Mass Effect multiplayer beta news is likely this month

Avatar image for spaceinsomniac
#1 Posted by SpaceInsomniac (5947 posts) -

According to a developer tweet, it's likely that we'll be getting some news later this month on the upcoming closed beta for Mass Effect Andromeda's multiplayer.

How much time did you spend playing Mass Effect 3 multiplayer? If you're anything like me, way too much time.

While signing up for the beta, I was asked some questions relating to how much time I spent playing ME3 multiplayer, and I was directed to a website that I either forgot about or never knew about: http://n7hq.masseffect.com/

A few clicks later, I learned the truth. 180 hours. I spent over a week of my life playing Mass Effect 3 multiplayer. Thankfully, I can take comfort in the fact that I spent the majority of that time having some great conversations with friends.

I'm ready to do it all over again. How about yourself?

Avatar image for pilgore
#2 Posted by Pilgore (256 posts) -

I played it for get my Galactic Readiness up while playing it alongside the singleplayer. I've never touched it since (nor Mass Effect 3 for that matter).

Avatar image for zevvion
#3 Posted by Zevvion (5217 posts) -

Funny. I'm writing a blog right now where I talk about being so excited for Andromeda, I'm not looking up any information on it and didn't even know it would have multiplayer. Great to hear though, I still play that multiplayer sometimes actually. It's so great. Best Horde Mode ever made and still is.

I can practically guarantee that the staff won't like this new Mass Effect too much because they will probably move into improving the gameplay a lot like they did from 2-3 and not trying to recapture the feel of Mass Effect 2, which they incorrectly think is the best game in the series.

Funniness aside, I this has the potential to be the best Mass Effect game I'll ever play given the exact make-up of the dev team (they did the ME3 multiplayer, played a large part in the mechanical changes of the gameplay from 2 to 3, Shadow Broker, Overlord, Citadel).

Avatar image for konig_kei
#4 Posted by konig_kei (956 posts) -

The tech test is PS4 and XBONE only. Went through the trouble to find that out.

Avatar image for herrheimlich
#5 Posted by HerrHeimlich (60 posts) -

*Goes to N7 HQ website*

*Checks playtime*

410 hrs 55 mins...

Yeah...

Avatar image for veektarius
#6 Posted by Veektarius (6098 posts) -

I put some time into ME3 multiplayer, but I never found it as interesting as most. It got better once you had an interesting class that was actually built for its reduced cover gameplay, but the controls always felt unresponsive to me.

Avatar image for boozak
#7 Edited by BoOzak (1717 posts) -

The ME3 multiplayer was basically just a chat room where my friends and I discussed the game as we were playing it (among other things) once we were done that was it. It's cool for what it was but I dont really understand how you could spend so much time playing it.

Hopefully ME:A has more interesting map/mission design. (SP & MP) I would sign up but the page keeps timing out when I try to log in... :(

EDIT: It's working now :)

Avatar image for spaceinsomniac
#8 Edited by SpaceInsomniac (5947 posts) -

@boozak said:

The ME3 multiplayer was basically just a chat room where my friends and I discussed the game as we were playing it (among other things) once we were done that was it. It's cool for what it was but I dont really understand how you could spend so much time playing it.

Hopefully ME:A has more interesting map/mission design. (SP & MP) I would sign up but the page keeps timing out when I try to log in... :(

EDIT: It's working now :)

ME3 was all about figuring out the best way to lock down and defend an area while your friends ran around and completed the objectives that would pop up. With ME:A multiplayer, the developers have specifically said they don't want players hiding behind the same cover for the whole game. To "solve" this situation, they've developed some enemies that will be really efficient at flushing you out of cover, and more objectives that require the players to cover more areas of the map.

It's either going to be a brilliant change that leads to far more variety and strategy, or fixing something that wasn't broken and that ends up ruining the multiplayer altogether. I guess we'll all know soon enough.

Avatar image for boozak
#9 Posted by BoOzak (1717 posts) -

@spaceinsomniac: That sounds a lot like how horde mode changed in Gears after each iteration, wasnt a fan of that myself but you seem a lot more versatile in ME:A.

Avatar image for metalbaofu
#10 Posted by MetalBaofu (1623 posts) -

10hours 26 minutes, apparently. I played whatever I had to play of it(for readiness/trophy), and not much more. I thought it was fun, I just don't really play horde mode stuff all that much.

Avatar image for thepanzini
#11 Edited by ThePanzini (397 posts) -

Just 11 hours I think for the war score, never been a horde fan and I detest random card rewards.

