If they're turning Witcher 3 Arena mode into a coop multiplayer, I'm down with that. That'd be absolutely amazing. Playing coop multi with friends. Dear oh dear. I've already invested so many hours into Arena and the thought of being able to spend time with friends there is just amazing.
Will you be able to choose your own skins for multi then? It'd be weird if everyone was playing as Geralt, so I have to assume that you'll be able to pick and choose your character? That'd be sweet too
Will you be able to choose your own skins for multi then? It'd be weird if everyone was playing as Geralt, so I have to assume that you'll be able to pick and choose your character? That'd be sweet too
FoggyFishburne said:If they're turning Witcher 3 Arena mode into a coop multiplayer, I'm down with that. That'd be absolutely amazing. Playing coop multi with friends. Dear oh dear. I've already invested so many hours into Arena and the thought of being able to spend time with friends there is just amazing.
Will you be able to choose your own skins for multi then? It'd be weird if everyone was playing as Geralt, so I have to assume that you'll be able to pick and choose your character? That'd be sweet too
Then it would be like a whole different game, with all the resources required for such a thing. That's why we get tacked on multiplayer in so many games now. Who the hell wants tacked on anything in a CDPR game?
From Software has proven that multiplayer can really add to RPG games. If CDPR implements multiplayer into TW3, I hope it's inspired by Dark Souls but I could also see a sort of duel mode being implemented into the arena mode.
I definitely agree. Tacking on multi is downright evil. It's an abortively bad idea. If something works well as a singleplayer, there's no need to force it to work as a multiplayer.slimgrin said:
That said, if CDPR is already considering making a multiplayer, why not ask for it to be an Arena coop thing? I wasn't asking for a multiplayer to be implemented at all but if they are, which I doubt, I might as well voice what aspect I would love to see integrated into a multi. Can't voice an opinion or what?
Still, be a little open minded yes? ME3s multi worked crazy well. It got boring after a while, yes, but it was still mad fun playing with your friends
I'm looking forward to see how they implement multi in DA3 too. Of course more often than not it backfires and drags down an already awesome game. Spec Ops: The Line anyone? Us gamers still gotta keep an open mind about the industry. It's worth playing every shitty, tacked on multiplayer to get to that multiplayer that's designed perfectly and fits with the theme of the singleplayer.Adding multiplayer into the best RPG single-player game seems bad. Maybe they should make a poll on the site. I would agree for a multiplayer only if it was a team deathmatch, deathmatch or duel in the arena. ONLY IN THE ARENA! Otherwise, multiplayer will ruin the game.
Until they actually mess up, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. They've earned my trust by putting out my favorite RPG in years. I won't preemptively bash them for adding multiplayer. Who knows, it could be the best thing since sliced bread. I think it is simply going to be a multiplayer arena mode. After TW2, it seems perfectly set up for it.
Baldur's Gate 2 was multiplayer, NWN was multiplayer. Multiplayer doesn't necessarily spell doom. I'm cautiously optimistic.
Baldur's Gate 2 was multiplayer, NWN was multiplayer. Multiplayer doesn't necessarily spell doom. I'm cautiously optimistic.
Did you guys misunderstand that post? I was agreeing with Babli and referring to the people in this thread who cry bloody murder because they are apparently borderline illiterate and unable to fathom that the recently announced Cyberpunk is the most likely candidate for that multiplayer feature.
Please refrain from making insulting or derogatory comments about other members.
Thanks.
Thanks.
It's listed under TW2 in the hiring blog page, not Cyberpunk. No one can know what it's about so it's useless to get too riled up about it now. But my own stance remains the same since I heard this news: I would hope CDPR continues to focus on single player games, since those are the rarer type these days. MP games are a dime a dozen.Demut said:
The borderline illiterates like my self have seen it on the Witcher page, they are also aware that ":OMG NWN, and BG and ID had multiplayer", sure that was once upon a time , with friendly publishers, with productions costs that where far bellow of these today, and these games are exceptions not rules in the RPG genre.Demut said:
By today's cost standards they are garage games, it's enough to reflect on the marketing expenses and competition of today to see the difference.
Some players are around for very long time, history witnesses if You want so, some are just very well informed and with at least basic knowledge on gamedevelopment, so the apparently borderline illiterates are having very, very valid concerns, particularly because the :"It will not affect SP, " is so hilarious when knowing that this is 2012, and it tends to bury companies with 800 + employes, what it can do to a company with less than 100 people, and even worse if it is a mandatory demand by the publisher, yea some are just burned.
So yes some people know more, have better memory on the recent event and the events of the past, or are simply way to many times dissapointed, and despite the love for both games, are never adopting the Corporate fandom mentality.
Uh-uh, uh-huh. So staying reasonable, not flipping out at speculations and instead recalling all the instances where a single-player game by a great company (not ones that suck to begin with) got a multiplayer in a sequal is equal to “Corporate fandom”? Yeah, sure, that’s not at all moronic or anything. Let’s go with you people’s way and deem CDPR complete idiots who have no idea of what they are doing and can’t be trusted with making their own decisions when it comes to game development. Yup, let’s all do that.
But there is nothing wrong with calling it like one sees it either. Pointing out idiocy shouldn’t be punished but rather encouraged, I think :3 I mean why protect stupidity?Tommy said:
