137 réponses à ce sujet

[kraidy1117]

Nightwriter wrote...

Valcutio wrote...

Massadonious1 wrote...

If decisions like this were panifully blatant, it would completely ruin whatever immersion there was.

There are some things you shouldn't be able to metagame.

If that was the case then it should have been more prevalent in Mass Efffect 1 and used for other things in Mass Effect 2. Instead it's used, seriously,  1 time. 1 time in 2 games.

It's like saying, "Surprise! We've sprung a new gameplay mechanic on you during the last hour of a 50+ hour epic RPG that will deeply impact your game in Mass Effect 3."

All I'm asking is to be made aware. They could have easily done it in a conversation with Jacon or Miranda. Did they hint? Yeah. "They're in trouble! But we should still build up our team! But they might die!" - You know what that tells me? Nothing. Those hints are used for everything in this and every other game. The difference is that we've never been punished for doing side quests before the final mission of a game before.

Kinda like suddenly being on the Normandy and controlling Joker? I thought that was so weird first time through. I'd played Shepard consistently through two games and I simply did not expect it.

Nightwriter, remember the sugestion I said for how that scene could have went? Would you have liked it better if Bioware did that?

[Valcutio]

Tarisln wrote...
 And no, that wasn't hindsight or forknowledge on my part (or, presumably, most other peoples'), We just made sure to get everybody ready before getting the last peice of the puzzle needed to jump through the Omega-4 relay.

How'd you know it was the last piece of the puzzle, as you put it? Maybe you also needed a super biotic barrier key. Maybe you needed a collector body-suit. Maybe the collector's nuke a nearby planet and you have to go rescue people before continuing.

There's a difference between assuming in the real world and assuming in a game world. In the real world, it's strategically sound to be ready before getting the "final piece of the puzzle" - in a game world, you don't know how many "levels" there are. For example, you didn't know the collector's were going to board the normandy and steal the crew. There's another "level".

Your point is moot.

[kraidy1117]

Valcutio wrote...

Tarisln wrote...
 And no, that wasn't hindsight or forknowledge on my part (or, presumably, most other peoples'), We just made sure to get everybody ready before getting the last peice of the puzzle needed to jump through the Omega-4 relay.

How'd you know it was the last piece of the puzzle, as you put it? Maybe you also needed a super biotic barrier key. Maybe you needed a collector body-suit. Maybe the collector's nuke a nearby planet and you have to go rescue people before continuing.

There's a difference between assuming in the real world and assuming in a game world. In the real world, it's strategically sound to be ready before getting the "final piece of the puzzle" - in a game world, you don't know how many "levels" there are. For example, you didn't know the collector's were going to board the normandy and steal the crew. There's another "level".

Your point is moot.

No it's not, I followed ME2 since it was announced and it was always this "Shepard can die if your not prepared" so I made sure I was prepared before i got the IFF. The IFF was the thing we needed to get to the Base. I put it togther and what do you know, I was right.

[Nightwriter]

kraidy1117 wrote...

Nightwriter, remember the sugestion I said for how that scene could have went? Would you have liked it better if Bioware did that?

No, what was the suggestion? Refresh my memory.

[Valcutio]

kraidy1117 wrote...

Valcutio wrote...

Tarisln wrote...
 And no, that wasn't hindsight or forknowledge on my part (or, presumably, most other peoples'), We just made sure to get everybody ready before getting the last peice of the puzzle needed to jump through the Omega-4 relay.

How'd you know it was the last piece of the puzzle, as you put it? Maybe you also needed a super biotic barrier key. Maybe you needed a collector body-suit. Maybe the collector's nuke a nearby planet and you have to go rescue people before continuing.

There's a difference between assuming in the real world and assuming in a game world. In the real world, it's strategically sound to be ready before getting the "final piece of the puzzle" - in a game world, you don't know how many "levels" there are. For example, you didn't know the collector's were going to board the normandy and steal the crew. There's another "level".

Your point is moot.