Avatar image for hobozero
#12 Posted by HoboZero (350 posts) -
@boozak said:

The ME3 multiplayer was basically just a chat room where my friends and I discussed the game as we were playing it (among other things) once we were done that was it. It's cool for what it was but I dont really understand how you could spend so much time playing it.

Hopefully ME:A has more interesting map/mission design. (SP & MP) I would sign up but the page keeps timing out when I try to log in... :(

EDIT: It's working now :)

ME3 was all about figuring out the best way to lock down and defend an area while your friends ran around and completed the objectives that would pop up. With ME:A multiplayer, the developers have specifically said they don't want players hiding behind the same cover for the whole game. To "solve" this situation, they've developed some enemies that will be really efficient at flushing you out of cover, and more objectives that require the players to cover more areas of the map.

It's either going to be a brilliant change that leads to far more variety and strategy, or fixing something that wasn't broken and that ends up ruining the multiplayer altogether. I guess we'll all know soon enough.

Hopefully since they are using the Snowblind engine we will see some large maps, maybe like Battlefront big. I would love having to really trek to an objective with the whole team.

Avatar image for sammo21
#13 Posted by sammo21 (5290 posts) -

I played Mass Effect 3's multiplayer for quite a while. I thought it was a really well made multiplayer. Even Dragon Age: Origin's mp wasn't bad. I hope they don't ruin it too much as it sounds like the multiplayer stuff is way more tied into the story and single player than in 3.

Avatar image for lawgamer
#14 Posted by LawGamer (1300 posts) -

If people enjoy it, fine. But I don't see myself investing any time in it whatsoever. I really dislike BioWare's multiplayer formula. There isn't anything original about it. They just take a better produced mode from other games and throw a Mass Effect skin on it. I personally found ME3's multiplayer to be one of the most excruciatingly tedious things I've ever played. And the less said about Inquisition's multiplayer, the better.

Personally I'd be perfectly happy if no developer ever mixed single-player and multi-player ever again. Depending on the main focus of the game, one mode or the other almost always ends up feeling rushed and tacked on and the inclusion of any kind of multiplayer tends to bring out the worst, most toxic members of a community. And forgive my skepticism on this point, but any time a developer says "multiplayer" these days all I hear is "odious DLC micro-transactions." And that shit needs to fuck right off.

Online
Avatar image for artisanbreads
#15 Posted by ArtisanBreads (8074 posts) -

@boozak said:

@spaceinsomniac: That sounds a lot like how horde mode changed in Gears after each iteration, wasnt a fan of that myself but you seem a lot more versatile in ME:A.

I think the jetpack could totally change things but yeah I get annoyed when Horde modes change with an idea of not wanting you to hole up... that's kind of what players actually want to do in these games.

Avatar image for opusofthemagnum
#16 Posted by OpusOfTheMagnum (185 posts) -

@zevvion: Yeah the original game is the best the franchise had to offer. 2 was the bastard child of the original and then 3 was just a bastard...

Avatar image for zevvion
#17 Posted by Zevvion (5217 posts) -

@opusofthemagnum: Ah, as expected, you too are incorrect. Mass Effect 3 is the best one.

Avatar image for dharmabum
#18 Edited by DharmaBum (1703 posts) -

I hope they fix the clunky ass movement. It is the downfall of any multiplayer game.

Avatar image for oursin_360
#19 Edited by OurSin_360 (4450 posts) -

Well i know i clocked over 300hrs in the multiplayer on 3. I wonder if this will be the same type or be some lame competitive thing? Watching the gb team play horde makes me want to jump back on 3 but i dont even have gold anymore. The classes, weapons, and random objectives were well done in me3. You just have to realize you dont really play it as a cover shooter too much.

I wonder if this will finally have native gamepad support on pc, the absence in the last few games was mind boggling. I could end up getting Xbox for this since the guys i played with are still in that.

Avatar image for pilgore
#20 Posted by Pilgore (256 posts) -

@zevvion: Nope, he's right the first one is the best one. 2 and 3 were big dumb sci-fi action movies were as the first one was a really really good season of Star Trek: TNG.

Avatar image for colonel_pockets
#21 Posted by Colonel_Pockets (1012 posts) -

I had no idea this had multiplayer. I played ME3 multiplayer a lot more than I thought they would. I hope Bioware made the shooting great, but ultimately I care about the single player waayyyy more. The multiplayer is just a cool bonus.

Avatar image for oursin_360
#22 Edited by OurSin_360 (4450 posts) -

@colonel_pockets: you know i find i am more interested in the multiplayer now lol. I feel the story is over honestly and have little interest in a spin off, but I really liked the multiplayer. They had a very good balance of character classes, combining techniques for extra damage was fun, and i thought the shooting in 3 was real good(against bots obviously). The enemy variety was good and they were constantly balancing(for both good and bad).

Avatar image for quarters
#23 Edited by Quarters (2591 posts) -

Played ME3's multiplayer a bit and thought it was fine, but I'm just not an online multiplayer guy AT ALL. Therefore, I practically have zero interest in ME's multiplayer, if it isn't local. For those that love that stuff good for them, but that just isn't for me. Heck, I haven't played a single match of Dragon Age Inquisition's multiplayer. I play those games for the story, period.

Avatar image for warlordpayne
#24 Edited by WarlordPayne (774 posts) -

ME3 is one of my all time favorite multiplayer games. Put well over 500 hours into it according to that site. I couldn't be more excited for the beta.

Avatar image for zevvion
#25 Posted by Zevvion (5217 posts) -

@pilgore: The first is very easily the worst one. It was a great game at the time but it's terrible now. 3 was and still is the best. You think saying 'action' is a bad thing when you're talking about Mass Effect but you're wrong.

Avatar image for pilgore
#26 Edited by Pilgore (256 posts) -

@zevvion said:

@pilgore: The first is very easily the worst one. It was a great game at the time but it's terrible now. 3 was and still is the best. You think saying 'action' is a bad thing when you're talking about Mass Effect but you're wrong.

Nope, the first one is easily the best one. It was still an RPG and not just a straight up action game ala Gears of War, that *is* a bad thing. It has an actual compelling well paced story (arguably one of the most important things in an RPG), good writing (largely because Drew Karpyshyn was still with the company at that time), good characters, an actual good fucking villain, proper exploration and an awesome soundtrack. The only thing Mass Effect 2 does better is sidequests (ME2 is really just a bunch of sidequest "episodes") and movement controls. Mass Effect 3 does nothing better. ME1 is still a great game and is no where near "terrible." lol.

Avatar image for zevvion
#27 Posted by Zevvion (5217 posts) -

@pilgore said:
@zevvion said:

@pilgore: The first is very easily the worst one. It was a great game at the time but it's terrible now. 3 was and still is the best. You think saying 'action' is a bad thing when you're talking about Mass Effect but you're wrong.

Nope, the first one is easily the best one. It was still an RPG and not just a straight up action game ala Gears of War, that *is* a bad thing. It has an actual compelling well paced story (arguably one of the most important things in an RPG), good writing (largely because Drew Karpyshyn was still with the company at that time), good characters, an actual good fucking villain, proper exploration and an awesome soundtrack. The only thing Mass Effect 2 does better is sidequests (ME2 is really just a bunch of sidequest "episodes") and movement controls. Mass Effect 3 does nothing better. ME1 is still a great game and is no where near "terrible." lol.

I liked the first Mass Effect for its story, universe building and characters. The part where it is an RPG, is actually the part where it is terrible. It plays terrible because the shooting feels godawful on top of being dice roll based which makes no sense.

I know we are jokingly saying we're both wrong, but the part where you are actually wrong is saying Mass Effect 3 does nothing better. That's a stance many people take when they got slogged up in the hate for that game, partly justifiably so, but partly definitely tremendously over-exaggerated. They lose sight of nuance and reality.

The reality is ME3 had by far the best and most defined gameplay of the three. People who played that game on Insanity from the get go and played the shit out of that multiplayer on Gold and Platinum tiers know this to be true. In fact, there isn't a shooter out right now that has more comprehensive and team-based use of abilities than that game does. It was about creating combo's and playing well. It is a fact that is sadly lost in history because people are so heated with rage over that ending that they decide to bash every little part of it.

The rest is obviously our opinions. I choose to find that mechanical changes in 3 make it the best game for me. I actually also really enjoyed the characters in that game as well as the DLC.

Avatar image for pilgore
#28 Posted by Pilgore (256 posts) -

@zevvion said:
@pilgore said:
@zevvion said:

@pilgore: The first is very easily the worst one. It was a great game at the time but it's terrible now. 3 was and still is the best. You think saying 'action' is a bad thing when you're talking about Mass Effect but you're wrong.

Nope, the first one is easily the best one. It was still an RPG and not just a straight up action game ala Gears of War, that *is* a bad thing. It has an actual compelling well paced story (arguably one of the most important things in an RPG), good writing (largely because Drew Karpyshyn was still with the company at that time), good characters, an actual good fucking villain, proper exploration and an awesome soundtrack. The only thing Mass Effect 2 does better is sidequests (ME2 is really just a bunch of sidequest "episodes") and movement controls. Mass Effect 3 does nothing better. ME1 is still a great game and is no where near "terrible." lol.

I liked the first Mass Effect for its story, universe building and characters. The part where it is an RPG, is actually the part where it is terrible. It plays terrible because the shooting feels godawful on top of being dice roll based which makes no sense.

I know we are jokingly saying we're both wrong, but the part where you are actually wrong is saying Mass Effect 3 does nothing better. That's a stance many people take when they got slogged up in the hate for that game, partly justifiably so, but partly definitely tremendously over-exaggerated. They lose sight of nuance and reality.

The reality is ME3 had by far the best and most defined gameplay of the three. People who played that game on Insanity from the get go and played the shit out of that multiplayer on Gold and Platinum tiers know this to be true. In fact, there isn't a shooter out right now that has more comprehensive and team-based use of abilities than that game does. It was about creating combo's and playing well. It is a fact that is sadly lost in history because people are so heated with rage over that ending that they decide to bash every little part of it.

The rest is obviously our opinions. I choose to find that mechanical changes in 3 make it the best game for me. I actually also really enjoyed the characters in that game as well as the DLC.

I don't even hate ME3, I played through it once, and liked it. It just does nothing for me that's better or an improvement to ME1. ME1 is a classic that I play through at least every 2 years, I replayed ME2 once.

Good going on calling the hate ME3 gets "tremendously over-exaggerated" and people losing "sight of nuance and reality" when calling the shooting in ME1 "godawful" moments before though.

Avatar image for oursin_360
#29 Posted by OurSin_360 (4450 posts) -

I believe the majority consensus is mass effect 2 is the best, mass effect 1 is good but clunky, and mass effect 3 had the best shooting but sacrificed in the writing a bit.

Obviously outliers exist

Avatar image for tesla
#30 Posted by Tesla (2126 posts) -

I played a few matches, and I have no idea why people spent any longer than that with the multiplayer. I love Mass Effect, and I love multiplayer shooters. But ME multiplayer was...average and boring.

Avatar image for demigodraven
#31 Posted by DemiGodRaven (349 posts) -

I played so much Me3 multiplayer, especially when they brought out the giant battle krogan with the hammer.

Avatar image for spaceinsomniac
#32 Edited by SpaceInsomniac (5947 posts) -

@tesla said:

I played a few matches, and I have no idea why people spent any longer than that with the multiplayer. I love Mass Effect, and I love multiplayer shooters. But ME multiplayer was...average and boring.

The game really works best when you play in a full party of four. It's also best when you play on the harder difficulties, so you can earn more credits, so you can get better gear, so you can play on harder difficulties, so you can earn more credits, so you can get better gear...

Loading Video...

Seriously, though, game is addictive.

@oursin_360 said:

I believe the majority consensus is mass effect 2 is the best, mass effect 1 is good but clunky, and mass effect 3 had the best shooting but sacrificed in the writing a bit.

Obviously outliers exist

Main campaign story: ME1 >ME2 > ME3

Controls: ME2 > ME3 > ME1

Overall story telling quality: ME2 > ME1 > ME3

Best overall game: ME2 > ME1 > ME3

Please note that I only consider ME2 controls to be best because of the game's original release. ME2 was an amazing improvement, and ME3 was just a slight refinement in comparison.

Avatar image for dispossession
#33 Edited by Dispossession (83 posts) -

@zevvion: So are you getting this for PC or PS4?

Avatar image for heltom92
#34 Posted by Heltom92 (810 posts) -

I got really into the MP in 3. I really enjoyed the variety of classes/races and the way you could combo powers. Charging around as a Krogan hitting fools was also great.

Avatar image for zevvion
#35 Posted by Zevvion (5217 posts) -

@zevvion: So are you getting this for PC or PS4?

Depends what type of multiplayer it has. If it's co-operative multiplayer and it has controller support, then I'll get it on PC. If not, I go PS4.

Avatar image for nickhead
#36 Posted by nickhead (1097 posts) -

I played the hell out of ME3 multiplayer and can't wait to do it again.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.