Top
200°

Next Xbox 360 World to feature Mass Effect 3 multiplayer details, Hitman blowout

Next issue of Xbox 360 World will apparently have a look at new levels and first look at multiplayer for Mass Effect 3 as well as a Hitman: Absolution blowout.

Read Full Story >>
gamingeverything.com
The story is too old to be commented.
Ethereal2210d ago (Edited 2210d ago )

NOOOOO! It better be some kind of co op missions that are outside the main storyline. Otherwise I am going to be angry...

Dlacy13g2210d ago

Some kind of Horde type mode seems to make the most sense. I would be shocked if they actually had a TDM style MP.

NukaCola2209d ago

Bioware seems to be slipping a bit.

At first I was glas that WRPG makers were revolutionizing as the JRPG market was failing because they tried to westerize to much, but it seems now WRPGs are trying to Call of Duty-ize so much to that teen shooter demographic.

vickers5002210d ago

Hopefully it's co-op campaign.

WhiteLightning2210d ago (Edited 2210d ago )

Hopefully not...

Some games don't need it, they whole point of your team mates is to work on when's the best time to use them eg. there biotics. If your friends are controling them then you have no power over them making it just a typical third person shooter.

vickers5002209d ago (Edited 2209d ago )

"then you have no power over them making it just a typical third person shooter."

Then don't play co-op. Problem solved. Meanwhile, those of us that would like co-op and don't care about controlling our companions (like me, since I rarely ever did it in Mass Effect 1 and probably wont do when I play Mass Effect 2) can enjoy playing with our friends. Win-win.

Being able to control (or not control) your team mates doesn't make Mass Effect any less of an RPG. You would still decide what characters have which skills and weapons, it's just that a person would take the place of one or more of your team mates instead of some crappy mindless AI.

This is one of those cases in which adding co-op would hurt absolutely nothing about the game.

WhiteLightning2209d ago

"This is one of those cases in which adding co-op would hurt absolutely nothing about the game. "

How do you know, if might seem simple to us but you don't know what goes on behind closed doors.

Al I know is when co-op/Multiplayer is introduced in a single player game...the game feels dumb down.

Tr10wn2209d ago

@vickers500 this may sound a little selfish but if Bioware focus on coop they will ruin the whole SP experience and i don't think bioware want another DA2 in their hands, since EA brought Bioware that company is lacking in what they "did" best and making a GOTY out of every game they launch, they have to listen to their fans. hopefully bethesda will still listen to their fans and never ruin what elderscroll or fallout is.

vickers5002209d ago (Edited 2209d ago )

"@vickers500 this may sound a little selfish but if Bioware focus on coop they will ruin the whole SP experience"

I'm not saying they should build the game around co-op like Resident Evil 5 or anything like that, I'm just saying that they should simply let another player take control of the AI, and I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be 'that' hard to implement. It's just a REAL PERSON (sooo much better than some dumbass AI npc) taking the reigns of your companions, what would be so bad about that? I'm guessing you believe that if they implement co-op, then you think they wouldn't spend the extra time on creating 3-4 hours more worth of content, to which I say, they decide when the game ends and what's being told, not you, and just because they could use that time they spent implementing a small thing such as co-op to instead add 3-4 hours more worth of (in all likelihood) repetitive side missions, doesn't mean it would make it better.

You may prefer that small amount of extra content to campaign co-op, but I would be willing to bet that if the campaign co-op was done right (simply the way I described it), then a lot more people would prefer it over a few extra side missions (which are inevitably going to be added as dlc anyway).

"Al I know is when co-op/Multiplayer is introduced in a single player game...the game feels dumb down."

So Uncharted 2 feels dumbed down to you? Because it sure as hell was a lot better than the first one to me, and I didn't even play that much multiplayer or co-op in that game. If the developer is talented enough, then it wont be an issue, and I have a strong feeling Bioware is up to the task.

I mean if implementing co-op means taking 20 or more hours of the campaign away, then they shouldn't add it, but if it's only like 10 hours, then it should be fine, as I've heard Mass Effect 2 was pretty damn long, like 25-30 hours long.

It depends how big of a chunk it takes out of those 30 hours. Lets just say it takes 8 hours off, well that still leaves a hell of a lot of content for single player gamers (and if you think 22 hours is short, then you need to get a real life) and also gives the co-op crowd what they want, so again WIN-WIN.

I'd be willing to sacrifice multiplayer content for those who want a single player experience (in fact I'm okay with the fact that they are adding a single player mode to Starhawk, even though I think it's absolutely pointless and unnecessary, I'm okay with multiplayer content taking a hit so they can appeal to some of you "single player only" gamers, because I'm not a selfish ass who thinks only what 'I' want should be in the game), so why wouldn't you be willing to take sacrifice for your game?

I'm not saying "every game should have co-op or multiplayer" because it doesn't fit every game, but it WOULD fit VERY well in Mass Effect. One of the problems with your example, is that multiplayer has always been added to games it doesn't really suit (Bioshock, Dead Space, a few others I can't think of), but co-op would fit Mass Effect like a glove, after all, you are constantly traveling with like 2 other people.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 2209d ago
Ethereal2209d ago (Edited 2209d ago )

Yea, if there is multi it has to be some kind of add on side story or the such. I would be okay with it as long as its not a full multi TDM. ME does not need it. This is the single most annoying thing about this generation. The infatuation of multi is getting quite annoying.

wwm0nkey2210d ago

Hey cool I was used as a source :D

thrasherv32209d ago

Mass Effect 3: Galactic Warfare

kamakaz3md2209d ago

im so sick of people showing mass effect 3 and talking about it... Deus Ex human revolution is far more superior to that game, HANDS DOWN. A true RPG shooter, GAMING fan would know this

DigitalRaptor2209d ago (Edited 2209d ago )

Mass Effect 3 is a confirmed action/adventure shooter. It's fallen from its RPG heights and people are not noticing this. It will be a great game, but Bioware are not listening to their most dedicated fans.

Deus Ex: Human Revolution is THE sleeper hit of this year. It's going to win so many GOTY awards and it's clearly a superior game in its depth, design and gameplay.

The only reason people are concentrating on Mass Effect 3 more is because:

#1 - it's the final chapter
#2 - it's more popular among the general gaming community.

kamakaz3md2209d ago

yea... cause there morons lol, whatever idc, im just a huge deus ex fan

Nate-Dog2209d ago

cool story bro, I'mma go into Deus Ex related news now and tell everyone how I like Mass Effect 1.

Cmpunk2209d ago

mass effect is the most overated game in history i brought the ps3 version of it and i didn't even last an hour before i got bored then i traded it for dead space 2 an actual good game.

im not being an idiot but mass effect sucks

Nate-Dog2209d ago

Yeah becase the first hour of every game always tells you exactly how the rest of the game is going to be, especially in a game where a playthrough can go on for around 40-50 hours.

PirateThom2209d ago

Big mistake, while not as good as the first game, ME2 is still great, but the first hour is basically a training mission.

Show all comments (26)