No it's not, I followed ME2 since it was announced and it was always this "Shepard can die if your not prepared" so I made sure I was prepared before i got the IFF. The IFF was the thing we needed to get to the Base. I put it togther and what do you know, I was right.

The difference between what you and I did was this - you did the sidequests before the IFF mission (grats). I did the sidequests before the last suicide mission. We were both "ready".

That's it. That's the difference. Of course, there was no way you heard all of Legion's conversations during that playthrough (unless it happened after the ending).

[kraidy1117]

Nightwriter wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

Nightwriter, remember the sugestion I said for how that scene could have went? Would you have liked it better if Bioware did that?

No, what was the suggestion? Refresh my memory.

Shepard and co go to a planet because they got a measage from a survior of a Collector attack, they go there and it turns out to be a trap. Shepard and co fight off Colectors, then Joker radios in and says "we are being atatcked" then it cuts to Joker and you play him.

I enjoyed the Joker part, it was just handled poorly.

[Nivenus]

Is it so hard to believe (myself concluded) that some people rightly suspected that there would be a time limit between the IFF and going to Omega and got prepared before heading for the former? Hell, I believed the IFF might initiate the end game immediately, like Ilos.

[Nightwriter]

kraidy1117 wrote...

Shepard and co go to a planet because they got a measage from a survior of a Collector attack, they go there and it turns out to be a trap. Shepard and co fight off Colectors, then Joker radios in and says "we are being atatcked" then it cuts to Joker and you play him.

I enjoyed the Joker part, it was just handled poorly.

Oh yes! Now I remember. Yeah, that would've been superb.

Not only would it have provided an explanation for why the whole crew had to leave, it would also provide transition into moving from Shepard's character to Joker's.

[kraidy1117]

Nivenus wrote...

Is it so hard to believe (myself concluded) that some people rightly suspected that there would be a time limit between the IFF and going to Omega and got prepared before heading for the former? Hell, I believed the IFF might initiate the end game immediately, like Ilos.

I suspected that Bioware might do it. Thats why I took my time.

[kraidy1117]

Nightwriter wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

Shepard and co go to a planet because they got a measage from a survior of a Collector attack, they go there and it turns out to be a trap. Shepard and co fight off Colectors, then Joker radios in and says "we are being atatcked" then it cuts to Joker and you play him.

I enjoyed the Joker part, it was just handled poorly.

Oh yes! Now I remember. Yeah, that would've been superb.

Not only would it have provided an explanation for why the whole crew had to leave, it would also provide transition into moving from Shepard's character to Joker's.

My reason Shepard left. Him and his squad went to afterlife and bought every one drinks and dances.

[askanec]

Massadonious1 wrote...

If decisions like this were panifully blatant, it would completely ruin whatever immersion there was.

There are some things you shouldn't be able to metagame.

Immersion should not become the be-all, end-all of game design. If it has to be broken so players can make informed decisions, then it should be broken, especially if the consequences of the decisions are only found much later and the player probably would have overwritten an earlier save.

[kraidy1117]

askanec wrote...

Massadonious1 wrote...

If decisions like this were panifully blatant, it would completely ruin whatever immersion there was.

There are some things you shouldn't be able to metagame.

Immersion should not become the be-all, end-all of game design. If it has to be broken so players can make informed decisions, then it should be broken, especially if the consequences of the decisions are only found much later and the player probably would have overwritten an earlier save.

Thats your fault. Why should I be pounshed because somep layers don't know to make diffrent saves <_<

[Nightwriter]

askanec wrote...

Massadonious1 wrote...

If decisions like this were panifully blatant, it would completely ruin whatever immersion there was.

There are some things you shouldn't be able to metagame.

Immersion should not become the be-all, end-all of game design. If it has to be broken so players can make informed decisions, then it should be broken, especially if the consequences of the decisions are only found much later and the player probably would have overwritten an earlier save.

Good post. I completely agree.

[Massadonious1]

Eh, I never said it should be the complete package, but it should be a part of it.



Being able to critically think about the clues that would lead up to such an event is much better than "If you do one extra mission, half your crew would die, if you do more than one mission, your entire crew will die. Would you like to go now? 1. Yes. 2. No."



