So multiplayer for Dragon Age 3 is pretty much confirmed

#1ribelePosted 4/9/2012 7:22:26 PM
David Gaider is answering some questions on the BSN...
http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/315/index/10947666&lf=8

Q: "What kind of disadvantage will those of us who don't play Multiplayer (you guys know you're doing this) be at?"

DG: "This is the sort of question that will be easier to answer when we talk about what kind of multiplayer we will have. Mike mentioned at the panel that we were looking more towards Baldur's Gate style co-operative multiplayer as our source of inspiration, but more than that will need to wait."

Why does every game need multiplayer these days?
#2GamemakoPosted 4/9/2012 8:01:25 PM(edited)
ribele posted...
Why does every game need multiplayer these days?

Used games. Sales are falling off faster than ever, and MP is a way to get players to stop selling back their games after a week. You also really need to keep a player engaged if you want to sell him DLC. The only practical way to do that is multiplayer. It also helps limit piracy (pirates rarely play online) and further chips away at the used game market when MP is set as a DLC-pass.

Without the used game market, you might see some pullback on MP, but until that happens, expect MP in every game you touch.

Thanks for the link, though.

//EDIT: This is why I am somewhat ambivalent about the anti-used-game thing on new consoles. I hate to see that kind of freedom removed, but hell, I never had it as a PC gamer. It's a no-win situation no matter how you slice it.
---
One can only wonder at how such idiocy invariably comes to power.
ESTIMATE THE CATACLYSM. CALCULATE THE APOCALYPSE.
#3LordRorkPosted 4/10/2012 5:04:07 AM

Sounds like another reason to not buy DA3.

I'm simply not interested in multiplayer. I'd be interested to see what sort of feedback they've got that prompted this, though.

#4GamemakoPosted 4/10/2012 7:45:38 AM
LordRork posted...
I'm simply not interested in multiplayer. I'd be interested to see what sort of feedback they've got that prompted this, though.

Feedback from ME3's MP has been quite positive. That said, I previously detailed the reason for MP. It's not necessarily that they think MP would make a better game but that they need MP to make money.
---
One can only wonder at how such idiocy invariably comes to power.
ESTIMATE THE CATACLYSM. CALCULATE THE APOCALYPSE.
#5LordRorkPosted 4/10/2012 7:59:31 AM
Gamemako posted...
That said, I previously detailed the reason for MP. It's not necessarily that they think MP would make a better game but that they need MP to make money.



It's a shame they haven't/can't come up with a better/different way to extend the life of the game. I can understand multiplayer in the majority of FPSs, but considering the replay value RPGs should have (I say should given Bioware's recent colour coding...) anyway, I'd expect something a little more original.
#6GamemakoPosted 4/10/2012 8:15:29 AM
LordRork posted...
It's a shame they haven't/can't come up with a better/different way to extend the life of the game.

Got a good suggestion? I don't. You could pull a Capcom and slowly release content off the disc, but we all see how well that works. Trying to accelerate your DLC schedule isn't practical either. How do you get people to (1) stop selling back their games and (2) notice or care about your new DLC/expansions/etc?

LordRork posted...
...but considering the replay value RPGs should have (I say should given Bioware's recent colour coding...)...

Most RPGs don't have much replay value. There's no motivation to replay open-world games (e.g. TES, KoA:R) after you've just done everything in it over 200 hours. JRPGs obviously have little replay value (unless it's just a really great game, like Xenogears).
---
One can only wonder at how such idiocy invariably comes to power.
ESTIMATE THE CATACLYSM. CALCULATE THE APOCALYPSE.
#7Thanatos2kPosted 4/10/2012 1:36:12 PM(edited)
Why does every game need multiplayer these days?

They don't. Every EA game on the other hand does!

I called this long ago.

It's a shame they haven't/can't come up with a better/different way to extend the life of the game.

Why do they need to? Make a product, sell the product, make the next one. It seemed to work really well.
---
-Thanatos2k-
#8GamemakoPosted 4/10/2012 2:17:23 PM
Thanatos2k posted...
Why do they need to? Make a product, sell the product, make the next one. It seemed to work really well.

Sell the product, get 100% of sales in the first week before the used game market destroys sales completely, puzzle how to pay for next game.
---
One can only wonder at how such idiocy invariably comes to power.
ESTIMATE THE CATACLYSM. CALCULATE THE APOCALYPSE.
#9Thanatos2kPosted 4/11/2012 9:03:53 AM
Sell the product, get 100% of sales in the first week before the used game market destroys sales completely, puzzle how to pay for next game.

Such is life.

And no the solution is not to attempt to screw the consumers out of reselling their own property. You could always give tangible extras that would not be present in a used version of the game. Posters, soundtracks, art books, etc. NOT locking out content of the game.

I especially think that the full soundtrack should come included with every new game via a download code or what have you.
---
-Thanatos2k-
#10Raven1229Posted 4/16/2012 8:06:25 AM
I agree that giving the customer more value is a better solution. I also think they should consider making a game with enough content that you can't trade it in in a week. I mean DA2 on normal difficulty could probably be beaten in what-20 hours. Depending on if you do a ton of side quests, the higher difficulties may not be far off.

However, I also am not necessarily opposed to the idea of multiplayer. MP is not intrinsically a bad thing. It's only a bad thing if: A)It sucks, B) It gives people who play it rewards over those who don't and C) It isn't added on, but instead takes up valuable resources that could be spent making the actual campaign good. Given BW's track record, this is why I'm skeptical of MP in DA3.