Losing campaign missions

(Blackened) #21

dont want to provide factual evidence for your debunking of my perspective? that cool. (makes you the lazy one not me). but look me up and send me a PM on launch day when im right.

and obviously coop will be p2p. but saying your friend will be booted and have to find a new partner to coop untill he/she wins in order to advance is equally obvious in the fact that it is stupid, which is exactly the game mechanic that is being implied here. and since actual 8v8 mp is not coop’ed and nor is this fact of team kicking yet to be confirmed, by you or anybody else other than stating that it is because i say it is, i still stand by my statement that is is a false assumption by everybody in this thread. 800 plus post count or not, its still BS.

as far as being lazy, with all the energy you have spent trying to defend your blatantly flawed perspective you could have gone out and found the post/video/interview/blog which states the loosing team is removed from the game. but you havent, so as far as i am care you forfeit all your arguments.

(riptide) #22

[QUOTE=Blackened;283901] but saying your friend will be booted and have to find a new partner to coop untill he/she wins in order to advance is equally obvious in the fact that it is stupid, which is exactly the game mechanic that is being implied here. and since actual 8v8 mp is not coop’ed and nor is this fact of team kicking yet to be confirmed,
[/QUOTE]

It’s not what is implied here… it’s the way your mind perceived it. It’s also wrong. 8 player coop is possible and it was already stated that you can play 8v8 versus while progressing the story, albeit out of “sequence” but it has no bearing since it’s collective.

Anyway I’m done helping you make yourself out to be a fool.

(Blackened) #23

8 player coop, yes. those players on opposing teams, yes. the players who happen to be on the team that lost being removed from the game, ridiculous. that is what is being implied here, and i say it has never been said or confirmed this is the case. still have yet to actually provide Beth/SD literature to prove my point invalid.

Winning:)

(ClickClickBOOM) #24

The mission intros and cutscenes might seem like a potential annoyance to multiplayer-centric shooter fans, but they mask the matchmaking processes which keep the game flowing smoothly. "You and seven people [playing as] Security just lost. This other team on Resistance, they just won. That means if you look at it from their perspective, they get to move on to the next mission, the next chapter of their story, but you guys need to try again to win the mission so you can move forward in that traditional, narrative, single-player style.
"When you get to the end of the level and everybody’s watching the final cutscene that wraps it up and explains what happens, we are already invisibly doing matchmaking for you and everybody on your team, to try and find another server out there on Xbox Live or PSN or in Steam, that just started up [the mission you need to repeat] and has spaces for you on the Security team.
“And when you try again, unbeknownst to you, you’re now moved to a completely new server where the system is set up exactly for what you need to keep on playing the story. And that’s really the trick that makes the single player/multiplayer hybrid work. Really clever matchmaking.”

(obliviondoll) #25

Well what I’ve heard, which makes more sense, is that the campaign mode keeps the players on both teams together - Security players stay with one another, and Resistance players stay together too. If your team won, you move on to the next map in the campaign. If not, you replay, paired with another team.

If a player on the losing team was the host for the match, then obviously you’re not going to keep the same host with the winning team, are you?

(DarkangelUK) #26

The post above you is the correct one.

(Blackened) #27

this all seems fine and dandy and plausibly workable on the consoles, but what about PC. there is no way this system can work, on dedicated server MP or COOP. The simple logistics just dont work out, in a coop scenario or on a dedicated server. if i am playing coop with my friends, and some want to play on one team and some on the other, i dont want them to have to DC and find another group of people to play with just because they lost. on the other side of the coin, i dont want people to be booted from a server im paying for just because they lost.

“blurring” the lines between mp and sp while creating a fun experience for friends in every game mode does not and cannot include booting the loosing team.

i think everybody is thinking of the campaign in the sense that you go from level to level in a linear fashion. i think its far more likely that you can play any mission at any time because the story is not told from one point to another. its a story told from several points in time in a non sequential manor.

if the 8v8 multiplayer really does kick the loosing team from the server, SD and Beth can keep their game and i shall keep my money, for this is the most backwards insane and moronic feature implanted into a game since modern warfare 2 put matchmaking on PC.

(Xepherian) #28

I really signed into my account just to tell you this;

Kay.

(DarkangelUK) #29

Wasn’t Blackened the one that said he ‘researched’ the game? I guess not. There’s several ways to play the campaign, and one of them is to progress map to map with the opposing team regardless if you win or lose.

(LyndonL) #30

Have a tanty Blackened? If you want to stay with the same teams play free mode and not campaign. Just stop your tears, you’re embarrassing yourself.

(BioSnark) #31

I wrote my thoughts on this somewhere or other, hmm. In any case, it’s possible that campaign players will be cycling through dedicated servers with freeplay players/server communities. That would be desirable for not further fracturing the playerbase, along with player level, mission and faction. However, it might not be desirable for campaigners who want their sp experience vs server admin/modification.

(Maawdawg) #32

here you go. It is exactly as described in the posts above you.