So Multiplayer is defiantly going to happen, what do you want to see? are you even going to play it? I have been talking with some friends and we have come up with some cool but unlikely ideas since we were pretty surprised by how much we enjoyed the Mass Effect 3 multiplayer even with its flaws. But I don't really want to see the same thing in DA3:I.

I however, would like to see maps taken from the main game, with lots of bots and NPC's to inhabit the map. I want to see Characters that level up based on what you do and how well you do it, like exp for how much damage you do not just for who gets the kill, revives, and commanding the bots based on your level. I don't think characters would have to be the basic classes mage, warrior, rogue... I want to see a variety of classes such as blood mage, keeper, templar, reaver, duelist, shadow, ect... the maps should be 8 player maps that divide up 4v4 with allied bots, and enemy bots from both factions, killing them gets you a little gold and a little exp, while killing enemy players gets you lots of gold and exp. the exp goes into leveling up and your ability to command bots. While gold goes to buying armor for the base class your specialization belongs to (warrior, mage,rogue) and weapons that are specific for you main class (templars gets sword and shield, while duelists get one sword one dagger. that type of thing). Character customization is also important to me, I want to see humans, elves, dwarves, even kossith as playable races... Lord Aeducan (talk) 21:11, September 22, 2012 (UTC)

What do you think? What would you change? And what do you think we will actually see? Lord Aeducan (talk) 21:11, September 22, 2012 (UTC)

I don't want MP.--ErgoXill (talk) 22:00, September 22, 2012 (UTC)

Since multiplayer is mandatory, I want a full campaign for multiplayer, and not just tacked on shit that was forced into ME3. I want a story, not a "run around and kill things" group of maps.

You know, like they did in Baldur's Gate 1 and 2. Hitokiri Akins (talk) 22:44, September 22, 2012 (UTC)

^that would be fantastic! Lord Aeducan (talk) 22:46, September 22, 2012 (UTC)

I don't see that happening though; not with EA in complete control of the company. No, we'll get the tacked on maps that allows EA to make money from DLC maps and weapons. Hitokiri Akins (talk) 22:55, September 22, 2012 (UTC)

I agree with Lord Aeducan and Hitokiri on the gameplay aspects. I do like being able to play with other people, but I didn't like how in ME3 your multiplayer score affected your single player campaign, in that you *couldn't* do as well if you didn't play the multiplayer enough. I wouldn't mind having some crossover effects, but I don't want the whole game hinging on how much I feel like playing multiplayer. I didn't mind the killing stuff in waves of the ME3 multiplayer, but it would have been nice to have some variety as well. You kill enough waves of Cerberus lackeys, and it kind of loses its pizazz. Marleysauce (talk) 22:59, September 22, 2012 (UTC)

I meant a story campaign that was specific to multiplayer that has it's own experience, but not tied into the main game in any way. Or a multiplayer version of the main campaign, like Baldur's Gate. But, with EA in charge, I don't see anything of the sort. Hitokiri Akins (talk) 23:06, September 22, 2012 (UTC)

You're really cheerful and positive, you know that? I don't think EA has as much control as you think they have. Sure, they wanna make money, but they also want happy customers. If you don't like the extra tacked on maps, well there's nobody forcing you to buy or use them, is there? Maybe you could boycott them. That'll send a message, right? Marleysauce (talk) 23:30, September 22, 2012 (UTC)

Again, I bring up their history with other companies. If EA truly wanted happy customers, they wouldn't have released Ultima 9 in the form it was released in; they would have allowed Origin Systems to have the time and money needed to make a game deserving of the Ultima name.

And if you have NO idea what I'm talking about, check out the Spoony Experiment's retrospective of the Ultima Series. I warn you that it contains a LOT of profanity. Ultima 7 through 9 was made during the EA era.

Here's the link. [1]

That said, I WANT to be pleasantly surprised. I just don't see it happening, given EA's past. Hitokiri Akins (talk) 23:42, September 22, 2012 (UTC)

I got enough of killing ridiculously large waves of enemies in DA2. I don't really want MP in DA but if we're gonna get stuck with it, I'm hoping for local co-op, either by itself or at least as an option. However I'm expecting online only PVP and possibly online only co-op. I'd be really pleasantly surprised to see any kind of local multiplayer though. I'm pretty much expecting them to go drastically overboard and turn it into an MMO like WoW unfortunately. Personally I've had almost no pleasant experiences with any kind of online multiplayer so I tend to avoid it. --Vampire Damian (talk) 00:45, September 23, 2012 (UTC)

I love PVP. Bring on the PVP.149.101.37.2 (talk) 03:12, September 23, 2012 (UTC)

I'm keeping my expectations low (kinda like I have since beating origins (pre-DA2) and thinking that it would be a royal pain in the ass to top that) and just hoping that it doesn't suck. 24.76.94.220 (talk) 03:20, September 23, 2012 (UTC)

I didn't bother reading everyone's posts in this, but I'm a little too drunk to care right now. Now with that out of the way, the only way I would bother playing DA3 multiplayer if it were set up such as Baldur's Gate Dark Alliance/Champions of Norath/LotR WitN. Which I find very fun, dark alliance even as a bonding agent for my little sister, who is only 10, she is almost done with DA2 act 2 about to tackle Following the Qun leading into Demands of the Qun, lol. She also thinks Anders is cute, hahaha. She is in for a surprise in Act 3. Tommyspa (talk) 03:45, September 23, 2012 (UTC)

I would like to seem Multiplayer in a concrete room that keeps it completely seperate from single player. ----Isolationistmagi 18:02, September 23, 2012 (UTC)

