Bioware has revealed that Dragon Age Inquisition will have a cooperative multiplayer mode which exists separately from the single player campaign. The mode is a four player co-op mode that has players making their way through dungeons, fighting bosses, and grabbing tons of loot.

I know the default position on something like is sure to be somewhere between rage and dismissal for many given the potent combination of factors: Bioware, EA, multiplayer being introduced in a traditionally single player series, and a recent delay. I however, am choosing to be optimistic.

For one, many lost their shit when it was announced that Mass Effect 3 would have a cooperative mode, but that turned out to be one of my and many others favorite multiplayer games the year it came out. I also don't think the often trotted out implication that the addition of multiplayer will somehow adversely affect the single player has ever held any water. Looking at games such as Tomb Raider, Spec Ops: The Line, and Far Cry 3, all of which had what many would describe as needless and tacked on multiplayer, though the multiplayer was not really worth engaging with in each of these games, it was entirely avoidable and didn't at all diminish what I consider to be three excellent single player games.

Putting those factors aside, I think just looking at Dragon Age: Inquisition's multiplayer alone there is a lot that seems potentially cool. The class and role structure within the party oriented combat of Dragon Age is ideally suited for cooperative play. Things like abilities combinations present some interesting opportunities for cooperation, and the MMO role trinity is pretty much already in place. I think the idea of a Diablo-like dungeon crawling, loot driven experience with the added tactical elements of Dragon Age could be really amazing, and I think adding this persistent online mode in addition to the reported 200 hours of single player content makes Dragon Age Inquisition a pretty enticing package.

What do you guys think? Do you think Dragon Age can work in a multiplayer environment or would you rather the game remain single player only?

Single player. Single player. Single player. The issue here isn't that multiplayer is included per se, I wouldn't touch it in any event. Rather, the troubling issue is what MP inclusion suggests about the gameplay in the single-player campaign:

One of the things a lot of people complained about with DAII was simplified the simplified combat compared to Origins. Subsequently, BioWare promised that the tactical camera would make a comeback in DA:I and fights would necessitate pausing and advance planning. Well, now multiplayer comes along. Clearly, you can't pause the game if you are in MP, which means the combat needs to be structured to be playable in real-time. This suggests simplification so that actions can be done quickly, which in turn suggests that BioWare has, if anything, doubled down on the Michael Bay style "mash A to win" style combat. Which is exactly the thing a lot of people said they didn't want.

Just look at the gameplay video. Kill streaks? Really? Do I get a magic UAV if I kill 5 enemies in a row? What BioWare has done is make Fantasy Gears of War. I have no interest in playing Fantasy Gears of War.

Also, this is EA. They will doubtless find some entirely tasteless and exploitative way of monetizing multiplayer.

@lawgamer: Well, pausing exists so you can give commands to each party member without time being a factor. If each player is controlling a single member of the party, the need pause to give commands is gone. Strategizing presumably comes in the form of communication instead of queuing up commands. I also don't think it's necessarily valid to draw any conclusions about the single player from the multiplayer. They've made it pretty clear you can play the game entirely in real time or by pausing every ten seconds, though one would assume the need to pause increases significantly with increases in difficulty level.

I also don't really think the Gears of War comparison holds up at all. They way they've described it it sounds much more like a dungeon crawler with its focus on moving through linear areas fighting enemies as a group and collecting loot.

As far microtransactions go, they have already explained that yes, it will have them, but it's simply an option to buy in game gold if you're too impatient to play to earn it. There's certainly the possibility that they abuse the balance and make regular gold income very slow without paying, and EA in no way deserves the benefit of the doubt, but at least they've learned somewhat from ME3 that the random element was a step too far. Also, they've said that all multiplayer DLC will be free, much like it was in ME3, which is in my opinion a fair trade for the presence of microtransactions. If other people want to throw their money away on microtransactions and I still get free DLC, that's fine by me.

Looks cool! Hope to hear good things about it.

Honestly, I felt Mass Effect 3 had the best cooperative multiplayer mode I've ever seen.

If BioWare can strike that same nerve with Dragon Age, a franchise I've had relatively little interest in to this point, it'd be really impressive.

Sounds cool!

In all honesty my first reaction to this was one of optimism. Reading all about it it seems like they know what they're designing and this isn't just some latched-on mandatory multiplayer bollocks. Even if it is technically mandatory multiplayer bollocks what with EA's business model of all their games featuring multiplayer. Nonetheless, I like what I'm seeing and making it into a Diablo action-RPG thing makes the most sense. It's funny how they've literally just taken the exact same model from ME3's and ported it into Dragon Age; but hey, if it works, and free DLC is always a bonus.

