[PC/PS3/360/WiiU] Mass Effect 3

[james0246]

Originally Posted by GN0010 Nosferatu

This is the first time I've seen this, themed N7 weapon pack with the CE game! I've been begging for this for a long long time. Now I can have weapons match my armor!

http://f.em.ea.com/i/9/2075765679/11...usivebonus.jpg

That's actually really cool. What's this exclusive too? Also, is the Dog for real, because I'm all for a robotic pet.

[Hellbore]

Originally Posted by james0246

That's actually really cool. What's this exclusive too? Also, is the Dog for real, because I'm all for a robotic pet.

Exclusive to the N7 (collector's) Edition up for preorder, and sadly the dog is in-game.

[synaesthetic]

They're just reskinned Phalanx pistol, Locust SMG, Eviscerator shotgun and Viper rifle... lol

[GN0010 Nosferatu]

Originally Posted by synaesthetic

They're just reskinned Phalanx pistol, Locust SMG, Eviscerator shotgun and Viper rifle... lol

Yes, but now....they will match my armor.

[Alchemist007]

Multiplayer http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/20...ayer-confirmed

God damnit EA.

[MeoTwister5]

Multiplayer does not automatically make a game suck...

[DingoEnderZOE2]

^ You obviously haven't played Fear 3,Assassins creed Brotherhood or Resident evil 5. When you add multiplayer to a series that was overall a single player experience things tend to change for the worse.

However In resident evil 5's defense it wasn't AS BAD, it was still somewhat enjoyable but as a result of multiplayer and co-op the overall quality was quite lower than the prequels.

Assassins Creed brotherhood was fine since it was more or less just a DLC expansion in the form of a new game, plus the multiplayer wasn't too bad, but it doesn't change the fact that the quality of the single player was less than before.

Fear 3 was the biggest offense....Although as a first person shooter multiplayer is to be expected. However with the addition of co-op the campaign was extremely short(4 stages I believe), it was easy as hell even on the harder difficulties, and the Ai was just retarded.....

I pray that in order to balance this risky decision E.A has like maybe 3 discs or 4 discs. One for multiplayer and 3 for the campaign.

[Tiresias]

Originally Posted by Alchemist007

Multiplayer http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/20...ayer-confirmed

God damnit EA.

I don't get it. Are they going to remove the pause-during-firefight setting for MP? Otherwise I don't know how they're gonna manage two players or more pausing every second. But if that's the case, it won't be fair for biotics and techs since the auto-lock for special abilities has failed me many times (I said hit the unprotected vorcha, not the armored krogan dammit!)

[MeoTwister5]

Originally Posted by DingoEnderZOE2

^ You obviously haven't played Fear 3,Assassins creed Brotherhood or Resident evil 5. When you add multiplayer to a series that was overall a single player experience things tend to change for the worse.

However In resident evil 5's defense it wasn't AS BAD, it was still somewhat enjoyable but as a result of multiplayer and co-op the overall quality was quite lower than the prequels.

Assassins Creed brotherhood was fine since it was more or less just a DLC expansion in the form of a new game, plus the multiplayer wasn't too bad, but it doesn't change the fact that the quality of the single player was less than before.

I pray that in order to balance this risky decision E.A has like maybe 3 discs or 4 discs. One for multiplayer and 3 for the campaign.

I've played all three games so, you know, don't take me for an idiot. I understand Brotherhood and FEAR 3, but I loved RE5.

It should stand to reason that we can only call the multiplayer teh suck or a useless tack-on when we, you know, actually see the game's release and actually play it? Biases aside?

All this "It has multiplayer, therefore it must be worse" mentality reeks of the elitism that has been pointed against the CoD/Halo gamers of the past that's now extending to pretty much every other game that decides to try and have multiplayer. What happened to the days when we based a game's greatness of actually playing it and not of whatever trend it must be following? Just because Mass Effect 3 will have mutliplayer doesn't mean that it'll be worse off like other games that tried it. That's just pretty illogical.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by MeoTwister5

Multiplayer does not automatically make a game suck...

It does mean it takes away from the main game.
Not the least because if I buy ME3, I would have to pay for the multiplayer in the box, which I wouldn't even touch.

