BioWare confirms Mass Effect 3 multiplayer with co-op missions

El33tonline writes:

"It may have been a foregone conclusion now with gaming magazines the world over announcing the news on their covers and websites, but BioWare proper has just gone and confirmed that Mass Effect 3 will include multiplayer in the form of co-operative missions."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
DaThreats2475d ago

Only thing I felt ME was missing was co-op!

OliverKO2475d ago

Definitely - it'll be awesome combining your unique powers and setup with a friend to complement each other in battle!

Looking *well* forward to this! ;)

Autodidactdystopia2475d ago

Sounds like more fun than a buncha monkeys fighting each other to the death.

BattleAxe2475d ago

Look at all the disaggrees from the RPG purists out there lol, they hate anything that's actually good. If they had their way, we'd still be playing stuff like this....

Don't get me wrong, I loved this game when it first came out, but its time to evolve fellas.

Pintheshadows2475d ago

If I had my way way we'd all be playing text adventures.

sonicsidewinder2475d ago

Dragon Age 2 - there's your evolution.

More Baldurs Gate please.

Bigpappy2475d ago

I love a deep sigle player RPG (Morrowind is my favorite game). But If there is one Action RPG that I always thought screamed for Co-op, that game would be mass effect. They could have all the battle missions you already unlocked available for co-op.

Blacktric2475d ago

"Dragon Age 2 - there's your evolution."

Showing just one example doesn't mean this "evolution" is bad. There are plenty of "old school RPG" games came out this year. If you're not happy with Dragon Age 2 or Mass Effect 3, you can play them instead of acting like you know the best of everything. Damn elitists.

Jazz41082475d ago

I didn't disagree but I loved the zork games on my apple 2c

Anon19742475d ago

And it's not like there's anything wrong with DA2. I'm playing it right now and having a blast. It's only crime was not being DAO. If it had come out on it's own it would have been well regarded as a decent, action/rpg. The majority of reviewers agree with me. But because it followed the excellent DAO and altered the formula based off feedback Bioware received, it's shunned. And it's unfortunate. DA2 is a good game.

It reminds me of the backlash Resident Evil 5 received. RE5 was an excellent, co-op action game that I loved to death. But it wasn't a survival horror game, and so people online loath the title for trying something different. If RE5 existed without the other Resident Evil games and was judged on it's own merits, no one would have had a problem.

DA2 is the same way, and how many people have missed a good rpg game simply because it isn't Dragon's Age Origins and they bought into the internet furor? It's a shame.

I hope Bioware brings out an on rails Baldur's Gate game. Then collectively all these rpg "purists" (snobs, more like it) will all spontaneously combust and we can finally have an end to their whining of "They ruined Dragon Age," or "Mass Effect 3 is going to suck because they're going to streamline leveling up" or some such nonsense. Just go buy Skyrim and let people enjoy other games in peace. Company's need to change up their products, for better or for worse. If they kept putting out the same game, you'd hate them for that.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 2475d ago
JaredH2475d ago

It's funny how completely different the reaction for this article is then the OXM article because it said multiplayer and not coop. I'm excited because it doesn't seem like a gigantic mode that took away from single player development.

Xyle2475d ago

seriously>? You felt it was "missing" multiplayer
... wow, thats sad

Legion2475d ago

Yes... I can't wait to have my co-op buddy assisting me with the planet mining! While I go off and do something to pass the time. Call me when you are done. :)

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 2475d ago
Megaton2475d ago

Ugh... this better not take away from the campaign at all. I'm gonna be seriously pissed off if they screw up ME3.

AfricanWoolf2475d ago (Edited 2475d ago )

I agree so hard. Multiplayer is not where I want to see them focusing.

How about making the world more open? How about making the missions less disjointed? Make the overarching story a more integral part of the game without giving me a laundry list to get through right at the beginning.

These are my personal gripes which, despite loving Bioware, I feel put them at the edge of either innovating and staying awesome or doing more of the same and fading behind the likes of Bethesda and CD Projekt Red.

Kaos_Vll2475d ago

I don't understand this complaint/worry. It's been a while since I last played ME/ME2, but I can't think of one mission where you didn't have your AI squad with you. Not one.

How will adding a human component instead of AI be any different? One person is shepard and everyone else would take the place of the AI, which in my opinion adds to the game verses taking anything away.

Just they way I see it I guess...

WhiteLightning2475d ago (Edited 2475d ago )


and there goes most of the single player

Everytime a developer adds co-op missions they have to shorten the single player game to make room for it. Look at Portal 2 for example Valve said they could of made the single player longer but cut the script to make room for co-op.

Bioware why don't you just do this as would then be a win/win for all

SageHonor2475d ago

Just to let you know. Casey Hudson has stated that they are adding music to the game. And that they are in the final stages. ME3 was playable last year.The singleplayer is already finished.Them delaying the release date of ME3 was due in part to them adding coop and giving the singleplayer more polish. Besides, Portal 2 is completely different from ME3.

However, I dont mind the coop. Just dont **** UP THE SINGLEPLAYER

WhiteLightning2475d ago

So.....if they had more time then I would rather them make more side missions for the single player so the single player in general would be longer.