If the conversation choices were based around the presumption that such things could happen, then I wouldn't mind it, but to blatantly put it out there like that is a bit extreme. If I wanted to play games like that, I would fire up my Commodore 64.

[Valcutio]

Massadonious1 wrote...

Eh, I never said it should be the complete package, but it should be a part of it.

Being able to critically think about the clues that would lead up to such an event is much better than "If you do one extra mission, half your crew would die, if you do more than one mission, your entire crew will die. Would you like to go now? 1. Yes. 2. No."

If the conversation choices were based around the presumption that such things could happen, then I wouldn't mind it, but to blatantly put it out there like that is a bit extreme. If I wanted to play games like that, I would fire up my Commodore 64.

Nobody is asking for that. But being told your crew is in danger means nothing. They need to stress that if you don't go RIGHT NOW or at most after one more mission, your crew will die. Period. They need to emphasize it and make it understood that this time is different than all the other "this mission is dire" hints.

Look at all the loyalty quests.. NONE of them are time sensative.

You can keep immersion and still be alerted to this game mechanic.

[Nivenus]

kraidy1117 wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

Nightwriter, remember the sugestion I said for how that scene could have went? Would you have liked it better if Bioware did that?

No, what was the suggestion? Refresh my memory.

Shepard and co go to a planet because they got a measage from a survior of a Collector attack, they go there and it turns out to be a trap. Shepard and co fight off Colectors, then Joker radios in and says "we are being atatcked" then it cuts to Joker and you play him.

I enjoyed the Joker part, it was just handled poorly.

I agree. I loved the Joker bit and EDI's wry little comments, but the setup was handled kind of clumsily in the story. They should have made it clear exactly where Shepard was heading and faked us out for a few minutes before dropping the "ladida - oh, frakk - a Collector ship!" part.

[kraidy1117]

Nivenus wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

Nightwriter, remember the sugestion I said for how that scene could have went? Would you have liked it better if Bioware did that?

No, what was the suggestion? Refresh my memory.

Shepard and co go to a planet because they got a measage from a survior of a Collector attack, they go there and it turns out to be a trap. Shepard and co fight off Colectors, then Joker radios in and says "we are being atatcked" then it cuts to Joker and you play him.

I enjoyed the Joker part, it was just handled poorly.

I agree. I loved the Joker bit and EDI's wry little comments, but the setup was handled kind of clumsily in the story. They should have made it clear exactly where Shepard was heading and faked us out for a few minutes before dropping the "ladida - oh, frakk - a Collector ship!" part.

"What the sh*t!"

[Rhofan]

http://www.collegehu...m/video:1923420

Modifié par Rhofan, 06 mai 2010 - 07:29 .

[AmstradHero]

OP: I wholeheartedly disagree with you for a number of reasons.

It was stated, repeatedly, that you "should be ready" before going to get the IFF.  TIM states this, Miranda does too, and you are given a dialog choice as well to indicate that this is a fairly considerable decision to be making.  To me, the only way it could have been made more obvious would be to (as you have suggested) have been to explicitly state (either before the IFF or immediately after) that people will die if you don't go.  However, that is a horrible idea.

"Why?" I hear you ask.  What possible reason would any of the crew members have for knowing that information?  How can you possibly know what the collectors are going to do with them? Admittedly, no other "time mechanic" equivalent exists in the game, but this consequence is not a bad thing.  You were given plenty of warning signs, you just didn't heed them.

The reason you're complaining is because it is a new meta-gaming concept that you weren't aware of.  BioWare is trying to create a "realistic" storyline that feels more organic.  I personally love the fact that I will "suffer" (although losing the crew has no real effect on the game anyway) because I don't heed the suggestions that I need to be ready before I visit the IFF.

I love "winning" and having a happy ending at the end of an RPG, but I love having to work for it.  Having to pick up on all the subtle clues keeps a morally good player on edge fearing that they might make a mistake with dire consequences for someone.  I didn't get an entirely happy ending at the end of Dragon Age Awakenings, but I respect the game for that (aside from the fact that one or two entries seemed erroneous, but that's another issue), as it means that I have to wear the results of the actions I've made.