I won't touch it but whatever.

Between Diablo 3, Marvel Heroes and Destiny I don't need another loot game.

I'll be optimistic and say it'll probably be tons of fun for the intended audience.

I probably played more ME3 wave based coop then any other wave based coop game combined. And that's a lot considering how much Horde mode I played in Gears 2 and 3. I'm all about this though.

Looks promising to me.

4 player co op is all I wanted from Skyrim and Dragon's Dogma. And Multiplayer works for Dark Souls. So I'll give this a shot.

ME3 multiplayer was outstanding, so I'm more than happpy to reserve judgement until I play it. Could be cool!

WHY IS IT GORRAMN SEPERATE.

God damnit. Had they just made it so I could have a buddy control a character or half of the party or something I would have actually been fully convinced and bought the game. If there's anything I'm going to the experience for, it's the SP.

It'll probably be neat for people who enjoy the combat, but come on. If they can do this they could have done it for the campaign. That is such a bummer. I am not nearly as interested in mediocre or simple content in this kind of game.

I've always wanted Bioware's RPGs to be coop in the campaign. You're already switching around, why not reduce the switching and let people play with a friend?

Complaining aside, this seems potentially neat. If they combat is any good.

after mass effect 3 i learned not to doubt biowares ability to make a good coop mode,so i think it will be good.my concern isnt whether it will be good or not,but whether it does enough different from diablo 3 to pull me away.diablo 3 with reaper of souls is my fave game of its type,and if this coop mode doesnt do enough different,then i wont play the coop for long because i will go back to diablo 3.the same thing happened to mass effect 3 for me,the coop was good but borderlands 2 gave me everything i liked about mass effects coop and more.so i never got heavy into mas effect 3 coop much because i didnt need to.hopefully there is enough new things that will keep me playing,but if not ill be happy with the sp.

Can't wait! Not sure if I'll jump into the MP first or head straight into SP.

Mass Effect 3's multiplayer was surprisingly enjoyable, and they supported the ever-loving shit out of it. This looks more in-depth than that with the increased customization and somewhat randomized areas.

If you're staunchly against the idea of a multiplayer mode in an RPG like this, maybe try thinking of it as instanced mutliplayer dungeons, like in an MMO? Those are RPGs. I dunno, I've been playing a lot of Old Republic and enjoying the flashpoints there, so getting some of that with Dragon Age sounds great to me. Is there going to be dialogue stuff or will it just be straight combat?

In any case, I'm looking forward to this game more than any other, but I'm not getting my expectations up.

I played way more Mass Effect 3 co-op than I thought I would, so I'm 100% confident that Bioware knows what they're doing with this.

Sounds great! 110% on board.

They've said there's a very loose story tying the co-op in with the events of the campaign, but it's a gameplay focused mode. There won't be any dialogue choices or anything like that.

Bioware already has a lot to prove post DA2. The way I see it, as long as the SP story/gameplay is good, then MP can be icing on the cake. If anything, it looks like the coop horde mode like gameplay that ME3 had (which I never played, but I was late to that party).

Either way, I don't mind an extra MP mode IF it doesn't detract from the main game (which for all intents should be what DA is aiming for). Just don't make it a component of the main game like it was in ME3 (Readiness score).

Fine. It doesn't touch the SP campaign, I can just ignore it if it's not cool.

I'm wary of even the mention of microtransactions because it undoubtedly motivated the slot machine aspect of ME3's multiplayer. But again, if I find anything about this mode bothersome, I can just ignore it.

I'm really bummed out about this.

I was kinda hoping that it would be a coop mode for the campaign kinda like how Baldur's Gate did it, but a separate coop mode sounds pretty good too. I played a ton of Mass Effect 3's multiplayer, and I loved how they kept updating it for free.

@jarmahead: I don't know what this rant is about. Would you really like a fully coop compatible campaign when you spend a long ass time in conversation, experiencing character moments and so on? A coop campaign would mean a lot of concessions I'm not confortable with. This is the best of both worlds and I hope the campaign and the multiplayer are great in their own way.

Why?

Because man. This is the wrong topic. Don't judge me!

