302 réponses à ce sujet

[Dick Delaware]

Oh, I didn't mean to be hostile towards you EAware. If you enjoy it more, great. Some of your points were valid.

I feel that there was exploration, but that it was ultimately shallow and badly implemented.

It's just that I think some folks here (not you) were disappointed with ME2, and now I think they're looking back at the original as better than it actually was. There may have been some parts that were better, but hearing people say "the character system in ME1 was great / the driving sections had a ton of interesting content / there was more dialogue in ME1" really elicits an eyeroll.

Modifié par Dick Delaware, 21 avril 2010 - 03:27 .

[Terror_K]

Dick Delaware wrote...

It's just that I think some folks here (not you) were disappointed with ME2, and now I think they're looking back at the original as better than it actually was.

One could also say people are looking at ME2 with rose-tinted glasses and that because its new its flaws aren't quite as apparent. I mean, it's amazing how some people paint ME1 as if its a horrible failure of a game when defending ME2 and the changes that were made. I've never seen the original game bashed so much on the official forums as I have in the last few months from ME2 fans who defend BioWare for the changes they made. ME1 has seemingly gone from "a great game with a few flaws" into "a terrible game that was bad at everything" the way some people talk.

[Massadonious1]

Too many people are hyping up ME1 beyond already solid and resonable expectations to spite ME2. ME2 doesn't have a inventory system to work with, so apparently being able to omni-gel items until the cows come home is the greatest thing in the galaxy. There's hardly any planet exploration in ME2, so handling the Mako's controls and driving to the same prefab base on every planet is the best vehicle experience they ever had in a video game.



If it wasn't for ME1, most of us wouldn't have as much, if any interest in a sequel, but those particular people really need to be taken down a peg or two.

[Doctor_Jackstraw]

I'd like to see major quests have major changes based on what you've done.

[Jebel Krong]

Terror_K wrote...

Dick Delaware wrote...

It's just that I think some folks here (not you) were disappointed with ME2, and now I think they're looking back at the original as better than it actually was.

One could also say people are looking at ME2 with rose-tinted glasses and that because its new its flaws aren't quite as apparent. I mean, it's amazing how some people paint ME1 as if its a horrible failure of a game when defending ME2 and the changes that were made. I've never seen the original game bashed so much on the official forums as I have in the last few months from ME2 fans who defend BioWare for the changes they made. ME1 has seemingly gone from "a great game with a few flaws" into "a terrible game that was bad at everything" the way some people talk.

not at all - it's still one of the best games i have ever played, but compared with mass effect 2 (having been released since) the obvious refinements make going back exteremely hard.

[Jebel Krong]

Terror_K wrote...

Jebel Krong wrote...

they were completely minor parts of the game - mass effect 2 had many more major missions - all the plot worlds and the loyalty quests, meant that you didn't need to rely on very minor characters on N7 missions for any consequence going forward. i know which one i prefer...

Yes... because the universe feels  oh so much more real and deep when the only choices and consequences relate to the main plot and absolutely nothing else that happens outside of that that effects anything <_<

I mean, seriously... why do you not want to be able to have your cake and eat it too like we could in ME1? That's not going to take anything away from the main-plot stuff we're already getting... it's just going to add more depth and give us more of a reason to do sidequests. What's the point in really doing them if there's no real pay-off? Usually in other RPGs the sidequests not only have a pay-off but are an interesting diversion from the main story and expand the universe. ME1 did this... ME2 almost failed utterly.

and conrad was a joke, nassana could (and maybe should) have been any asari with no change to gameplay/consequence.

