2338 réponses à ce sujet

[Wittand25]

PoliteAssasin wrote...
Actually, those are 5 unreasonable excuses. Why? Well first off - who in their right mind jumps into a trilogy at the third act? You can't do that and expect to know what's going on. I'm sorry, no matter what amount of dumbing down they could do, you wouldn't understand. I played Mass 1, but also started Mass 2 as a default character for my female shepard before I did a playthrough with her on Mass Effect 1, and the only thing that "helps" the player who jumped into the second act was the intro scene where your interrogated by Miranda. That's it. Psychological profile, Virmire decision, and then who joined the council. That was it. If I played the second game first, even with all of the introduction information, I still would be confused. You can't jump into a second or third act of a trilogy. The only reason Bioware made it where new players could come in is because they're not going to make it where you have to buy the 1st game in order to play the second, or the first two in order to play the third. And again, your saying that players who import their save would have an upper hand, that's a benefit, or consequence if you will, of playing the first two games. Simple as that.

-Polite

The fact that it will be hard to play ME3 to understand without a memory of ME1 and 2 does not mean that Bioware will make it even harder to understand. You and me are not the average player (no one on this forum is). Most of the future buyers of ME3 don´t still play the ME2/have played ME2/ more than twice/will be playing ME2 again before the launch of ME3or post in the forums. Like it or not the game has to be designed for the player who know next to nothing about the franchise. A game like ME3 is incredible expensive to produce and must appeal to biggest possible crowd.
And I did not say in that post that returning players have an advantage (that would be a good thing), but that new players have a disadvantage (that is a bad thing and not the same as the previous).

[Jaron Oberyn]

Wittand25 wrote...
 Like it or not the game has to be designed for the player who know next to nothing about the franchise. A game like ME3 is incredible expensive to produce and must appeal to biggest possible crowd.
And I did not say in that post that returning players have an advantage (that would be a good thing), but that new players have a disadvantage (that is a bad thing and not the same as the previous).

You must be playing a different game than the rest of us.

New players are already disadvantaged. Why? Because they don't get Wrex and the Rachni queen to help in the third game. Because they can't import a level 60 playthrough with all of it's perks, along with a fully complete mass effect playthrough. Saying that they would have to balance the game to be identical for both new and old players is nonsense.

-Polite

[Zulu_DFA]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

PoliteAssasin wrote...
Whoever you romance will be an important part of Mass 3.
-Polite

Yo, brothers! Behold! Polite & 4chan have just revealed the END SPOILER for ME3!!!





The Galaxy will be saved by the POWER OF LOVE!!!




Yeah, sure, why the yuck not? ME2 has already been a parody game, why not just go homage to another satire movie?

.

http://www.giantbomb...dson/35-382636/

malevolente: I hope I'm not spoiling anything for anyone, but the devs have stated that all squadmates (and Shepard) can die at the end of ME2. Or everyone can survive. And given that Ashley or Kaidan could die in ME, wouldn't that make having a squad in ME3 of any of the squadmates from both games (except Liara) difficult? Are you still considering this option, or is an entirely new squad likely to be present in ME3? I'm sure that putting ME2 and ME squadmates on the backburner for the final installment of...

CaseyH-ME2: Yes, it's definitely difficult to continue the fiction when we allow major characters to be **bleep**ed off by player actions. But, that's part of the fun, and the impact of major consequences. One reason that the love interests were not recruitable in ME2 (but are still part of the story) is that they need to be around for the ongoing story in ME3.

What now? Show me something that will counteract this. What do you have now?

-Polite

What exactly have I to counteract? Again in what Casey said there is ZERO indication that any of the ME2 squadmemebers will be in ME3 at all. For all we know, e-mails count as "major consequences" in Casey's books. And again, he speaks about ME1 LIs needing to be available post "suicide mission". He avoids speaking about ME2 characters. Can't you really see, that Casey is not answering the question he is being asked? He just repeats the same PR dpt. approved piece of stuff: Liara and Ashley/Kaidan are important and need to make it past the "suicide mission".

And again, one last time, on Ashley/Kaidan. This Siamese Twin can not die. Only one of its two heads is chopped off on Virmire, leaving exactly one head remaining in 100% saves, thus pushing the Virmire Survivor above the LCD. Of the ME2 squadmates only Legion, by a huge stretch, can make it.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 05 août 2010 - 07:06 .

[pvt_java]

Wittand25 wrote...

