "substantially profitable" at 500,000 subscribers: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-02-02-500k-subs-will-make-sw-tor-profitable

I imagine their break even point is well below that.

The studio that made Aion has hinted they have more subscribers than that right now and it's been months since launch: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-06-08-trion-caused-wow-subs-dip

the article doesn't read that way at all. Anything north of 1m subscribers is called "very good." The half million sounds like just north of a break even number to me.

Those are also, one would assume, annual numbers. Averaging 500,000 subs a month for an entire year seems like a lot of people to hang on to reskinned WoW for a year. What were Galaxies numbers?
 

Nirolak

Mrgrgr
eznark said:
the article doesn't read that way at all. Anything north of 1m subscribers is called "very good." The half million sounds like just north of a break even number to me.

Those are also, one would assume, annual numbers. Averaging 500,000 subs a month for an entire year seems like a lot of people to hang on to reskinned WoW for a year. What were Galaxies numbers?
Well, we don't usually get perfect statements, but MMO Data tries to collate what we get from fiscal statements and press releases into a few different charts.

Galaxies peaked and stayed around 300,000 for a year when it launched eight-ish years ago.

subs-1etxi.png


subs-2nrme.png
 

eznark

Banned
That's really awesome, thanks Nirolak. Nothing in that data changes my mind that SWTOR is going to hemorrhage money, though.
 

IoCaster

Member
I've already consigned this game to the sub $20 bargain bin and every new bit of info released kind of reinforces that decision. By the time March 2012 rolls around I fully expect to be willing to settle for a quick glance at a spoilerish endgame vid on youtube just out of morbid curiosity.

I don't track E3 news and trends, but did ME3 generate any serious buzz or hype coming out of the convention? Specifically among those in the crowd that weren't already fans of the series.
 

Nirolak

Mrgrgr
eznark said:
That's really awesome, thanks Nirolak. Nothing in that data changes my mind that SWTOR is going to hemorrhage money, though.
I think the key part though is that EA is a $3.6 billion revenue company.

To make any movement in that, they'd probably need at least 100-200K profitable subscribers.

I don't think they could call less than that "substantially profitable" unless they're straight up lying to shareholders.

You could be right, but I have a hard time envisioning the game tanking to the point where they can't hit a break even point in post launch costs.

Even going hybrid would likely net them more than enough money to keep going given the huge revenue spikes Turbine saw.
 

Nirolak

Mrgrgr
~Devil Trigger~ said:
will Mass Effect have Fifa animation now too?
It's still on Unreal Engine, so probably not.

I suspect it will move to Frostbite after this though as it's EA's last internally developed game using Unreal.
 

eznark

Banned
Nirolak said:
I think the key part though is that EA is a $3.6 billion revenue company.

To make any movement in that, they'd probably need at least 100-200K profitable subscribers.

I don't think they could call less than that "substantially profitable" unless they're straight up lying to shareholders.

You could be right, but I have a hard time envisioning the game tanking to the point where they can't hit a break even point in post launch costs.

Even going hybrid would likely net them more than enough money to keep going given the huge revenue spikes Turbine saw.

We're obviously in the wrong thread for this, so my last thought and biggest reason I think there could be significant ramifications should the MMO underperform is I think it would result in Riccardi's ouster, and a new CEO will likely want to rid himself of the stink of even a break even MMO (when they are billing it as so much more).

I wish they had the stones to get behind Warhammer. Maybe I'm just bitter at EA for abandoning that game so quickly. I thought it was a blast.
 
Dabanton said:
I would accept Co-op but this? capture the flag,team deathmatch it's just bizarre.
Yeah, this is pretty strange, although not all that surprising.

Why not just develop some co-op RPG mechanics? Something new that fits the game and the genre better?

BTW - Deathmatch and Capture the Flag need to die. Its fucking 2011.
 

soldat7

Member
While playing ME1/ME2, I never once said, "Gee, this would make for some great multiplayer." After ME2, it was clear that BioWare had thrown the baby out with the bathwater. ME3 is just reinforcing that fact. :(
 

megalowho

Member
176249-drray_large.jpg


"With Mass Effect 3, we are listening to our fans and adding in both Kinect support and lots of great multiplayer modes. Even though it's the third game in a series, there's never been a better time... to jump in."
 

BeauRoger

Unconfirmed Member
Wonder if this is EA at work or if Bioware actually felt multiplayer was necessary. They really dont know their audience if they think that the shooter mechanics are what people play Mass effect for. Especially when its the final act in a trilogy where its absolutely necessary to play the previous games. In their heads it must be something like this:

"I didnt play mass effect 1 or 2, but will pick up 3 because it has multiplayer!"

"Mass Effect 3 multiplayer will no doubt hold its own against Gears of War 3 and Call of Duty Spec Ops MP!"
 
Nirolak said:
Following the rumor path, this was originally a spin-off that got canceled and merged into the main game, so it probably has a fair amount of effort in it.
So it's Mass Effect ODLC? Overpriced, downloadable content?
 
horde mode along with CTF style objectives sounds pretty great, similar to uncharted 2
competitive mp is lame and totally not fitting for the game
BOO-URNS!
 
Top Bottom