Okay, Conrad was admittedly bugged, but at least the mission and content itself was cool. As for Nassana, in ME2
the dialogue and scene played out when you got to her quite differently if you had met her and whether you had done her sidequest or not than if you hadn't, which gave it three distinct variations. A random asari would have given you only one variation there. You say that main plot stuff is more important, but keep in mind that Nassana got more effort into her import stuff than Garrus did, who didn't change an iota whether you'd recruited him in the first game or not.

again garrus comes from the problem of ratifing your cherished rpg freedoms within the framework of a coherent narrative - if they had made his recruitment mandatory in both games, it wouldn't have been a problem, but then you lose one more choice.

conrad was crap in both games and most definitely didn't need to come back, the 5 minutes his "side-quest" took were barely worth the paragon/renegade points.

i don't mind depth, but i'm also very aware that time spent on random side-worlds is often time taken away from the main plot, and it's here that depth and choice etc matter most. it's not like it's vastly different from me1 -> me2 anyway, and we are yet to see how any N7s affect me3, for example. i vehemently disagree with reducing the size of the universe by having a repercussion for every goddamn merc you kill on a side-world, where you have killed hundreds more the same - it's not realistic, you wouldn't give it a second thought and it most likely would never affect anything you did going forward. even Toombs is a stretch.

[Terror_K]

Jebel Krong wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

Okay, Conrad was admittedly bugged, but at least the mission and content itself was cool. As for Nassana, in ME2
the dialogue and scene played out when you got to her quite differently if you had met her and whether you had done her sidequest or not than if you hadn't, which gave it three distinct variations. A random asari would have given you only one variation there. You say that main plot stuff is more important, but keep in mind that Nassana got more effort into her import stuff than Garrus did, who didn't change an iota whether you'd recruited him in the first game or not.

again garrus comes from the problem of ratifing your cherished rpg freedoms within the framework of a coherent narrative - if they had made his recruitment mandatory in both games, it wouldn't have been a problem, but then you lose one more choice.

I kind of wish they had made Garrus a mandatory recruitment in the first one, because it completely broke the immersion for my import character who purposefully didn't take him the first time around. The whole thing felt very lazy and poorly implemented, and could have been fixed by simply giving Shepard an alternate opening line, Garrus a single alternate opening  line where he mentions your brief meeting on The Citadel and perhaps your saving The Citadel and then just not had him say any of the other things that related to your past. Perhaps a few extra alternate lines here and there on his personal quest and some more cuts and there you have it. But no... BioWare simply ignored the problem and cheapened the whole situation as well as the character. And this is a classic example of why I feel ME2 is a rather hamfisted game overall compared to the original, or any of BioWare's other previous games for that matter. It feels a lot like KotOR2.

conrad was crap in both games and most definitely didn't need to come back, the 5 minutes his "side-quest" took were barely worth the paragon/renegade points.

Well, that's a matter of opinion. Conrad was, in general, a very popular character many wanted to see again, which is why Casey Hudson brought him up several times before ME2's launch as somebody you'd see. I believe he even said it was because of his popularity that he came back... just a shame he was so borked. Even just changing a single line (the one about the gun in the face) would have at least salvaged him, because he was unhinged and so obsessed with Shepard that even after you'd told him to go back to his wife and stop trying to be a hero while he may have listened for a start the death of Shepard would have realistically kicked him back to his old ways.

i don't mind depth, but i'm also very aware that time spent on random side-worlds is often time taken away from the main plot, and it's here that depth and choice etc matter most. it's not like it's vastly different from me1 -> me2 anyway, and we are yet to see how any N7s affect me3, for example. i vehemently disagree with reducing the size of the universe by having a repercussion for every goddamn merc you kill on a side-world, where you have killed hundreds more the same - it's not realistic, you wouldn't give it a second thought and it most likely would never affect anything you did going forward. even Toombs is a stretch.

It also reduces the size of the universe though to having everything going on simply revolve around just you and the main quest. The world feels larger when there are sidequests to do and other worlds to explore and you feel you're not the centre of the universe. Again, I felt the best ME2 import stuff was related to sidequests, but that may simply be  because they don't have as big an effect on things and shouldn't do, while the main stuff from ME1 was mostly awful because it felt like there was nowhere enough impact or variation or true consequences. The sidequest stuff pretty much stays within its own little bubble of influence which works well... but when the main quest stuff does the same thing when it should be effecting so much more, it fails utterly.

I've taken two Shepards through the game entirely, both of whom are almost opposites in style and personality, and yet the ME2 universe was almost identical in both, despite the rashly different decisions. As such, I find myself not playing and replaying ME2 so much, because why should I give a damn when the devs don't seem to? How am I supposed to believe that ME3 is going to actually provide any real consequences when ME2 didn't? I played ME1 through dozens of times with dozens of characters all with different choices across the board, and now that I see it doesn't really change all that much I feel I wasted my time.

