Two men enter, one man leaves!
29.01.2013 @ 09:28 #1
What about witcher 3 and the arena? Would you strongly oppose the idea of duels between players? How about 4 vs 4 mode? Or maybe a similar idea to ME3 co-op?
Imagine 4 classess, theri skills sets; Brokilon, castle ramparts, shores of Jaruga, burned village, dark caverns... man, I think we would be for a treat with best designed mp maps ever - and I mean it.
I know, resources are a finite number, right? But if it were in a plan from the very beginning, to expand the fun, make Witcher 3 even bolder and replayable ad infinitum with friends would you still bitch about how the game will suck just because the devs want to implement mp?
I think it might be extreme fun, something akin to War of Roses maybe, I want them to try, if REDs feel like they are up for the challenge, I want them tu push through with it, and make it happen...
... after the singleplayer campaign is done, of course, right ;P
29.01.2013 @ 10:01 #2
I love BF3, APB, SC2 and L4D. I spent a lot of time playing those games, but all those games were designed with MP or Coop in mind. So I just doubt that MP in TW2/CP2077 will be fun for me. TW2 has a chance for interesting MP because it's sword and magic game, so there is a chance that it will be something fresh, but I doubt that it will be something as "big" as MP in ME3. I would bet that it will be some kind of Arena with coop and pvp.
29.01.2013 @ 10:17 #3
All multiplayer is repetitive, it's simply a matter of making it entertaining at the same time. ME3 does not achieve that, it's true.
29.01.2013 @ 10:42 #4
Costin Moroianu said:
In ME3 there is no place for creativity. It's always the same waves of same enemies on the same maps. Players usually defend in the same place and they are using the same weapon. So for me it's repetitive. I don't feel receptivity when I play L4D or BF3.
29.01.2013 @ 11:09 #5
29.01.2013 @ 13:56 #7
29.01.2013 @ 14:30 #8
The title led me to believe this was a thread about gay one-night stands. Something about the phrasing.
More on-topic: We can only see the future as an extrapolation of the past. When Witcher 2 was released, there were plenty of people going, "It was consolized!" One of many things that was said, including criticism of some of the bugs, the fact that the game only supported 16:9 resolutions, etcetera. Adding multiplayer just gives people something to point at and blame if something similar happens for Witcher 3. Anything missing at launch would automatically be "that awesome thing that didn't get added because they were too busy working on multiplayer."
Besides, adding multiplayer to a single-player game is like walking into a battlefield armed with a wiffle bat. There are games out there that are designed as multiplayer games, and throwing a multiplayer mode onto a single-player game is no way to compete with that. Especially if it's such an afterthought that its development doesn't negatively affect the single-player. The whole thing strikes me as taking away from something that few do well (SP) in a vain attempt to satisfy a need that's well-covered by others. I can't imagine any scenario where this could be justified, regardless of the quality of the end result. If they want to make the game replayable ad infinitum, then I say the focus should be on making an unforgettable single-player story worth playing through over and over again.
29.01.2013 @ 14:33 #9
But in this world where resources and many other conditions have to taken into account, i wouldnt.
Multiplayer is just a very very very low priority for this franchise, there's still a lot of other more important things that TW has to do.
29.01.2013 @ 17:08 #12