You'll no doubt argue that you didn't "make" a choice, because you didn't know they were going to suffer - but that is the inherent beauty of the situation in making the universe feel more like a living game world rather than a mostly static environment. Perhaps i'm just not as much of a fan of min/maxing and meta-gaming, but I appreciate it - because there were clues that could be consequences if you weren't ready before you hit the IFF.

[Lunatic LK47]

AmstradHero wrote...

OP: I wholeheartedly disagree with you for a number of reasons.

It was stated, repeatedly, that you "should be ready" before going to get the IFF.  TIM states this, Miranda does too, and you are given a dialog choice as well to indicate that this is a fairly considerable decision to be making.  To me, the only way it could have been made more obvious would be to (as you have suggested) have been to explicitly state (either before the IFF or immediately after) that people will die if you don't go.  However, that is a horrible idea.

"Why?" I hear you ask.  What possible reason would any of the crew members have for knowing that information?  How can you possibly know what the collectors are going to do with them? Admittedly, no other "time mechanic" equivalent exists in the game, but this consequence is not a bad thing.  You were given plenty of warning signs, you just didn't heed them.

The reason you're complaining is because it is a new meta-gaming concept that you weren't aware of.  BioWare is trying to create a "realistic" storyline that feels more organic.  I personally love the fact that I will "suffer" (although losing the crew has no real effect on the game anyway) because I don't heed the suggestions that I need to be ready before I visit the IFF.

I love "winning" and having a happy ending at the end of an RPG, but I love having to work for it.  Having to pick up on all the subtle clues keeps a morally good player on edge fearing that they might make a mistake with dire consequences for someone.  I didn't get an entirely happy ending at the end of Dragon Age Awakenings, but I respect the game for that (aside from the fact that one or two entries seemed erroneous, but that's another issue), as it means that I have to wear the results of the actions I've made.

You'll no doubt argue that you didn't "make" a choice, because you didn't know they were going to suffer - but that is the inherent beauty of the situation in making the universe feel more like a living game world rather than a mostly static environment. Perhaps i'm just not as much of a fan of min/maxing and meta-gaming, but I appreciate it - because there were clues that could be consequences if you weren't ready before you hit the IFF.

Ding ding ding. I'm happy with the current system that ME2 handled for this situation, and if it were done any other way, I'd feel it to be as stupid as saying "Rush into a mission without having good weapons and equipment or face WMD threats just for having the good equipment."

[Valcutio]

AmstradHero wrote...

OP: I wholeheartedly disagree with you for a number of reasons.

It was stated, repeatedly, that you "should be ready" before going to get the IFF.  TIM states this, Miranda does too, and you are given a dialog choice as well to indicate that this is a fairly considerable decision to be making.  To me, the only way it could have been made more obvious would be to (as you have suggested) have been to explicitly state (either before the IFF or immediately after) that people will die if you don't go.  However, that is a horrible idea.

"Why?" I hear you ask.  What possible reason would any of the crew members have for knowing that information?  How can you possibly know what the collectors are going to do with them? Admittedly, no other "time mechanic" equivalent exists in the game, but this consequence is not a bad thing.  You were given plenty of warning signs, you just didn't heed them.

The reason you're complaining is because it is a new meta-gaming concept that you weren't aware of.  BioWare is trying to create a "realistic" storyline that feels more organic.  I personally love the fact that I will "suffer" (although losing the crew has no real effect on the game anyway) because I don't heed the suggestions that I need to be ready before I visit the IFF.

I love "winning" and having a happy ending at the end of an RPG, but I love having to work for it.  Having to pick up on all the subtle clues keeps a morally good player on edge fearing that they might make a mistake with dire consequences for someone.  I didn't get an entirely happy ending at the end of Dragon Age Awakenings, but I respect the game for that (aside from the fact that one or two entries seemed erroneous, but that's another issue), as it means that I have to wear the results of the actions I've made.