ME3 better come out and be one hell of a game or I'll probably only be taking two or three Shepards into it instead of a dozen.

[Tazzmission]

the only thing that basicly hurt me2 was the non threat of a story. other than that the game was fine mechanics and charachters wise. i hope me3 goes back to being about the reapers

[phimseto]

Terror_K wrote...


A: All of the the Mass Effect titles standalone. The beginning of Mass Effect 2 is really meant to let players experience Mass Effect for the first time. We really want to look at Mass Effect 3 as a standalone title where the ending is going to feel satisfying.[/i]
.

That's about the worst thing I have read in a long while.  LOTR doesn't stand alone, Star Wars doesn't stand alone.  This comment makes me feel like Bioware has more or less abandoned the potential of what it set out to do all those years ago.  Instead of getting a nice German brew, I've gone to Foxwoods and gotten myself a watered down drink. 

[Mr. MannlyMan]

I have a question: instead of watering down the experience for both newcomers and veterans of previous Mass Effect games, why not just give a brief description of each character in the Codex and an overview of their personal history, like you did in DA:O?
Assuming that bringing in old characters from Shepard's past will confuse and alienate new players, and restricting their role in the game for that reason, is a little too safe and a little misguided IMO.

[this isnt my name]

Massadonious1 wrote...

Too many people are hyping up ME1 beyond already solid and resonable expectations to spite ME2. ME2 doesn't have a inventory system to work with, so apparently being able to omni-gel items until the cows come home is the greatest thing in the galaxy. There's hardly any planet exploration in ME2, so handling the Mako's controls and driving to the same prefab base on every planet is the best vehicle experience they ever had in a video game.

If it wasn't for ME1, most of us wouldn't have as much, if any interest in a sequel, but those particular people really need to be taken down a peg or two.

Thea mako was bad, planet scanning is worse, besides they did a crap job when instead of fixing a system they just removed it e.g mako, now we are stuck with the hammerhead and scanning, mako is still the better option. Inventory management may not be fun, but its better than being stuck with the same terrible weapon/armour until the ship or some mission gives you a decent one. Point it it wasnt great, but it beats the current system.

[Garuda One]

I think people are being overly picky is because BioWare hasn't dones a three part game so people are over critiqueing it every chance they have. I, myself only have a few complaints myself but some people's issues and arguments on there complaints are just absurd to say the least.

The biggest issues I have in the game.

PLOT HOLES
-Ones everyone is at least bothered by it-
1.) Kaiden and Ashely wtf come out of no where after fighting a giant crab. Knowing them they should have done something anything then just start ****ing in my face.
2.) Liara at her telemarketing job, I'm sorry her personaility should not have gone that bad in two years, espically for an Asari and one delivery boy quest? wtf.
3.) The entire crew leaves the Normandy for no reason so the plot can continue. Come on now.
4.) Planet Scanning, for the love of god don't ever do it again. God I hate planet scanning.

Things that bothered me personally.
4.) Terminator End Boss, really? Giant Man Eatting Robot Fetus>Terminator
5.) I would have enjoyed seeing the minor things I did in Mass Effect have a bigger impact or at least see them instead of having my eyes bleed trying to read there email. BioWare don't even think making the font bigger in the email will resolve the issue. I'd like to see and meet all of the minor characters. God my eyes hurt.

6.) On a personal note, I would have like to have seen the Rachni wtf own some mercs or had some sort of bigger role in Mass Effect 2 even though there trying to rebuild their race and fight the Reapers with us. Id like to see one come threw a wall and bite a merc head off, turn around salute me and then go threw the other wall.

Thats it honestly, when playing a BioWare game I expect a good story, going into Mass Effect 2 and saw such terrible plot holes and such I nerd rage, hard. Gameplay is good, characters are good, ect.

Did I mention my eyes hurt everytime I even look in the direction of the emails?

