92 réponses à ce sujet

[borelocin]

I hope that in ME3 Conrad gets eaten by the Rachni I spared in ME1

[megatron999]

Its a load of crap claiming that bioware wanted to introduce new gamers too Mass effect.



For new players jut have default settings with some minor hints to ME1 such as sparring the Rachni or leaving council to die etc...



I suppose in ME2 the game comes away from the council and citadel area quite a bit and you take on a rogue attitude.

[mosor]

A lot of choices shouldn't matter. There is only so much one person can effect the universe, even Commander Sheppard.

[Annihilator27]

I hope alot more choices are accounted for instead of "making" another seqeul for the new crowd. It would be hilarious to see no pros or cons on whether if you kept the collector base or not.

[Mayson02]

I remember playing Leisure Suit Larry when I was younger. You could sleep with a prostitute, but, if you didn't use a "rubber", at some point later in the story you died no matter what.



Would the consequences system be better if something you did in ME1, meant you always died in ME2 or ME3? That would be the easiest way to implement them. Someone said it before, adding a lot of divergent story lines would make it impossible to make the game.



The best you can hope for is something that most would consider just "fanservice". Anything more than just mentioning something that happened before in passing would probably be prohibitively expensive.

annihilator27 wrote...



I hope alot more choices are accounted for instead of "making" another seqeul for the new crowd. It would be hilarious to see no pros or cons on whether if you kept the collector base or not.

I bet, as others have said, ME3 will be all about gathering the other races together in a big fleet to fight the collectors. If you kept the Reaper base, then one of the factions comes to your aid armed with Reaper tech.



Depending on how Bioware decides to play it, the final ending scene in the game will be altered to show more or less death scenes(similar to how loyalty only changed the ending in ME2, but nothing else). Less death scenes if they decide Reaper Tech helps. More if they decide that the Reapers always leave their base around every "generation" so that they can furher push the sentient races to develop tech that they can easily defeat.

[Niddy']

rynluna wrote...

Well they want to make ME3 accessible to new gamers so I'm afraid decisions aren't going to have a huge impact there as well.

ghaay

[megatron999]

I think at least some of them will.

One major change is on tchunka if you kill Wrex on vermirer then his brother takes over and hates you alot. They could do it so he takes a contract out on your life in ME3

[InvaderErl]

Mayson02 wrote...

I remember playing Leisure Suit Larry when I was younger. You could sleep with a prostitute, but, if you didn't use a "rubber", at some point later in the story you died no matter what.

Would the consequences system be better if something you did in ME1, meant you always died in ME2 or ME3? That would be the easiest way to implement them. Someone said it before, adding a lot of divergent story lines would make it impossible to make the game.

The best you can hope for is something that most would consider just "fanservice". Anything more than just mentioning something that happened before in passing would probably be prohibitively expensive.

annihilator27 wrote...

I hope alot more choices are accounted for instead of "making" another seqeul for the new crowd. It would be hilarious to see no pros or cons on whether if you kept the collector base or not.

I bet, as others have said, ME3 will be all about gathering the other races together in a big fleet to fight the collectors. If you kept the Reaper base, then one of the factions comes to your aid armed with Reaper tech.

Depending on how Bioware decides to play it, the final ending scene in the game will be altered to show more or less death scenes(similar to how loyalty only changed the ending in ME2, but nothing else). Less death scenes if they decide Reaper Tech helps. More if they decide that the Reapers always leave their base around every "generation" so that they can furher push the sentient races to develop tech that they can easily defeat.

I think this post bears repeating.

[Onyx Jaguar]

*jumps back in*



You guys do realize that this is all marketing speak and that code for a "trilogy" translates to "We couldn't write a coherent enough plot with one game of resources so we spaced it out into multiple games hoping the first one was a success"



They are all stand alone, having games that are soley dependent on previous games is stupid.

[InvaderErl]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

They are all stand alone, having games that are soley dependent on previous games is stupid.

Well said.

I remember some people even going so far as to suggest the game be unplayable without a ME1 save. The day Bioware does something like that they might as well just call it in.

Modifié par InvaderErl, 05 juin 2010 - 05:43 .

[Vaenier]

dont call them games, call them "expansion packs containing 40 hours of new gameplay". then you can make them completely dependent on having saves from older games.

[InvaderErl]

A lot of people have a the glass is half empty approach.

[megatron999]

No your all completely wrong:

It is possible for Bioware to make ME1-2-3 all linked in some way and that your decisions will directly affect the entire game.



It doesn't necessarily whether you have saves or not you just have default settings so for example:

ME3 everyone survives

Gave base to cerberaus

Let patriarch get killed

let hostages burn to death in Zaeeds mission

etc...



You see my point? It would have been simple for Bioware to have made some variations in the game based on decisions you may have made.

[Revan312]

Jeirt wrote...

InvaderErl wrote...
A lot of people have a the glass is half empty approach.

Haha, me too. And sometimes, it's justified. However, I think some people should give the devs more credit here. Yes, the game isn't perfect, and some things could've been improved, but this is their story, so we should let them tell it they way they intend to.