PoliteAssasin wrote...
Actually, those are 5 unreasonable excuses. Why? Well first off - who in their right mind jumps into a trilogy at the third act? You can't do that and expect to know what's going on. I'm sorry, no matter what amount of dumbing down they could do, you wouldn't understand. I played Mass 1, but also started Mass 2 as a default character for my female shepard before I did a playthrough with her on Mass Effect 1, and the only thing that "helps" the player who jumped into the second act was the intro scene where your interrogated by Miranda. That's it. Psychological profile, Virmire decision, and then who joined the council. That was it. If I played the second game first, even with all of the introduction information, I still would be confused. You can't jump into a second or third act of a trilogy. The only reason Bioware made it where new players could come in is because they're not going to make it where you have to buy the 1st game in order to play the second, or the first two in order to play the third. And again, your saying that players who import their save would have an upper hand, that's a benefit, or consequence if you will, of playing the first two games. Simple as that.

-Polite

The fact that it will be hard to play ME3 to understand without a memory of ME1 and 2 does not mean that Bioware will make it even harder to understand. You and me are not the average player (no one on this forum is). Most of the future buyers of ME3 don´t still play the ME2/have played ME2/ more than twice/will be playing ME2 again before the launch of ME3or post in the forums. Like it or not the game has to be designed for the player who know next to nothing about the franchise. A game like ME3 is incredible expensive to produce and must appeal to biggest possible crowd.
And I did not say in that post that returning players have an advantage (that would be a good thing), but that new players have a disadvantage (that is a bad thing and not the same as the previous).

Uh, no, it doesn't. I've never read a book that had 8 chapters of "The Story so Far", or a movie that had 45 minutes of recap material. Even the worst writers out there don't design their final books for the masses. You build up your audience with the first, second, third, etc products before releasing the final one to make maximum profits. This is simple business strategy. Sure, there's a few crazy kids out there who're going to buy the third game, but no company bases their business around a fringe group.  

[Wittand25]

pvt_java wrote...
So? No one in their right mind would read Return of the King before reading the Fellowship of the Ring.

 You do know that Lord of the rings was planned as a strory spanning several books, while the ME series are planned and announced by Bioware as a trilogy consisting of three linked stories, each with a beginning, middle and end ? That Bioware explicitly expressed the wish that each and every of the ME games is supposed to work as single game as well as as part of the trilogy.
If you want to compare it to another trilogy compare it to "Back to the future", three films that all work indepently but also work as one whole several hours long movie.

[pvt_java]

http://www.computera...e.php?id=258534



I think this conversation is over.

[Wittand25]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

Wittand25 wrote...
 Like it or not the game has to be designed for the player who know next to nothing about the franchise. A game like ME3 is incredible expensive to produce and must appeal to biggest possible crowd.
And I did not say in that post that returning players have an advantage (that would be a good thing), but that new players have a disadvantage (that is a bad thing and not the same as the previous).

You must be playing a different game than the rest of us.

New players are already disadvantaged. Why? Because they don't get Wrex and the Rachni queen to help in the third game. Because they can't import a level 60 playthrough with all of it's perks, along with a fully complete mass effect playthrough. Saying that they would have to balance the game to be identical for both new and old players is nonsense.

-Polite

New players are not penalized in ME2 and we do not know what will happen in ME3. Returning players are rewarded with several things like a cameo by a former squad-mate (something that you are adamant as portraying as a bad thing usually); and several minor perks like bonus resources. None of that is of the level of what you are expecting for ME3,like serious plot changes.
And the game must be balanced for the new player, a returning player can get a bonus yes but the game must be completly playable and winnable for a new player.

[KingDan97]

Wittand25 wrote...

PoliteAssasin wrote...

Wittand25 wrote...
 Like it or not the game has to be designed for the player who know next to nothing about the franchise. A game like ME3 is incredible expensive to produce and must appeal to biggest possible crowd.
And I did not say in that post that returning players have an advantage (that would be a good thing), but that new players have a disadvantage (that is a bad thing and not the same as the previous).

You must be playing a different game than the rest of us.

New players are already disadvantaged. Why? Because they don't get Wrex and the Rachni queen to help in the third game. Because they can't import a level 60 playthrough with all of it's perks, along with a fully complete mass effect playthrough. Saying that they would have to balance the game to be identical for both new and old players is nonsense.

-Polite

New players are not penalized in ME2 and we do not know what will happen in ME3. Returning players are rewarded with several things like a cameo by a former squad-mate (something that you are adamant as portraying as a bad thing usually); and several minor perks like bonus resources. None of that is of the level of what you are expecting for ME3,like serious plot changes.
And the game must be balanced for the new player, a returning player can get a bonus yes but the game must be completly playable and winnable for a new player.