Also if Mass Effect 3 is going to be another stand alone, I might wait until I get a used copy or see peoples opinions on it. Mass Effect 2, yeah fine. I completely understand Mass Effect 2 being a stand alone game, that way people won't have to do as much or even spend as much to get Mass Effect and if they want play it and change their characters, give more depth. But I think at a end of an series they shouldn't make it stand alone. If you didn't bother with the first two games then why bother with the third?

Modifié par Garuda One, 21 avril 2010 - 06:47 .

[AngryFrozenWater]

Thanks for the link Terror_K. This is all bad news. We were promised a trilogy and not 3 stand alone franchise titles. What a crap. I need to think about this.

[Elvis_Mazur]

Garuda One wrote...

I think people are being overly picky is because BioWare hasn't dones a three part game so people are over critiqueing it every chance they have. I, myself only have a few complaints myself but some people's issues and arguments on there complaints are just absurd to say the least.

The biggest issues I have in the game.

PLOT HOLES
-Ones everyone is at least bothered by it-
1.) Kaiden and Ashely wtf come out of no where after fighting a giant crab. Knowing them they should have done something anything then just start ****ing in my face.
2.) Liara at her telemarketing job, I'm sorry her personaility should not have gone that bad in two years, espically for an Asari and one delivery boy quest? wtf.
3.) The entire crew leaves the Normandy for no reason so the plot can continue. Come on now.
4.) Planet Scanning, for the love of god don't ever do it again. God I hate planet scanning.

Things that bothered me personally.
4.) Terminator End Boss, really? Giant Man Eatting Robot Fetus>Terminator
5.) I would have enjoyed seeing the minor things I did in Mass Effect have a bigger impact or at least see them instead of having my eyes bleed trying to read there email. BioWare don't even think making the font bigger in the email will resolve the issue. I'd like to see and meet all of the minor characters. God my eyes hurt.

6.) On a personal note, I would have like to have seen the Rachni wtf own some mercs or had some sort of bigger role in Mass Effect 2 even though there trying to rebuild their race and fight the Reapers with us. Id like to see one come threw a wall and bite a merc head off, turn around salute me and then go threw the other wall.

Thats it honestly, when playing a BioWare game I expect a good story, going into Mass Effect 2 and saw such terrible plot holes and such I nerd rage, hard. Gameplay is good, characters are good, ect.

Did I mention my eyes hurt everytime I even look in the direction of the emails?

Also if Mass Effect 3 is going to be another stand alone, I might wait until I get a used copy or see peoples opinions on it. Mass Effect 2, yeah fine. I completely understand Mass Effect 2 being a stand alone game, that way people won't have to do as much or even spend as much to get Mass Effect and if they want play it and change their characters, give more depth. But I think at a end of an series they shouldn't make it stand alone. If you didn't bother with the first two games then why bother with the third?

Cry me a river:devil:

[Vena_86]

Mr. MannlyMan wrote...

I have a question: instead of watering down the experience for both newcomers and veterans of previous Mass Effect games, why not just give a brief description of each character in the Codex and an overview of their personal history, like you did in DA:O?
Assuming that bringing in old characters from Shepard's past will confuse and alienate new players, and restricting their role in the game for that reason, is a little too safe and a little misguided IMO.

Most kids wont start reading the codex when they can shoot aliens and get laid instead.

[Garuda One]

PetrySilva wrote...

Garuda One wrote...

I think people are being overly picky is because BioWare hasn't dones a three part game so people are over critiqueing it every chance they have. I, myself only have a few complaints myself but some people's issues and arguments on there complaints are just absurd to say the least.

The biggest issues I have in the game.

PLOT HOLES
-Ones everyone is at least bothered by it-
1.) Kaiden and Ashely wtf come out of no where after fighting a giant crab. Knowing them they should have done something anything then just start ****ing in my face.
2.) Liara at her telemarketing job, I'm sorry her personaility should not have gone that bad in two years, espically for an Asari and one delivery boy quest? wtf.
3.) The entire crew leaves the Normandy for no reason so the plot can continue. Come on now.
4.) Planet Scanning, for the love of god don't ever do it again. God I hate planet scanning.

Things that bothered me personally.
4.) Terminator End Boss, really? Giant Man Eatting Robot Fetus>Terminator
5.) I would have enjoyed seeing the minor things I did in Mass Effect have a bigger impact or at least see them instead of having my eyes bleed trying to read there email. BioWare don't even think making the font bigger in the email will resolve the issue. I'd like to see and meet all of the minor characters. God my eyes hurt.