I am sick of those who insist multiplayer should be added to everything. I don't go around demanding WoW to release a single-player version, do I?

All this "It has multiplayer, therefore it must be worse" mentality reeks of the elitism that has been pointed against the CoD/Halo gamers of the past that's now extending to pretty much every other game that decides to try and have multiplayer. What happened to the days when we based a game's greatness of actually playing it and not of whatever trend it must be following? Just because Mass Effect 3 will have mutliplayer doesn't mean that it'll be worse off like other games that tried it. That's just pretty illogical.

Which part of I DON'T PLAY MULTIPLAYER do you not understand?

I bought ME 1 and 2 because they are single-player games. Single Player games are the only games I buy, ever. I don't care how great multiplayer it has, I don't want to play it. And if I have to pay extra to have this "feature" then I have wasted my money.

Why is it that multiplayer gamers assume everyone else would be able to be "converted" to their side?

[DingoEnderZOE2]

It's not about whether or not the multiplayer is good or not it's about how much of a negative effect it will have on the games single player experience.

And I'm sorry past events have shown no matter how good a multiplayer may be, if you randomly add multiplayer or any other type of co-op experience that wasn't previously in a series that was single player game expect the quality in single player to drop either significantly or a little bit.

Once again if E.A. decides to up the discs in the game I can EASILY see this being balanced, but that would require extra work would it?

Another reason why I find multiplayer pointless is that because of party chat most people on x-box live don't even use headsets that much like they used to so you're basically stuck play in silence or forced to only play with the friends who you know still communicates.

[MeoTwister5]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

It does mean it takes away from the main game.
Not the least because if I buy ME3, I would have to pay for the multiplayer in the box, which I wouldn't even touch.

I am sick of those who insist multiplayer should be added to everything. I don't go around demanding WoW to release a single-player version, do I?


Which part of I DON'T PLAY MULTIPLAYER do you not understand?

I bought ME 1 and 2 because they are single-player games. Single Player games are the only games I buy, ever. I don't care how great multiplayer it has, I don't want to play it. And if I have to pay extra to have this "feature" then I have wasted my money.

Why is it that multiplayer gamers assume everyone else would be able to be "converted" to their side?

Wow you do realize that I wasn't even talking to you right? Please tone down the adrenaline and the fanrage a bit.

EA and Bioware do not answer to your demands. They answer to market forces and the money. If they dictate things to go multiplayer (for better or for worse) then that's probably how it's going to be. If you don't like, then you don't. If I don't like then I don't. Game's change, developers change. If they want to tack on either a mind-blowing co-op mode or a completely useless one, that's their prerogative.

As for me, I'm going to enjoy the shit out of the single player and probably not even touch multiplayer at all.

It's not about whether or not the multiplayer is good or not it's about how much of a negative effect it will have on the games single player experience.

And I'm sorry past events have shown no matter how good a multiplayer may be, if you randomly add multiplayer or any other type of co-op experience that wasn't previously in a series that was single player game expect the quality in single player to drop either significantly or a little bit.

Once again if E.A. decides to up the discs in the game I can EASILY see this being balanced, but that would require extra work would it?

Another reason why I find multiplayer pointless is that because of party chat most people on x-box live don't even use headsets that much like they used to so you're basically stuck play in silence or forced to only play with the friends who you know still communicates.

Which we will only be able to really see when the game comes out, don't you think?

My point still stands: yes there is a pattern, but any preconceived notion that the game isn't going be anywhere near as good as ME2 is premature at best.

[DingoEnderZOE2]

I repeat the only way I can see this working for everyone is if they make sure to balance it out with the appropriate amount of discs included with the game.

Otherwise I'm sorry while your optimism is admirable the single player's quality will definitely drop as a result.

I can tell you one thing though I will be PISSED if the multiplayer part of the game has achievements to it.

[MeoTwister5]

Originally Posted by DingoEnderZOE2

I repeat the only way I can see this working for everyone is if they make sure to balance it out with the appropriate amount of discs included with the game.

Otherwise I'm sorry while your optimism is admirable the single player's quality will definitely drop as a result.

I can tell you one thing though I will be PISSED if the multiplayer part of the game has achievements to it.