It dosen't matter if Portal 2 was a differen't game they still had co-op missions and are doing excatly what Valve did. This is a DLC idea but they have obviously thought that it's going to sell more units because of the tacked on co-op

vickers5002475d ago

"So.....if they had more time then I would rather them make more side missions for the single player so the single player in general would be longer."

Well you don't get everything you want you spoiled baby. They made the single player the way they intended, and them adding co-op didn't detract from what they intended to do with the single player.

This way, EVERYBODY wins, instead of just the folk who only want single player. Stop being so damn selfish. Just because you hate multiplayer/co-op, doesn't mean everyone does, and just because you hate it, doesn't mean your preference is more important than other peoples.

Personally, I'd rather have co-op than some crappy extra side missions that would be no more than kill or fetch quests.

SageHonor2475d ago (Edited 2475d ago )

Bioware has been working on ME3 since ME2. They have had plenty of time to work on the game. Also, who is to say that they havent been doing things like polishing the singleplayer with their time.

" and there goes most of the singleplayer "

You're kind of overeacting to it all. Especially since they said it will be as long as ME2 and its already done.

Also, Uncharted 2, Red Dead Redemption and Gears 3 both have multiplayers but no short campaigns

MrSpace2475d ago (Edited 2475d ago )

Who cares that it's been worked on since ME2. A lot of us would like the single player to be even longer. It's a single player game, the longer the better.

I don't think he's overacting it at all, seems like a ME fan like many of us that knows for a fact that adding co-op/multiplayer lowers the quality of a single player game. If the game was built up around online then fair enough but Bioware have lost what ME was all about.

maniacmayhem2475d ago (Edited 2475d ago )

Who cares if its been worked on since ME2??

Well if it has then that means Bioware is taking the time and care to make this third chapter the best in the series. Not just some crapped out yearly sequel that "some" people complain about.

Here's a dev that is taking the time. Giving us a single player campaign, plus adding multi player missions too. And Sage is right, Uncharted, Assassins Creed, Dead Rising are all IP's that added multiplayer and turned out great. So why jump to a conclusion that ME would be crap or "gimped"?

If anything be happy that they're extending the gameplay of this great title.

TheOtherTheoG2475d ago

The single player is, a) according to Bioware at ComiCon, as long as, if not slightly longer, than both previous games, so there's no need to worry about the length changing, and b), according to some fairly recent Twitter stuff, pretty much finished bar adding VO work and music, tweaking the odd level, play testing and bug testing. The co-op stuff is, if you like, just a bonus. As SageHonor says, the game was most likely delayed to polish the SP some more, and, whilst they have the time, add another mode in for fun which a few people have been asking for, rather than it being detrimental against the game.

Oh, and Portal 2 was an incredible game in every way made only better by the inclusion of co-op, using that as an example of bad implementation of MP into a single player game simply goes against the very laws of physics.

WhiteLightning2475d ago (Edited 2475d ago )

But I didn't say Portal 2 co-op was "bad" I just said I would of rather had a longer single player. They have done another co-op story mode for the DLC, why couldn't of Valve do the co-op for DLC and make the single player longer because you can't add bits to a story which is already finished but you can add a co-op mode which dosen't have anything to do with story as much as the single player. In the end it would of been a win/win just like what Bioware could of done with ME.

Pintheshadows2475d ago

I have to agree. With a game like Mass Effect where immersion is everything is MP a necessity? The fact is there are tons of MP games available and i'd never sat with 1 or 2 going " this needs mp".

I'd much rather have extra campaign content every day of every week of every year that I live.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2475d ago
SeraphimBlade2475d ago

... what, because there's more content than you thought? You don't have to play the multiplayer. It's like not going to a good steakhouse because they also sell burgers.

Impaler2475d ago

They already watered down ME2 from ME1(PS. they destroyed Dragon Age) and now this just seems like they want to jump on the bandwagon and throw MP out there.

It's not something I signed up for when I bought ME1 day of release and put god know how many hours and how many times I went back on a new character. I accepted that ME2 suffered from the sequel in a trilogy syndrome that movies come from(usually the 2nd one is good, but it sets everything up for the 3rd which is better), and awaited ME3.

Now instead of using all those resources they put into making this co-op and MP side of the game to make a better SP game(better DLC too because most of it in the ME franchise was crap) they make this.

No thank you.

I hope you all enjoy it, but I won't buy it new or used or even rent it.

Bioware, sigh, how you have fallen.

KaBaW2475d ago (Edited 2475d ago )

BioWare has mentioned that they are implementing more RPG in ME3.
There will be things that was included in ME1 that was not included in ME2.
More customization (weapons/armor), as well as more skills, apparently..
They have also added melee weapons. Also, prolly more, but I forget.
Though, the engine is already done, that leaves all this time for SP campaign.

From what I've heard, ME3 sounds more like ME1 than ME2. That's good.
The game doesn't come out till, what, March? Plenty of time to look into it.

Show all comments (56)
The story is too old to be commented.