6.) On a personal note, I would have like to have seen the Rachni wtf own some mercs or had some sort of bigger role in Mass Effect 2 even though there trying to rebuild their race and fight the Reapers with us. Id like to see one come threw a wall and bite a merc head off, turn around salute me and then go threw the other wall.

Thats it honestly, when playing a BioWare game I expect a good story, going into Mass Effect 2 and saw such terrible plot holes and such I nerd rage, hard. Gameplay is good, characters are good, ect.

Did I mention my eyes hurt everytime I even look in the direction of the emails?

Also if Mass Effect 3 is going to be another stand alone, I might wait until I get a used copy or see peoples opinions on it. Mass Effect 2, yeah fine. I completely understand Mass Effect 2 being a stand alone game, that way people won't have to do as much or even spend as much to get Mass Effect and if they want play it and change their characters, give more depth. But I think at a end of an series they shouldn't make it stand alone. If you didn't bother with the first two games then why bother with the third?

Cry me a river:devil:

Why... why are you so mean

[AngryFrozenWater]

Vena_86 wrote...

Mr. MannlyMan wrote...

I have a question: instead of watering down the experience for both newcomers and veterans of previous Mass Effect games, why not just give a brief description of each character in the Codex and an overview of their personal history, like you did in DA:O?
Assuming that bringing in old characters from Shepard's past will confuse and alienate new players, and restricting their role in the game for that reason, is a little too safe and a little misguided IMO.

Most kids wont start reading the codex when they can shoot aliens and get laid instead.

If that is true and they don't care about the details then BioWare could have made ME a true trilogy. Those kids wouldn't know the difference anyway.

BTW... Why do kids play this game? I thought it was intended for 18 years and older.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 21 avril 2010 - 08:09 .

[Jade Elf]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

BTW... Why do kids play this game? I thought it was intended for 18 years and older.

Nope. Not in Europe, in any case. It's 15+ or 16+, depending on the country.

[Dick Delaware]

Garuda One wrote...

I think people are being overly picky is because BioWare hasn't dones a three part game so people are over critiqueing it every chance they have. I, myself only have a few complaints myself but some people's issues and arguments on there complaints are just absurd to say the least.

The biggest issues I have in the game.

PLOT HOLES
-Ones everyone is at least bothered by it-
1.) Kaiden and Ashely wtf come out of no where after fighting a giant crab. Knowing them they should have done something anything then just start ****ing in my face.
2.) Liara at her telemarketing job, I'm sorry her personaility should not have gone that bad in two years, espically for an Asari and one delivery boy quest? wtf.
3.) The entire crew leaves the Normandy for no reason so the plot can continue. Come on now.
4.) Planet Scanning, for the love of god don't ever do it again. God I hate planet scanning.

Things that bothered me personally.
4.) Terminator End Boss, really? Giant Man Eatting Robot Fetus>Terminator
5.) I would have enjoyed seeing the minor things I did in Mass Effect have a bigger impact or at least see them instead of having my eyes bleed trying to read there email. BioWare don't even think making the font bigger in the email will resolve the issue. I'd like to see and meet all of the minor characters. God my eyes hurt.

6.) On a personal note, I would have like to have seen the Rachni wtf own some mercs or had some sort of bigger role in Mass Effect 2 even though there trying to rebuild their race and fight the Reapers with us. Id like to see one come threw a wall and bite a merc head off, turn around salute me and then go threw the other wall.

Thats it honestly, when playing a BioWare game I expect a good story, going into Mass Effect 2 and saw such terrible plot holes and such I nerd rage, hard. Gameplay is good, characters are good, ect.

Did I mention my eyes hurt everytime I even look in the direction of the emails?

See folks, this is a perfect example of a legitimate, nuanced critique of what could be changed in ME3. It cuts right into the main issues and ignores irrelevant issues.  As for #3 on your list, I'm pretty sure that there was supposed to be some content there that would explain this, but it was cut beforehand.