Point and case against the "no major changes." If you didn't play ME1/2 then in the final battle you won't have the Rachni, Quarians, united Krogan, Geth and likely you won't have the resources in the collector base. That means that you'd have one game to get a comparable force to the Armada the previous players will have gained over 3(by the end of ME3).

So, if those aren't detriments then how is the lack of maybe 10 squadmates the player wouldn't have known, that's assuming they go with the real LCD. Also, no one is saying new squadmates wouldn't be added or that placeholders wouldn't exist, just that they wouldn't ignore the story the player crafted over the past 2 games.

[Lisa_H]

The ones I want most on my squad are Kaidan and Garrus, and hopefully Liara, Tali, Legion and Miranda as well, since these were the characters I liked best.

I hope Bioware tries to keep as many as the old characters as possible. ME2 focused a lot on the squad, and I want ME3 to be the great epic story about saving galaxy from the reaper. The character driven missions in ME2 were fun and all, but in ME3 the spotlight should be on the reapers and Shepard.

And since ME3 is the last part of a trilogy conclusions for the different story threads are need, and that includes the romances, and that cannot be done if the LI are sidelined.

[Boombox]

We already have a good squad, we spent 80% of the game getting them.

I really don't want a new squad for ME3 but considering how ME1 choices carried over to ME2 I'm pretty sure Bioware won't go all out to account for the different squad possibilities..



I really hope I'm wrong. ME2 would have so much more meaning if we keep the squad. It would be epic.

[Lilicat]

I can understand why BW make a new squad in ME2, but i cant understand if they do it again

[Wittand25]

KingDan97 wrote...
Point and case against the "no major changes." If you didn't play ME1/2 then in the final battle you won't have the Rachni, Quarians, united Krogan, Geth and likely you won't have the resources in the collector base. That means that you'd have one game to get a comparable force to the Armada the previous players will have gained over 3(by the end of ME3).

So, if those aren't detriments then how is the lack of maybe 10 squad-mates the player wouldn't have known, that's assuming they go with the real LCD. Also, no one is saying new squad-mates wouldn't be added or that placeholders wouldn't exist, just that they wouldn't ignore the story the player crafted over the past 2 games.

The quarians are not finalized yet, your actions in ME2 might make it easier to get them to join you or maybe there will be other consequences (like unless you import  a safegame with the right decisions you are forced to choose between the Geth and the Quarians) The thing is
a.) While having a important safe will make it easier to get the best possible ending, it will also be possible to reach a nearly equally good ending without an imported safe.
b.)Because all Squad-mates of ME2 can die, and it will be assumed for the standard Shepard that some died (otherwise it would be a slap in the face for all those who played ME2 and have a everyone survived safegame), it is not possible to give all of them full squad-mate status, because the workload involved would be immense. You need more back-story, interaction with many of the worlds you will visit ... .
Giving a ME2 squad-member a cameo role in ME3 does not cheapen the character or the reward for the player who kept the character alive in ME2 (See Wrex in Me2 as example), while still making it possible to produce a good quality replacement NPC for those player who let this NPC die in ME2 without increasing the production cost too much. Nobody says that the decisions in past games will not matter or that the squad will be casually dismissed by a simple email, but the game must be a full and winnable experience for new players and players with the worst possible import alike.
The standard must be the new player, returning players with a good import might get a bonus, those with a bad import a penalty, but all must be able to win the game.
(Say if you import a good safegame you can win with few casualties and Shepard survives; for new players you either win with few casualties and Shepard dies or Shepard survives but the fleet takes many casualties, and a bad import always leads to many casualties).

[XX55XX]

I had been predicting something like this ever since I saw how our choices in ME1 didn't matter. And given that everyone in the squad could die, would BioWare expend the effort to create content that might not be enjoyed someone one else if they lost squadmates in their savegames?

Only Liara is coming back.

I hope that the new squadmates will as awesome as the old ones. That said, it won't be difficult, given BioWare's excellent writing. 

[SmokePants]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

Actually, two things are wrong with your statement. 1st. DA:O wasn't about the characters. Mass Effect 2 was. 
2nd. DA:O's characters weren't all in DA:A because of financial issues. They said it would cost too much for them to do it. 

But again, these two franchises are completely different. Bioware themselves said not to compare the treatment of one to the other.

-Polite

Character recruitment was a larger proportion of ME2's content, so what? DAO did fewer, better characters. You get a couple of missions and a dialogue tree with those ME2 characters and they're somehow sacred cows? It doesn't work that way. The ME series is about Sheperd. Everything and everyone else is incidental.

