LOL. I've spent >50% of my time with this game on the multiplayer. I am hooked.
I've paid cash money for 3 Spectre packs. I don't mind. It beats grinding, and I got a SUPER sweet assault rifle.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Mass Effect 3 Multiplayer |OT| Rich, deep online role playing
- Thread starter EatChildren
- Start date
LOL. I've spent >50% of my time with this game on the multiplayer. I am hooked.
I've paid cash money for 3 Spectre packs. I don't mind. It beats grinding, and I got a SUPER sweet assault rifle.
Happened to me trying to join a friend's game on Origin. Inviting or invited.
Did you find a solution?
Quickmatch works fine, it's really just friends invite that doesn't work.
SnakeswithLasers
Member
Does that app show your MP characters and their builds?
Will changing the online option to not auto login to online do the same?
I don't understand how you can actually think this makes sense.
If the game was built to exploit money out of people who play the MP, then credits would buy random packs while cash would buy specific items. As it stands the balance is such that there is in fact very little reason to spend real money, when you get a much better return on your time investment.
What iPhone app?
SnakeswithLasers
Member
Agreed.
The problem with the card system isn't that it's pay, it's that a lot of it is sloppy.
I think it's a great start and would love to see a content patch where they add in a ton of new equipment and iron out some of the kinks.
I would love it if more games did this as their wave based survival mode. It's a cool take on loot, and the cooperative (rather than adversarial) multiplayer is great fun. It works really well with the setting too.
UpperCaseN
Member
The system is designed like Collectable Card Games (CCG's) such as Magic: The Gathering, Pokemon, etc. You'll get a bunch of shit that is common and usable, but might not be what you're looking for. You've got a chance at getting some uncommons and rares, but it's not guaranteed. You've got to be lucky or willing to buy more packs to increase your chances. This is nothing new.
The difference is you can buy or trade for single cards of what you are looking for from other people. You can't do that in ME3.
If you had the money, you could make a top tier deck without ever buying a booster pack. In ME3, your only use of money is for a chance at items.
Woo-Fu
Banned
If, as you say, you're "hooked" then it isn't really grinding.
I enjoy the gameplay. Sure it is nice to get something new in the next pack but that is just icing on a cake I'd eat even if it had no icing. Kind of amazing that the same company who has managed to streamline every bit of entertainment out of the traditional CRPG has come up with this engaging co-op play.
UpperCaseN
Member
speaking of engineer, which species have the best abilities? Both quarian and salarian are unlocked.
Human engineer is by far my favorite. Though the Salarian's decoy and energy drain are really nice - especially once you've maxed out the decoy.
EatChildren
Currently polling second in Australia's federal election (first in the Gold Coast), this feral may one day be your Bogan King.
I want that DLC to hurry up so I can finally play as a Geth infiltrator. It's been my life long goal.
I finally unlocked the Quarian, so I'm set. Shamefully, I unlocked her after buying a few of those stupid pack things, but I had a stockpile of discounted BW points so it's cool. I've enjoyed the MP quite a bit so far, but like a few of you guys said, I feel like I should hurry up and get to the end of the solo campaign before I play any more.
You think it's real?
A Krogan Battlemaster and Asari Justicar still don't make sense to me.
Haint
Member
Assuming this were even true, you have to allow that the public consciousness simply cares more about the single player component--particularly such a major story element. I don't think anyone would even attempt to debate such. This is the third game in a (single player) series that has followed a story arc focusing heavily on the Protheans--of course locking them behind DLC was going to be the biggest stink. The only thing that could have conceivably topped it would have been locking a good ending behind DLC. The MP component is brand new and largely unknown and untested. Clearly a lot of people don't give 2 shits about it (hence the questions and complaints about "having" to play it for the single player ending) and they wouldn't understand what was going on one way or the other. As such, you can't really use the visibility of Prothean DLC bitching to say hey look, everyone likes/accepts the MP trinket sales. Maybe they do and maybe they don't, but your example is evidence of neither.
I would feel a lot better about this if you presented a convincing argument for why this group of people deserve to troll around with Black Widows and the like beyond "cause EA deemed it so, or because EA's stock is tanking". We could all list a hundred examples of things we'd like to have, do, or accomplish but can't because we don't have the time, money, or talents. This is just reality. Maybe you have this utopian outlook on life where everyone has a right to everything at anytime, but that's unrealistic, and I think we'd lose all sense of fulfillment and accomplishment in the process. Now it would be perfectly fair for you to say "cause it's an entertainment property, it can be utopian, and I don't care whether the rules or codes of conduct mirror the real world", but understand that's only your opinion. Some people are going to disagree, and would in fact prefer it mirror real life concepts of fairness and earned rewards.