And your pessimism about the game makes me depressed.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

My point still stands: yes there is a pattern, but any preconceived notion that the game isn't going be anywhere near as good as ME2 is premature at best.

The fact is, ME3's "big reveal" had nothing to do with making ME3 a better game. It was about making a shooter-only side element. The very fact that they were working on this at all is proof that they aren't serious about stopping ME from being degraded into a shooter.

I had to struggle through many parts of ME2 which I didn't event like in order to get to the RPG parts. You might say that they don't care about my money any more, which is fine. But I reserve the right to complain, especially since they pretended to cater to people like me in the media up until this moment.

It was all a lie.

[MeoTwister5]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

The fact is, ME3's "big reveal" had nothing to do with making ME3 a better game. It was about making a shooter-only side element. The very fact that they were working on this at all is proof that they aren't serious about stopping ME from being degraded into a shooter.

I had to struggle through many parts of ME2 which I didn't event like in order to get to the RPG parts. You might say that they don't care about my money any more, which is fine. But I reserve the right to complain, especially since they pretended to cater to people like me in the media up until this moment.

It was all a lie.

And there's your problematic bias right there.

So it seems you've already made up your mind about the game at this point, so simple solution: Don't buy it then.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by MeoTwister5

And there's your problematic bias right there.

So simple solution: Don't buy it.

Yes, but what made you think I have no right to be angry about not getting the game I was promised?

What made you think it is okay to lie to one's customers?

No, I won't buy it. But not because of any silly reason like "boycott" or "protest". I won't buy it because it isn't FUN any more. I have lost access to "fun".

I lose. How is that not worth getting upset over?

And how is it a "bias", anyway? You think it is unfair that I want ME3 to be a Mass Effect game?

[DingoEnderZOE2]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

Yes, but what made you think I have no right to be angry about not getting the game I was promised?

What made you think it is okay to lie to one's customers?

No, I won't buy it. But not because of any silly reason like "boycott" or "protest". I won't buy it because it isn't FUN any more. I have lost access to "fun".

I lose. How is that not worth getting upset over?

And how is it a "bias", anyway? You think it is unfair that I want ME3 to be a Mass Effect game?

Whoa whoa whoa dude even I have to say you're over reacting at least rent it. I'm sure with or without the multiplayer it'll still be fun in it's own way.

[MeoTwister5]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

Yes, but what made you think I have no right to be angry about not getting the game I was promised?

What made you think it is okay to lie to one's customers?

No, I won't buy it. But not because of any silly reason like "boycott" or "protest". I won't buy it because it isn't FUN any more. I have lost access to "fun".

I lose. How is that not worth getting upset over?

And how is it a "bias", anyway? You think it is unfair that I want ME3 to be a Mass Effect game?

Your choice to be pissed, your right to be pissed, if you so decide. I just live under the assumption that there are so many other problematic things happening in this world of so much more importance that wasting my time being angry that video game X didn't be what I wanted to be seem to pale in comparison. Been there, done that, wasted my time.

I understand you're angry things didn't going your way, but is it really such a huge thing that it makes such a huge fuss?

It's just a game.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by DingoEnderZOE2

Whoa whoa whoa dude even I have to say you're over reacting at least rent it. I'm sure with or without the multiplayer it'll still be fun in it's own way.

Rent? I have better use for my gaming time than playing a rented game. As I say, I am not the type to make a fuss about a game then buys it anyway. I will go play something else.

All I wanted was to help the Geth and Quarians set up a peace deal, and build Tali a house in her homeland. I am not interested in the combat, and definitely not caring about multiplayer. But if the shooting aspect gets expand again, I would have been paying full price for even less of the game I wanted to play.

Your choice to be pissed, your right to be pissed, if you so decide. I just live under the assumption that there are so many other problematic things happening in this world of so much more importance that wasting my time being angry that video game X didn't be what I wanted to be seem to pale in comparison. Been there, done that, wasted my time.

I understand you're angry things didn't going your way, but is it really such a huge thing that it makes such a huge fuss?

It's just a game.

"So Many other problematic things" exist, yes. That's why I play games, to give me something to relax in. Thus, it is important to me. Just as other people care about their favourite music genres or favourite opera. If games are unimportant, why give it it's own section in animesuki at all?