Let's play Nostradamus.

For Honor does not work well. Mostly, OOS and very bad cases with dropping connections. It is competitive PvP and apparently, sync issues are a priority especially against cheaters. Lots of people complain about atrocious lag and constant disconnects in US to Europe to Asia games. It's a big world after all and P2P obviously has issues in any global community. But more localized games work rather well.

MEA is not too competitive, they might put some sync tolerance failsafes in their netcode which they did not put in DAIMP. For example, in ME3 MP most of the guns worked even when powers missed and with severe cases of lag as majority of gun hits are processed mostly client-side probably through challenge server cache. That makes laggy games actually playable for everyone except some really severe cases with ping over 300 msec. Sometimes, it is possible to do some damage and actually carry games on 500 msec hosts although it can get messy.

White people love Wayne Brady because he makes Bryant Gumbel look like Malcolm X.

Chappelle show skit.

I am moderately aware of how the different multiplayer networking models work but thanks for going into detail. The question is, how is a P2P model with a super-peer different from the client/server model?

The way I understand it, the difference is that actions require twice the travel time to the server to be carried out instead of once as in a C/S model since the "main" game is running on each client individually instead of the server. While this means you always have a higher latency, it seems like a lot of issues can be circumvented by a proper matchmaking putting great emphasis on a low-latency enviroment.

I don't think they're going to remove proper validation and basically going full "Ubisoft", allowing players to cheat whatever way they want in a multiplayer environment (have they fixed the Division by now?). While MEA isn't competitive/PvP, there's still a lot of money involved, which is arguably even more important than a fair game to companies.

Regarding the netcode, though, there seems to be room for improvement over ME3. I haven't played DA:IMP so I have no idea if they already fixed some of the issues but in ME3 it felt to me like the client prediction was sub-par, making the experience in a high-latency environment worse than it could be.

As for the fully connected approach someone mentioned: I don't see how this is supposed to work with a PvE game. Someone still has to host the NPCs, their projectiles etc. making them a super-peer and leading to the same issues we have now. Also, it would either use a lot more bandwidth or require synchronization which is even worse. 
edit: I guess you'd also have each client simulate the NPCs on their own but that seems like the worst combination of all the possible issues...

I am not going just to try MP,I am going to marry it and fully accept bad with the good.

Off topic.
It took me some time to recall where did I see that ugly face (Shame on me 'cos it was in one fun game)

This

ME3MP wasn't perfect, but it was good to great for about 2 years after launch.

The issue with dedicated servers is 1) putting up enough so that someone in Montreal doesn't have to connect through New York. 2) Once they start shutting servers down you're fucked.

Me and some friends used to play Diablo. I live in Edmonton, they live in Calgary. We had to connect to these servers a million miles away in the states, usually California, and the lag was atrocious. But we could play P2P games together just fine whether it was NHL, COD or ME3. Even friends of mine in Montreal/Toronto/Seattle/Washington/New York never had too many issues playing P2P with each other. It wouldn't always be perfect, but it was always good. Once you put an ocean between you and someone, its a different story but that doesn't change with dedicated servers.

A lot of games are P2P and work great. A lot of shooters and basically all sports games are P2P. Most fighting games were P2P for years and generally worked fine online.

I'm blindly assuming the ME3MP team can make it work better than the DAIMP team with more time with the engine to previous experience. I couldn't play at all DAIMP due to the connection issues. Regardless of your feelings on EA, they likely won't stand for that again. MP is too large a revenue source via microtransactions to let it be lost to poor netcode and other problems that plagued DAI.

Hmmm I might give it a try sometime, just to see what it's about. The sp version is bad because of the story but I do enjoy playing the dragon age series otherwise, playing as the different classes, especially mage is my favourite.

Wow really? I guess I won't be trying it anyways then lol.

I've read about it today, and it sounds like it has too much toxic potential. For example, you need to open additional doors to loot, instead of getting autorewards like in ME3MP. So, as a new player you will immediately never really get anything now, because every other person still playing will be ripping through it to just finish the zones. It is also kind of a linear randomly generated dungeon crawl rather than the waves, with only three revives... all and all, it sounds nothing like the fast and fun ME3MP, rather like a dungeon in every other game, so this late in the game trying to pug on level 1 first time... does not sound like anything but a recipe for running after other people in confusion and being left for dead, if not being called all sorts of names for daring to play the game.

Yeah that doesn't sound like much fun. Even with me3 mp it wasn't fun until the guys from the mp section helped me get into it. And me3 is still the superior game.

Thank you, that's not patronizing at all, it's actually good advice