You'll no doubt argue that you didn't "make" a choice, because you didn't know they were going to suffer - but that is the inherent beauty of the situation in making the universe feel more like a living game world rather than a mostly static environment. Perhaps i'm just not as much of a fan of min/maxing and meta-gaming, but I appreciate it - because there were clues that could be consequences if you weren't ready before you hit the IFF.

I appreciate your well-thought-out post. The problem is that it's the only part that's time sensative and you're not given any indication of that mechanic. If there was even a slight indication of such a game-changing mechanic being introduced, I wouldn't complain. There isn't.

You say they did this to be more realistic but the problem is that the rest of the game and all of part one isn't realistic in that case. You're saying this one mission is a great thing.. if that's the case then you must be terribly disappointed with the rest of the game. I'm not.

[Dougdh]

It appears that only you got caught unaware, you became complacent I believe is the proper word. You didn't expect them to actually mean that your crew was in danger when they said "Your crew is in danger.". Usually, when someone in-game or in real-life says "Are you sure you want to do that?' it means you might wanna think about it for a moment because it might be important. That would be your last heads-up/warning. Appearently, it went over your head, my friend. It's not a stupid game mechanic you were simply caught off-guard.

[Kissamies]

Heh, BioWare has been guilty of telling you to hurry and then allowing you to take all the time you want multiple times in the past. I don't like to be rushed, but if I am, it's better if the threat is real. Of course, I'm not so keen to replay story based games as some, so I tend to try to do everything the first time through. By the time I hit that IFF, I had already pretty much done everything else.



I wonder how they could make an actual time limit like in Star Control 2 work in these games. How would it affect the experience? Make it more intense or just frustrating?

[Sir Ulrich Von Lichenstien]

Lemonwizard wrote...

I still don't get why you can't just load a save right before the IFF.

This is what I was about to say, particular when I read the OPs comment about having to start from the very beginning again.

Unless the OP is one of those dimwitted people that doesn't save much in an rpg based game then you must surely have a save pre-IFF that isn't too far back.

In virtually all my playthroughs I tend to make a save just after doing the collector mission that I keep just so I can tinker with things.

What makes me laugh is how the OP talks about players being rewarded for being lazy. Have to wonder if he can see the hypocrisy in such a line.

Post-Horizon, TIM states that everyone needs to be focussed. Post-Collector Ship, Miranda states that everyone needs to be focussed and team built.

How many more times does that need drilling into peoples head before they get the message?

Gaining the loyalty of your crew isn't being lazy, it is a task that will help.

Yes, you can do the suicide mission with everyone coming out alive with just about 5 people loyal (was 4 pre-Kasumi) but that to some extent has to be specific people. The key fact is, all of this still needs to really be done pre-IFF or at least if going post-IFF you only should have a couple of things at most to tie up because you know that the crew gets abducted soon after getting the IFF.

One thing to point out, after the crew gets taken. If you haven't done everything Miranda and Jacob talk about what things still need fixing. It is mentioned that by delaying you could be risking the lives of the crew. Shepard gets the chance to state going after the crew or mission comes first. Miranda does also comment on the fact that the crew knew this could be a one way trip and that their lives could be in jeopardy. It's actually also mentioned when you do Grunt's recruitment mission in one of the dialogues how the crew is expendable.

[AmstradHero]

Valcutio wrote...
I appreciate your well-thought-out post. The problem is that it's the only part that's time sensative and you're not given any indication of that mechanic. If there was even a slight indication of such a game-changing mechanic being introduced, I wouldn't complain. There isn't.

You say they did this to be more realistic but the problem is that the rest of the game and all of part one isn't realistic in that case. You're saying this one mission is a great thing.. if that's the case then you must be terribly disappointed with the rest of the game. I'm not.

No, there wasn't an indication that was specifically time specific, but I still felt there were enough indications given that something else might have been in play.

I wasn't disappointed in the game.  I just thought this was a nice addition on top of the regular gameplay for most of it. I understand your annoyance but I thought it was an interesting twist. Differing opinions, I guess.