Money is the key limiting factor for everything. Of course, they could build the ME3 you're talking about -- it would only cost them north of $100 million. That's way outside the ballpark, in case you were wondering. They have to be fiscally responsible and that includes putting their resources toward areas of maximum benefit.

I might respect the opposite argument more if you guys didn't focus SO MUCH on the love interests. Surely, your decision about the council was the most important decision you made in ME1. Even the Rachni Queen should have greater ramifications that who Sheperd decided to bone. And let's be honest -- Liara, Ashley, Kaiden -- not BioWare's finest work.  I have a hard time affixing the "Sacred Cow" label to those three duds. So why the fascination? Could it be you're thinking with your Sheperd penises instead of your brains?

By the way, could somebody dig up the quote where Casey Hudson says that they're basically flying by the seat of their pants and weren't thinking ahead to the next game very much when they were developing ME1 and 2? I mean, they obviously hadn't even imagined the Collectors -- the main bad guys of the next game -- when they built the Prothean beacon cut scene in ME1. Ir kind of sinks all the flowery logic behind these grandiose predictions.

[Jaron Oberyn]

pvt_java wrote...

http://www.computera...e.php?id=258534

I think this conversation is over.

[SmokePants]

1) Old news

2) The conversation is not over. It should have been over months ago, but it is not. Unfortunately.

3) Nobody pays him to think.

Are you daft? When did any of us argue that ME3 wouldn't handle the decisions that were made in ME1 and 2. The argument is HOW they will be handled. So, whether there are 1000 or 100000 variables, it makes absolutely no difference to this discussion.

Modifié par SmokePants, 05 août 2010 - 08:17 .

[Jaron Oberyn]

SmokePants wrote...

. So, whether there are 1000 or 100000 variables, it makes absolutely no difference to this discussion.

I really hope your joking. Now I would have thought you were smarter than that. Kids these days.

-Polite

[pvt_java]

SmokePants wrote...

1) Old news

2) The conversation is not over. It should have been over months ago, but it is not. Unfortunately.

3) Nobody pays him to think.

Are you daft? When did any of us argue that ME3 wouldn't handle the decisions that were made in ME1 and 2. The argument is HOW they will be handled. So, whether there are 1000 or 100000 variables, it makes absolutely no difference to this discussion.

"We plan out the larger plot points of the story from one game to the next, but it would be impossible to plan it all in advance," he told PC Zone issue 224 (in all good stores now, folks). 

"More importantly, we'd never be able to plan as many creative opportunities if we'd do it all up front. Instead, we record what a player has done in a play-through, and then we have all of those choices available that writers can refer to as they build storylines...

"Numerically, it's over 1,000 variables that we'll have access to for shaping the Mass Effect 3 experience for people who've played the previous games."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Casey has at the very least confirmed cameos for every squaddie you ever had with 1000 variables. And the tone of this article is clearly one of "making sure each playthrough is equally different".

[Jaron Oberyn]

pvt_java wrote...

SmokePants wrote...

1) Old news

2) The conversation is not over. It should have been over months ago, but it is not. Unfortunately.

3) Nobody pays him to think.

Are you daft? When did any of us argue that ME3 wouldn't handle the decisions that were made in ME1 and 2. The argument is HOW they will be handled. So, whether there are 1000 or 100000 variables, it makes absolutely no difference to this discussion.

"We plan out the larger plot points of the story from one game to the next, but it would be impossible to plan it all in advance," he told PC Zone issue 224 (in all good stores now, folks). 

"More importantly, we'd never be able to plan as many creative opportunities if we'd do it all up front. Instead, we record what a player has done in a play-through, and then we have all of those choices available that writers can refer to as they build storylines...

"Numerically, it's over 1,000 variables that we'll have access to for shaping the Mass Effect 3 experience for people who've played the previous games."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Casey has at the very least confirmed cameos for every squaddie you ever had with 1000 variables. And the tone of this article is clearly one of "making sure each playthrough is equally different".

Exactly. Well said. Especially read the bold. People who've played the previous games.


-Polite

[Wittand25]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

pvt_java wrote...
"Numerically, it's over 1,000 variables that we'll have access to for shaping the Mass Effect 3 experience for people who've played the previous games."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Casey has at the very least confirmed cameos for every squaddie you ever had with 1000 variables. And the tone of this article is clearly one of "making sure each playthrough is equally different".

Exactly. Well said. Especially read the bold. People who've played the previous games.