I don't understand how you can actually think this makes sense. When testing the waters, you don't dive in head first. It's all about baby steps (see also DLC's beginnings). You're delusional if you think EA wouldn't sell individual weapons if they felt they could get away with it. You guys just keep supporting and defending this, see where it goes.
Maybe it's...new character models? Dunno.
I haven't tried Quarian but I heard the Sentry isn't that good. The human engineers are both good; overload is baller. If I were to build out the humans I'd use a respec on one and max out incinerate/overload and then max out drone on the other. If you do overload set it up for chain overload (jumps 3 times). I don't think drone is necessary because overload works as good CC. One advantage of drone is that you can cast it across the map behind enemies by scoping in on them. The downside to this is that it moves around a lot and can't act as a choke block like the decoy.
Decoy is really good against geth and cerberus. (Most reaper enemies seem to just ignore it) You only need 3 points in it to be effective.
And add even more filler gold cards? No thanks.
Diablohead
Member
I must have that Geth Engineer. I'm predicting Overload, Sabotage, and Combat Drone/Defense Matrix, if it's legitimate of course.
Diablohead
Member
Geth on silver are a bitch now, those cloaked bastards can really get in your way now that they move faster.
firehawk12
Subete no aware
Elcor Sentinel for me.
My Volus Vanguard will fuck you up. Bullet Bill to ya dome.
FYI, looks like we fixed the problem by putting both our computers in the DMZ (not the Krogan one....HA Mass Effect joke......sorry guys).
Anyway, now with both of us in the DMZ we can join games and invite each others. FYI we did set the ports that are listed on the EA Support website earlier tonight but it was still not working after doing that.
So what does promoting a character do?
That's why I put it in quotes. I know there isn't any competition here, but he was claiming it gave them an unfair advantage.
That's why I put it in quotes. I know there isn't any competition here, but he was claiming it gave them an unfair advantage.
Just 1.
Well, it was grinding while trying to get basic weapon upgrades. Now that I got weapons I'm happy with, I can just enjoy the game and unlock other fun stuff organically. I actually got so wrapped up in it tonight, I looked at how much cash I had after a round and I was over 79k. Woot.
Tried the Adept tonight. Fun, and a nice change from my Battlefield 3 guy I'd been using since the beginning.
Just the one character, but I'm curious as to what it actually does beyond giving you 10 N7 points. And what do the N7 points do? Just leader board fodder?
Name your character after Legion.
Diablohead
Member
do it, one bronze run will get you back to level 5 before you know it, an entire day's play will get you to 20 no problem imo.
firehawk12
Subete no aware
So, I'm sure this has been asked before, but what's a good way to spec a Quarian Infiltrator?
Thanks!
walbertsmith
Member
Fine, ok, I'll bite.
Ok, let's ignore the fact for now that the DLC involved Protheans... some people care about them, some people don't, some people played the first game, some people didn't. Let's not argue about a subjective issue on whether or not the "Protheans matter to the storyline." The biggest issue with the Day 1 DLC is that some/all of the content was already available on the disc, making people think that that they're paying extra for something they already should be getting. That was the issue people had.
My comparison wasn't using the basis of "visibility" of one over the other. They are both different forms of monetized content, presented and accessed in different ways. They are fundamentally different in the fact that one is accessible by *your* choice on how to access it, and the other is accessible *only* by money. That is the fundamental difference between the two. Spectre packs are accessible by Time or Money, but the DLC is *only* accessible by Money. This is true, correct? *That* is my point in comparing the two.
I have provided this argument, numerous times... it's called price differentiation. It's a legitimate business term that explains the phenomena I've been detailing this entire time. From the link I posted, price differentiation is:
In this case, the product is Spectre packs, the different prices are units of Time (credits) or units of Money (money), and the different markets are the various demographics I detailed before (like the person with lots of Time but little Money to the person with lots of Money but little Time). Like I have said numerous times before (but no one seems to acknowledge), individuals place different personal values on their own Time and their own Money. Do you agree with this?
A real world example: someone who is unemployed. They have lots of Time but very little Money; in this case, one unit of Time (say, 1 hour) is far less valuable to them than 1 unit of Money (say, $10). So $100 is far more valuable to them than 10 hours of their time.
The counterexample: someone who works 14 hour days. They have lots of Money but very little Time; in this case, one unit of Money ($10) is far less valuable to them than 1 unit of Time (1 hour). So 10 hours of their Time is far more valuable to them than $100.
Do you agree with these examples?