We can, of course, whine into their ears until they fall over and obey our every word drop them some hints on how to improve certain things here and there, but it's up to them to pick them up or leave them be.

Now normally I would agree to the that bit of text, but there is no excuse for the Contra boss at the end and the just terribly paced and convoluted spinoff feel this game had.  The main story arch of ME2 was oh so underwhelming which I attribute to bad writing/wandering off into the wilderness. 

ME1 was pretty tight and moved along a set progression that never strayed far.  But ME2 had me doing step and fetch missions for people to make sure they were "loyal" to me?  On a suicide mission?  "Well the only way I'm gonna work hard and try not to die or let the mission go to hell is by you solving my identity crisis/daddy issues"  Which was most of the game.  By the end I had nearly forgotten that there even was a main threat and that this wasn't a "friendship" sim game. *shrugs*

Creative license only goes so far to me if your charging a fee and making promises that you can't keep, which Bioware did plenty of.  Hyperbolic is the word I should use to describe the write ups and lead in interviews prior to ME2's launch.  Really I've only myself to blame for buying into it and pre-ordering the game but really, so much of what the devs said was overblown rhetoric.  Remember the little gem "They're almost like planet toys!" "You kind of tease open a really cool location for you to land at".  Really, because to me it seemed like a time wasting mini non-game that had only one place to land at per landable planet, which wasn't many.

Concerning the question of the thread, I'm not gonna hold my breath on the decision carry over mechanic being anymore "in depth" than this installment's.   I'm expecting the worst so then I won't be disappointed and if it does turn out to be amazing, then it will be a pleasent surprise. 

[InvaderErl]

I hate to say this to somebody who likes Farscape (WOOT) but I completely disagree with everything that you said.

I knew going in that a good chunk of the plot was going to be devoted to the party. A huge part of Bioware's marketing scheme was built on showing the new squad off and selling the idea of recruiting and then making your team ready for the suicide mission, even moreso than dealing with the Reapers. Now personally I found that more engaging than ME1's plot (which honestly fit the Bioware formula to such a T, its not even funny), but they made the increased focus on the squad clear from the start.

And they oversold the first Mass Effect probably even moreso than they did with 2, its just what game companies do.

Modifié par InvaderErl, 05 juin 2010 - 10:07 .

[Revan312]

InvaderErl wrote...

I hate to say this to somebody who likes Farscape (WOOT) but I completely disagree with everything that you said.

I knew going in that a good chunk of the plot was going to be devoted to the party. A huge part of Bioware's marketing scheme was built on showing the new squad off and selling the idea of recruiting and then making your team ready for the suicide mission, even moreso than dealing with the Reapers. Now personally I found that more engaging than ME1's plot (which honestly fit the Bioware formula to such a T, its not even funny), but they made the increased focus on the squad clear from the start.

And they oversold the first Mass Effect probably even moreso than they did with 2, its just what game companies do.

Ah, another scaper aye?  Sweet, theres not enough of us around.

About your post, yes, I knew this was going to be about the squad and the relationships of the characters, but that was never done well or even came close to being fleshed out. 

Lemme use Farscape as an example.  Think about the amount of characterization that each individual had within that story.  From backstories to inter-ship relationships, from betrayals to reconciliations, reunions, arguments, fighting, votes, discussions, explenations etc.  There were so many character driven events and relationships within that show that it felt realistic as far as the emotions and motivations of the characters are concerned.  I understood why they did what they did and how each one felt, I knew what had made them into what they are and why they had the problems they had.  Each character wasn't just a self contained bubble of interaction in Farscape, they all had impact on each other and because of that, the story organically evolved.

ME2 toted itself as a character driven story (although I'd argue it was the plot that formulated the basis for any and all motivations) but none of the individuals had any meaning outside of their self-contained little universes.  It was a bunch of clinical character vignettes.  Bringing one character along on anothers loyalty or recruitment mission meant absolutely nothing.  Like bringing Jack along on Miranda's sister mission, it had zero impact or even any dialogue from Jack besides a single snotty line at the end.  I wish she would have refused or you would have had them talk it out, have the relationship evolve for good or bad.  Instead we see small snippets in conversations that take the place of actual characterization and interaction.

Basically what I'm saying is, I had zero connection to these people.  By the end of Farscape I was really connected to all of the characters, even the bad guys as they as well had there own motivations, dreams, hopes and wishes fleshed out at least partially (Scorpius especially) but ME2 had none of that, it put cliches into a universe that revolved around shepard and left him to try and systematically gain their "loyalty" which amounted to solving a personal problem at a time of supposed "peril" for the galaxy. 

If it had really went in depth with these people and tried hard to show you the characters and who they truly are, if it had more interaction between them and not just Shepard interrogating them about basic run of the mill attributes concerning there lives, then ya, I would have been happy with the story taking on a character driven focus.  But as it stands, all of it felt flat and shallow and so too did the plot.  They took on too much by trying to completely revamp the gameplay mechanics, introduce a slew of new characters, form a brand new threat and try and juggle it all under the umbrella of the first game. 

As I've said before, I'm hoping they found their "sweet spot" in gameplay and have essentially the full character roster and will now JUST focus on the story arch and characters.