-Polite

No one, not a single person in this thread, or even n the whole social site has ever claimed that your decisions would get dismissed or not carried over.  Many point out though that your expectations are unreasonable high and that you will be disappointed because for the sake of sensible resource management,balance and story telling Bioware will have to make some sacrifices (potentially dead  NPC´s returning as recruit-able squad-members and other things; dealing with many choices either through emails and maybe in the endgame but not before and other things).
An Polite SHAPING not DESIGNING, that means the game is built for new players and players with an imported safe-game get an adjusted experience not the other way round.

[Fiery Phoenix]

Wittand25 wrote...

PoliteAssasin wrote...

pvt_java wrote...
"Numerically, it's over 1,000 variables that we'll have access to for shaping the Mass Effect 3 experience for people who've played the previous games."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Casey has at the very least confirmed cameos for every squaddie you ever had with 1000 variables. And the tone of this article is clearly one of "making sure each playthrough is equally different".

Exactly. Well said. Especially read the bold. People who've played the previous games.


-Polite

No one, not a single person in this thread, or even n the whole social site has ever claimed that your decisions would get dismissed or not carried over.  Many point out though that your expectations are unreasonable high and that you will be disappointed because for the sake of sensible resource management,balance and story telling Bioware will have to make some sacrifices (potentially dead  NPC´s returning as recruit-able squad-members and other things; dealing with many choices either through emails and maybe in the endgame but not before and other things).
An Polite SHAPING not DESIGNING, that means the game is built for new players and players with an imported safe-game get an adjusted experience not the other way round.

I wish it was the other way around.

Modifié par FieryPhoenix7, 05 août 2010 - 08:53 .

[Wittand25]

FieryPhoenix7 wrote...

Wittand25 wrote...
An Polite SHAPING not DESIGNING, that means the game is built for new players and players with an imported safe-game get an adjusted experience not the other way round.

I wish it was the other way around.

That would be preferable in theory (and for us players) horrible in reality (especially for the developer).
Just take into account that there are (2^12)-1-12 =4083 different squads that you could theoretically import from ME2 into ME3. And that does not take any other decision or anything about Shepard into account. Providing a good custom tailored game  for all those things would burst any budget and result in the most expensive game of all time.

[Asheer_Khan]

I see that curse of the sequels is still strong over Bioware games...

And i wonder how many content will be butchered from ME 3 and later on reselled as DLC?
My instinct tells me that this could be pretty high count... and of course EA/Bioware PR departament will stand on thier ears to dismiss any accusation of cheating own fans...<_<

Modifié par Asheer_Khan, 05 août 2010 - 09:19 .

[Jaron Oberyn]

Asheer_Khan wrote...

I see that curse of the sequels is still strong over Bioware games...

And i wonder how many content will be butchered from ME 3 and later on reselled as DLC?
My instinct tells me that this could be pretty high count... and of course EA/Bioware PR departament will stand on thier ears to dismiss any accusation of cheating own fans...<_<

You have to understand that the game was already two discs full. After seeing how much space the DLC took off of my HDD, I can understand why they cut some content to be given out as DLC. It wouldn't fit. If Mass Effect 2 were on the PS3 however, Bluray could handle the space.

-Polite

[We Tigers]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

Wittand25 wrote...
 Like it or not the game has to be designed for the player who know next to nothing about the franchise. A game like ME3 is incredible expensive to produce and must appeal to biggest possible crowd.
And I did not say in that post that returning players have an advantage (that would be a good thing), but that new players have a disadvantage (that is a bad thing and not the same as the previous).

You must be playing a different game than the rest of us.

New players are already disadvantaged. Why? Because they don't get Wrex and the Rachni queen to help in the third game. Because they can't import a level 60 playthrough with all of it's perks, along with a fully complete mass effect playthrough. Saying that they would have to balance the game to be identical for both new and old players is nonsense.

-Polite

You're assuming a lot about the consequences of some of the game decisions.  It's entirely possible that every race we've spared or been nice to will team up for a big battle against the Reapers, but far from guaranteed. Similar, kingdan suggested that keeping the Collector Base would make the player stronger, but again, who knows where Bioware will take that.  Just an observation--perhaps the better way to characterize this view would be that default players are not being able to select and/or access all of the bonus/trilogy content of import players, because who knows what decisions will really "disadvantage" a player.  The Rachni might end up trying to slaughter the galaxy again.

Also, I agree with SmokePants--the "1000 variables" thing doesn't really say anything about this specific discussion.  As has been cited in this thread, Armando Troisi stated at GDC that they accounted for 700 variables from ME1 to ME2.  An estimate of 300 more doesn't signify much of anything either way, particularly when you consider that ME2 had a longer critical path than ME1.

Modifié par We Tigers, 06 août 2010 - 12:40 .