Garuda One wrote...
Also if Mass Effect 3 is going to be another stand alone, I might
wait until I get a used copy or see peoples opinions on it. Mass Effect
2, yeah fine. I completely understand Mass Effect 2 being a stand alone
game, that way people won't have to do as much or even spend as much to
get Mass Effect and if they want play it and change their characters,
give more depth. But I think at a end of an series they shouldn't make
it stand alone. If you didn't bother with the first two games then why
bother with the third?

In 12 pages of thread unfortunately, nobody has defined the word "stand alone".

www.techterms.com/definition/standalone

Standalone - Standalone can also refer to a software program that does not require any software other than the operating system to run. This means that most software programs are standalone programs. Software such as plug-ins and expansion packs for video games are not standalone programs since they will not run unless a certain program is already installed.

Well duh, of course ME3 is going to be standalone. This means that you don't need the other two games to play it. This should be obvious to anyone here why BioWare would do this. When have you ever heard of a video game sequel or third installment that required the original to play? Making the game standalone is not mutually exclusive with having a lot of diverging consequences based on your choices in the first two games.

Does that mean we should suddenly start trusting every word out of a dev's mouth in an interview? Absolutely not. But at the same time, it's hardly grounds for the kind of hysteria I'm seeing in this thread.

I find it more likely that ME3 is going to include deeper consequences for your actions if you are importing a character than ME2 did. Why? Well, since it's going to be the finale, they don't have to worry about screwing up the continuity. Because they already have an established base of many people due to the success of the first two games, there is less pressure to flirt with the casual market on the finale (for a similar example, look at the difference in quality from Neverwinter Nights 2 to Mask of the Betrayer), so theoretically they are more free to make whatever they want. Lastly, since they are likely going to be using the same engine and core gameplay mechanics, this inspires confidence that much work will be done on quest design, dialogue, and branching choices and consequences.

I'm sure it's certainly possible that carryover is going to be just as cosmetic as it was in the first game, and we should certainly let the devs know we'll be voting with our wallets, but many of you are gettting wound up over nothing.

Modifié par Dick Delaware, 22 avril 2010 - 12:10 .

[Darth Drago]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

Thanks for the link Terror_K. This is all bad news. We were promised a trilogy and not 3 stand alone franchise titles. What a crap. I need to think about this.

-I’m thinking it might be a better idea to spend the price of the strategy guide for ME3 than the actual game if they stick to this “stand alone” idea BS. Or at least look at it to see how the game ends.

Lets see, spend $60 for a game that already doesn’t sound that great or about $20 on a guide book to get all the info on the quests and find out about the ending that way?

[-Skorpious-]

The negativity is this thread is more oppressive than Niftu Cal's great biotic wind.
Since it is obviously unrealistic (not to mention impossible) to expect Bioware capable of pleasing every fan of ME; why don't we all simply spend our time advocating for changes we would like to see in ME3 instead of complaining about ME2's flaws? ME2 has come and gone - no use complaining about a finished product.

Bioware has proved that that they listen to fan feedback (stale combat, cumbersome inventory, ect) and is perfectly capable of listening to us again. Granted, I do believe that some of their changes were a bit extreme or unnecessary, but I am going to let Bioware know as a consumer what I would like to see in their products.

Maybe they listen, maybe they don't, but at least I'm being a hell of a lot more productive than crying over changes I do not approve of. Let Bioware know what improvements you believe will make ME3 a better game; constantly pointing out flaws without offering solutions is rather pointless in my opinion. 

Modifié par -Skorpious-, 22 avril 2010 - 12:40 .

[TJSolo]

-Skorpious- wrote...

The negativity is this thread is more oppressive than Niftu Cal's great biotic wind.
Since it is obviously unrealistic (not to mention impossible) to expect Bioware capable of pleasing every fan of ME; why don't we all simply spend our time advocating for changes we would like to see in ME3 instead of complaining about ME2's flaws? ME2 has come and gone - no use complaining about a finished product.
...
Maybe they listen, maybe they don't, but at least I'm being a hell of a lot more productive than crying over changes I may not approve of.