Again, you're putting words in my mouth. Stop it. My point is that EA can conduct fair and ethical business (maximizing profits) while also providing a product that entertains as many people as possible (maximizing game enjoyment). EA didn't "deem it so," they're just providing the same product to as many people as possible, by allowing them to maximize their own personal resources (Time and/or Money). In other words, EA is maximizing their own profits by allowing people to enjoy the game how they are (key word) able to. Not everyone is able to commit Time, just as not everyone is able to commit Money. But the players are allowed to choose if they want to commit Time or Money, or whatever combination of the two they want. Do you agree with this?
Now you're going into philosophy and communism and time constraints and all kinds of digressions.. this debate has nothing to do with any of those. I have made ZERO comments on a "utopian outlook on life" nor have made assumptions on "where everyone has a right to everything at anytime." That's putting words in my mouth; stop it. This discussion is solely about whether or not the monetization of Spectre packs is a fair system... in TangoAlphaLime's case, whether or not it affects game design (it does not).
Like I have said before, the person with NO Time and NO Money is going to be at a disadvantage to everyone else, and the person with LOTS of Time and LOTS of Money is going to be at an advantage to everyone else. Regardless of what the game system is, someone with NO resources will always be at a disadvantage to someone with LOTS of resources. Do you agree with that?
Ok, let's ignore the fact for now that the DLC involved Protheans... some people care about them, some people don't, some people played the first game, some people didn't. Let's not argue about a subjective issue on whether or not the "Protheans matter to the storyline." The biggest issue with the Day 1 DLC is that some/all of the content was already available on the disc, making people think that that they're paying extra for something they already should be getting. That was the issue people had.
My comparison wasn't using the basis of "visibility" of one over the other. They are both different forms of monetized content, presented and accessed in different ways. They are fundamentally different in the fact that one is accessible by *your* choice on how to access it, and the other is accessible *only* by money. That is the fundamental difference between the two. Spectre packs are accessible by Time or Money, but the DLC is *only* accessible by Money. This is true, correct? *That* is my point in comparing the two.
I have provided this argument, numerous times... it's called price differentiation. It's a legitimate business term that explains the phenomena I've been detailing this entire time. From the link I posted, price differentiation is:
In this case, the product is Spectre packs, the different prices are units of Time (credits) or units of Money (money), and the different markets are the various demographics I detailed before (like the person with lots of Time but little Money to the person with lots of Money but little Time). Like I have said numerous times before (but no one seems to acknowledge), individuals place different personal values on their own Time and their own Money. Do you agree with this?
A real world example: someone who is unemployed. They have lots of Time but very little Money; in this case, one unit of Time (say, 1 hour) is far less valuable to them than 1 unit of Money (say, $10). So $100 is far more valuable to them than 10 hours of their time.
The counterexample: someone who works 14 hour days. They have lots of Money but very little Time; in this case, one unit of Money ($10) is far less valuable to them than 1 unit of Time (1 hour). So 10 hours of their Time is far more valuable to them than $100.
Do you agree with these examples?
Again, you're putting words in my mouth. Stop it. My point is that EA can conduct fair and ethical business (maximizing profits) while also providing a product that entertains as many people as possible (maximizing game enjoyment). EA didn't "deem it so," they're just providing the same product to as many people as possible, by allowing them to maximize their own personal resources (Time and/or Money). In other words, EA is maximizing their own profits by allowing people to enjoy the game how they are (key word) able to. Not everyone is able to commit Time, just as not everyone is able to commit Money. But the players are allowed to choose if they want to commit Time or Money, or whatever combination of the two they want. Do you agree with this?
Now you're going into philosophy and communism and time constraints and all kinds of digressions.. this debate has nothing to do with any of those. I have made ZERO comments on a "utopian outlook on life" nor have made assumptions on "where everyone has a right to everything at anytime." That's putting words in my mouth; stop it. This discussion is solely about whether or not the monetization of Spectre packs is a fair system... in TangoAlphaLime's case, whether or not it affects game design (it does not).
Like I have said before, the person with NO Time and NO Money is going to be at a disadvantage to everyone else, and the person with LOTS of Time and LOTS of Money is going to be at an advantage to everyone else. Regardless of what the game system is, someone with NO resources will always be at a disadvantage to someone with LOTS of resources. Do you agree with that?
razgriz417
Member
My god, just had my best session yet. 8 out of 9 rounds of Gold Cerberus full extraction, 1 failed after getting the money in wave 10. Had 2 Adepts (sometimes 2 asari or 1 asari and 1 drell), 1 Infiltrator (salarian) and me as engineer (wish i had asari adept :/). Stasis bubbles are a necessity against waves of phantoms. I never knew how powerful biotic explosions were on the Atlus until I saw one of the asari knock down 3 bars of its health with one boom. The infiltrator had a lvl 5 widow and told me he can 4 shot an Atlus if we strip the shield 
Must grind more spectre boxes...
Must grind more spectre boxes...