I don't think a cooperative campaign would work in this type of story driven RPG without making some drastic changes. I tried playing Baldur's Gate cooperatively with some friends of mine (having never played the game before) and it wasn't a great way to experience the game for the first time. Everyone wanted to go at a different pace, it seemed every conversation was being led by a different player, and I felt like I was missing so much of the context and narrative when the other players were advancing through the story portions.

Dragon Age is just as much story and character interactions as it is combat and dungeon crawling, and the non-combat aspects of the series would be hindered rather than improved by the addition co-op. I think having the multiplayer as an entirely separate mode is the best option, you get to engage with the series' combat mechanics as a full party of four players without having the narrative and character aspects negatively impacted.

I don't have a problem with Dragon Age having a multiplayer mode as long as it doesnt take away from the single player. Last of Us is a great example of a game with a fantastic single player as well as multiplayer.

I'm more than fine with this ... From all I have seen the single player seems to be huge, looks good and has a good story. Why would I mind a coop mode in this? Even if not attached to the story I love coop.

Eh, I will give it a shot. Mass Effect 3's multiplayer was far better than it had any right to be, so I will maintain optimism in this situation.

I never did try out ME3's multiplayer, but I feel like the general consensus was that it was super fun. From what I've been hearing and reading about Inquisition's multiplayer, it looks like it's shaping up to be just as good if not better. I was gonna pass on it considering the amount of games coming out this season, but now I'm like a thousand times more interested.

Kinda out of the blue for me, but if it holds a candle to the fantastic ME3 mp, I will look forward to trying it. Gonna play Inquisition anyway.

I remember reading about Mass Effect 3 having co op and thinking it was a bad idea. Then I ended up playing and enjoying it quite a bit so I'm cautiously optimistic about this.

@ll_exile_ll: Yeah true, it never really worked too well in the old Infinity Engine games.

*glances at my numerous forum posts about the need for more co-op in games*

...I'm ok with this.

Add me to the "I loved ME3 multiplayer so this could be cool" list. Hopefully playing a healer will be a valid/valuable option.

First thought: oh God it's happening again.

Second thought: Well if it's like Neverwinter Nights that could be cool.

Third thought: Oh God the pattern for Dragon Age 3 mirrors Mass Effect 3 almost exactly.

Current thought: I should resign myself to thinking the game will be shit. I can't afford to have my heart broken again.

So yeah, that's about where I stand with this news.

What pattern? Dragon Age hasn't had any of the day 1 DLC bullshit ME3 had, and let's also not forget that Dragon Age Inquisition is being positioned as a return to form for the series, the redemption after the disappointment that was DAII. Mass Effect 3 was the follow up to a game that won numerous Game of the Year awards. It didn't have anything to prove the way Dragon Age does and the pre-release media strategy was focused on broadening the audience, not winning back the trust of fans the way Inquisition is being positioned. Finally, Mass Effect 3 was in development for 26 months, but it will have been 44 months since Dragon Age II when Inquisition finally releases.

I can understand if you simply don't trust EA and Bioware to produce a game you're interested in anymore, but I just do see the comparison to the pre-launch circumstances of Mass Effect 3. Dragon Age: Inquisition is in a much different situation leading up to launch than Mass Effect 3 was, as is Bioware as a studio.

@ll_exile_ll: The pattern goes like this:

Mass Effect 3 announced for November 2011 -> game is delayed -> rumours of unannounced multiplayer component being the reason -> multiplayer is announced -> we all know how ME3 turned out

Dragon Age Inquisition announced for October 2014 -> game is delayed -> rumours of unannounced multiplayer component being the reason -> multiplayer is announced

Don't get me wrong, I am an utter Bioware fanboy. Unabashedly so. Yet the last two games they have put out have been terribly mediocre or outright heart breaking. I can't handle another ME3. I really can't. I've noticed the pre-release pattern and I'm hoping against hope that Dragon Age 3 will rock my socks off, but I can't ignore that Bioware have swung twice and missed terribly on both counts. One of them was a near miss, and on the other Bioware lost grip of the bat and it was swung into the audience and hit me square in the face.

Maybe I'm paranoid, or just cynical, but this news isn't exactly encouraging to me (although if it does turn out to be more like NWN MP that would be totally cool).

I loved Mass Effect 3 multiplayer, but I hope they can do this one without all that gambling nonsense and game lobby/connection issues attached to it.

That is some real jerky looking combat.

ME 3 multiplayer really surprissed me and played a ton of it , so I´ll definitely try this one too.