What is the productive difference between talking about the known product, ME2 vs the unknown ME3?
Some of the talk about ME2 can be addressed via DLC; extra guns, content, and such.
While something as grand as gameplay no matter if it is specfically addressed as a ME3 still is taken in by Bioware and possibly addressed in ME3.
Talking about ME2 or ME3 both have the same result. Bioware possibly reading and possibly making adjustments in ME3 accordingly.
You are no more productive talking spefically about ME3 than someone talking about ME2.

[-Skorpious-]

I apologize for being vague - gameplay, armor pieces, DLC suggestions and the like can obviously be included in ME2. My main concern are the amount of threads complaining about "character X was handled terribly, ME3 is going to suck" or "ME3 will be a TPS with no RPG elements" are not productive, as usually the thread creator offers no positive solution to the problem.

I was merely asking forum members to create threads that address specific issues they had with ME/ME2 with intentions of providing productive solutions that they feel will ultimately make ME3 a better game.

Perhaps I may have been a bit extreme with my first post, but the message is still the same.

Modifié par -Skorpious-, 22 avril 2010 - 01:06 .

[phimseto]

Love your sig, TJSolo. Commentary on ME2 is commentary on ME3, specifically pro and cons points about the direction of the new game.



For me, though, the one thing I wanted in ME3 was a story that strived first and foremost to shape itself deeply around the choices of the first two games. Most of the follow-up in ME2 was superficial. It bothered me a bit, but I lived with it. If Bioware does the same thing with ME3, I'm going to feel like a got suckered by a used car dealer. I enjoyed both ME1 and ME2, but I've been tagging along for them to make a true trilogy, not a series of affiliated follow-ups.

[Darth Drago]

-Skorpious- wrote...

I apologize for being vague - gameplay, armor pieces, DLC suggestions and the like can obviously be included in ME2. My main concern are the amount of threads complaining about "character X was handled terribly, ME3 is going to suck" or "ME3 will be a TPS with no RPG elements" are not productive, as usually the thread creator offers no positive solution to the problem.

I was merely asking forum members to create threads that address specific issues they had with ME/ME2 with intentions of providing productive solutions that they feel will ultimately make ME3 a better game.

Perhaps I may have been a bit extreme with my first post, but the message is still the same.

-Several problems with individual threads centered around a single issue.

1. Go to the Spoilers Forum and count all the character specific “support” threads and how they cluster up the forum. No one can even create a new topic thread there and hope to keep it on the first 2 pages unless it’s a mega hit. Now times all those “support” topics with as many individual issues in ME2 that many of have.
2. Lurking Trolls. Almost every time someone posts something that apparently go against the mob mentality here on how godlike BioWare is. They get slammed with trolls armed with their massive amount of crap comments and pictures. Nothing says a waste of time to continue with a thread when its 75% full of BS comments attacking the original topic.
3. Flaming into a Lockdown. It wont take long before a thread gets into a full fledged flame war and it gets Mod locked. This usually goes hand in hand with no.2 above. I even suspect that some people go out of their way to do this to get rid of a topic.
4. So many to read and no time to read them all. Anyone in the ME developer team would be nuts to try and come in here to hunt down and read all of the individual issue threads. That alone would defeat the purpose.
　
As for the “standalone” issue, just reread the question and reply.

“Q: Mass Effect 3 was announced some time ago. But your work on ME2 showed that while the decision structure carried over, the story itself is fairly separate from the first game. Why is that?
A: All of the the Mass Effect titles standalone. The beginning of Mass Effect 2 is really meant to let players experience Mass Effect for the first time. We really want to look at Mass Effect 3 as a standalone title where the ending is going to feel satisfying.”

That sounds like they are just making a series of games like Tomb Raider, Final Fantasy or something. His own words “The beginning of Mass Effect 2 is really meant to let players experience Mass Effect for the first time.” So we can expect ME3 to be just the same. Why wouldn’t we now? It almost sounds like they (BioWare) don’t want to have anything to do with the first game.

I personally don’t want to go through ME3 relearning the stuff I already know from playing the first 2 games. I had enough of that crap in ME2.

Oh please tell me about the genophage, or the migrant fleets political structure or the pilgrimage or Cerberus for the third time.

Modifié par Darth Drago, 22 avril 2010 - 01:53 .