Or at the very least on another disk, with an optional download. I'm not going to begrudge anyone who actually wants to play this, but in my mind it's a very small subset of the usual audience. Much smaller than Bioware and EA realizes. It's probably going to amount to a waste of space and money really. The Grey Unknown (talk) 18:37, September 23, 2012 (UTC)

I don't think i understand why everyone refuses to play it, I mean it will only be optional I am sure... but no one who plays dragon age likes multiplayer games??? I see a few posts wanting Baldurs gate type multiplayer, and that would be really cool in theory, could end up like Fable 3 though. I liked SW:TOR for pretty much every reason no one else likes it, because it is a pretty interesting single player story played with people who are also playing pretty interesting single player stories. but I liked ME3's multiplayer too, and that is just point and shoot wave survival with a buddy. but I play all kinds of games and love them for different reasons, I just think it is strange that everybody is fighting multiplayer so hard. Dragon Age is a universe that is rich and full of pretty neat ideas and fresh looks on tired story telling traditions. It is my favorite fantasy universe, beating out Forgotten realms and I have played D&D in a Forgotten Realms Campaign for years... I just feel like the universe is cool, and strong enough to continue to capture our imaginations after let downs like DA2, and odd little flash titles like Journey's and Legends. I know that even if multiplayer is a crappy waste of time filled with loading screens and spawn killers, I will still be playing day after day. Lord Aeducan (talk) 20:26, September 23, 2012 (UTC)

I can't speak for others, but for me it's not that I hate multiplayer games, it's that I hate that so many companies now seem intent on making every single game multiplayer, whether it makes sense or not. Sony's even putting multiplayer into the next God of War game. Alot of Pubs/devs have shown a tendency to neglect the single-player aspects for multiplayer too, though they rarely admit it. Some EA asshole was saying he was proud that he never green-lit a single player game.

What makes it even worse for some people (like me) is that alot of them are online-only multiplayer, which I do hate because then I can't pause, some games lag and disconnect alot and most importantly I can't play it with anyone I know unless they are somewhere else, have the same system I do and have that same game for that same system, which almost never happens. Also, playing with random people online usually sucks for various reasons depending on what kind of multiplayer it is. I don't see how anyone has fun that way, to me it's just a big headache. Multiplayer is infinitely more fun in the same room with my friends drinking and talking shit. Plus if they get cheap or try to ragequit, you can hit them.--Vampire Damian (talk) 13:32, September 24, 2012 (UTC)

Id like to see three versions of multiplayer, one as a group survival, you and three friends defend against tougher waves of enemies meaning people have to work together to kill enemies, gather resources and build upgrades to make fights easier so as better equipment, Resurrection potions and possibly friendly npc , an arena of 4v4 and finally a multiplayer campaign of either the single player campaign or a new one entirely. --Halisme (talk) 18:22, September 24, 2012 (UTC)

I want them to be honest this time about the multiplayer's effect on the single player.--Wsowen02 (talk) 02:32, September 25, 2012 (UTC)

You can have multiplayer thats not a problem. What i don't want multiplayer to do is affect the single-player story. 203.45.127.20 (talk) 04:55, September 25, 2012 (UTC)Darkside

I want to see multiplayer six feet under, with an epitaph "We *do* listen to our fans, so no multiplayer. Yours, Bioware".-Algol- (talk) 02:13, September 26, 2012 (UTC)

We are here to witness the death of multiplayer, so bow your heads as we lower this add-on feature in the dirt. Bioware is known for it's selective hearing and i highly doubt they have put any of the ideas the fans have or what we don't need in the game(we no want multiplayer). 203.45.127.20 (talk) 02:25, September 26, 2012 (UTC)Darkside

Let's face it, DA3 will be a true testament to just how far both EA and Bioware have fallen. They have sold their souls to make the younger generations (who should not be playing games like this at all) happy. Look at the multiplayer of ME3 in a long-term standpoint. Tying the success of the single-player campaign into multiplayer was the epitomy of stupidity; Think about it, at some point, the servers hosting ME3 multiplayer will be shut down, and then what? All of ME3 becomes crippled. No. In fact, I don't want multiplayer in DA3 AT ALL. IF I want multiplayer, I'll go play TF2 and GW2.

To summarize: Until EA and Bioware realize their folly and remember what made their games successful in the first place (great characters, good story, stability, innovation) and stop making it blatantly obvious thay they have lost touch with their own market, no amount of multiplayer,flash, or feel-good moments will make this game good. (talk) 07:10, September 26, 2012 (UTC)Darkside

Don't lump EA into Bioware's fall; they are the cause of it. EA has never cared about the happiness of it's customers, only the money they can get out of us. EA has NEVER been in touch with their market; look at the Madden series, and how little it has changed over the years. EA has also never cared about the developers it has aquires; look at what they did to Origin Systems and the Wing Commander and Ultima Series.

EA won't realize anything; only Bioware can save themselves by fighting back against EA's heavy handed tactics. Hitokiri Akins (talk) 16:34, October 18, 2012 (UTC)

"who should not be playing games like this at all" - If the game is rated 18, it only means minors shouldn't buy it, not shouldn't play it.

But overally, I agree with everything else. I think I'd better go and play TF2 too, right now:) -Algol- (talk) 02:38, September 27, 2012 (UTC)

I don't want the mulitplayer to be like ME3, on how it has a huge impact on single player. Now I won't mind if it affects that you can get special kind equipment something like the Warden Commander Armor from the Warden Keep DLC sort thing. But other then that it should not mix. I read some the comments and people just saying that they totally hate it. People before you totally hate it at least give it a chance in the series. Back to the topic. I would like it see bit mixture of multiplayer. Mixtures are you have the PvP(possible npc in battle there too), with group people just facing off against waves of npcs, and even some sort campaign to it.--Dalish Arrow 04:01, October 19, 2012 (UTC)