2338 réponses à ce sujet

[smudboy]

PoliteAssasin wrote...
You can't predict how Mass 3 will play out based on what happened from Mass 1 - 2. You just can't. You talk about science and logic, you obviously don't know how to think logically. I can't seriously believe your still on this. 

-Polite

In relation to the topic, yes we can.

However, because ME2's plot is a giant steaming pile has nothing to do with anything, it's anyone's guess wtf is going to happen to ME3s plot.

[Jaron Oberyn]

smudboy wrote...

PoliteAssasin wrote...
You can't predict how Mass 3 will play out based on what happened from Mass 1 - 2. You just can't. You talk about science and logic, you obviously don't know how to think logically. I can't seriously believe your still on this. 

-Polite

In relation to the topic, yes we can.

However, because ME2's plot is a giant steaming pile has nothing to do with anything, it's anyone's guess wtf is going to happen to ME3s plot.

So because you, the most childish person in this discussion, say so I'm supposed to take you word for it? Mass Effect 2 didn't follow the same pattern as the 1st game, what makes you honestly think Mass 3 will follow the same as the second game?

-Polite

[Zulu_DFA]

PoliteAssasin wrote...
you obviously don't know how to think logically.

-Polite

Sorry, kid, it's you who can't think logically!

[Il Divo]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

So because you, the most childish person in this discussion, say so I'm supposed to take you word for it? Mass Effect 2 didn't follow the same pattern as the 1st game, what makes you honestly think Mass 3 will follow the same as the second game?

-Polite

Am I the only one who thought the bolded statement was somewhat ironic?  

[Zulu_DFA]

Il Divo wrote...

PoliteAssasin wrote...

So because you, the most childish person in this discussion, say so I'm supposed to take you word for it? Mass Effect 2 didn't follow the same pattern as the 1st game, what makes you honestly think Mass 3 will follow the same as the second game?

-Polite

Am I the only one who thought the bolded statement was somewhat ironic?  

No one has any idea what you are talking about.

[MaxQuartiroli]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

SmokePants wrote...

KingDan97 wrote...

Okay, can we stop with the "we know" garbage? No one here "knows" what they'll do with ME3. No one has "proof", no one has definitive knowledge of any sort. The closest we can get is "disputable subjective assumptions fueled by inconclusive evidence and surmising" okay? Debate your points all you want but don't act like you KNOW because you don't. Until stated by a Bioware dev, in writing, audio or video on a respectable source there is no proof either way.

Do you know how science works? Science makes predictions and tests assumptions. If there was a guy standing around saying, "Yeah, but you don't really KNOW! God didn't tell you!" who wasn't immediately punched in the face, we'd still be in the stone age.

Between ME1 and ME2, we have the Rosetta Stone for deciphering the rest of the series. Like all scientific theories, it represents the best model for what we can expect. Now, if you want to dismiss the actual Rosetta Stone and say, "You Egyptologists don't KNOW what hyeroglyphs mean. They might have changed everything after the Rosetta Stone was made."  -- that is your right. But don't be surprised when a fist connects with your face.

You can't predict how Mass 3 will play out based on what happened from Mass 1 - 2. You just can't. You talk about science and logic, you obviously don't know how to think logically. I can't seriously believe your still on this. 

-Polite

He's not making predictions based on what happened between ME1 and ME2 but looking at what always happened in the world of videogames.

ME3 won't be a gift for people who played the first  two games, but it will be a full stand alone game for everybody and this means it must follow some principles.
I said many times that it would be really COOL to have a game which act in a different way depending on how you played before, but think that a company would really release a game which can provide contents which differs by 50% from a player to another in my opinion is dreaming the impossible.

Let's image that I am a casual player who doesn't read forums, who avoid any spoilers and without know anything I go buy Mass Effect 3 when it is released. In my suicide mission I keep alive only 2 squadmembers. I start the game and then I know that I have only those 2 members, lack of possibilities, lack of dialogues. lack of choices, 50% of the contents cut, for a game I payed 50$ . How would I react then?

Same thing if I am a new player. I begin the game and I have a ship full of person. I don't know who they are, I don't know why they are here, I don't know their story, I just pick up them and I begin space missions. My reaction would be "what's this crap?!"
A full game must have an history with a beginning and an end, everyone must be able to enjoy and understand in the same way that story, you just cannot begin a story from "nowhere.

When a company releases a game I have never seen that it was developed thinking only to historical players, but they do a game with equal contents and possibilities both for historical players and newbies. For faithful players they provide continuity with small contents like cameos, some line of dialogue, short side quests, but for the main contents game companies they have always provided tha same contents for all.
This is obviously my logic, and my motivations for it, feel free to agree or disagree with it

Modifié par MaxQuartiroli, 09 août 2010 - 02:09 .

[Il Divo]

[inappropriate comments removed]

Modifié par Stanley Woo, 09 août 2010 - 05:00 .

[Jaron Oberyn]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

PoliteAssasin wrote...
you obviously don't know how to think logically.

-Polite

Sorry, kid, it's you who can't think logically!

Sure. I only provide sources along with a solid argument to back up my claims, you on the other hand have no sources.  But of course, based on your "logic" you don't need sources to back up your conclusions, only speculation and a lot of support from other likeminded individuals. I have no intention of convincing you of what actually is going to happen with the Mass 2 squad, I'm just amused that you, and a couple of others here, think that they're going to be subjected to cameos based on Ashley/Kaidans treatment in Mass 2. 

-Polite

[glacier1701]

 Those who say that we cannot say what will be going on in ME3 until it is released unless we happen to be part of BioWare are wrong in one important regard. We can, at the very least, look at the things that CANNOT be in ME3. That is we can pare away those ideas and things that for one reason or another would not be a part of the conclusion. A prime example:  ME3 will not have any reference to the Reapers or to the fact that they exist in it. Such a thing will NOT occur. By using that kind of logic much can be cut out of our theories and narrow down what there is that can be speculated on. This means that we can come up with some outlandish stuff which we can throw away. An example would be that Shepard is confined to Earth for the ENTIRE game and not once do we get to see any other world!!! 

 So using logic to cut away the areas of possible plots that cannot be will allow us to move in on those possible plots that can be. It is to be hoped that as we do that the composition of the squad for ME3 can be arrived at. With that in mind I do see that we MUST fulfill 4 conditions.

 Condition 1: The squad composition MUST be such that a newcomer to the franchise can pick up the game and get going from the point they finally get control. That is ME3 is standalone and newcomers can play even if they do not have the full richness of past games/dlc to flesh out the universe. 

 Condition 2:  Players with ME2 saves should get some sort of advantage/disadvantage. This does NOT have to mean that the game is "balanced" between newcomers and old players because, after all, this is a SOLO game. It is NOT multiplayer or Co-Op so what I do in my game has NO bearing on someone's game.

 Condition 3: There is a budget - both financially and in time available. So while some things would be nice if they will not fit into the appropriate budget they cannot be in the game.

 Condition 4: The developers/producers for ME3 HAVE learnt some things from what they did in ME1 and ME2 and will NOT repeat the exact same mistakes they made. They might vary something a bit but they will not make the exact same mistake. This is perhaps the most nebulous of the conditions for ME3 but we can use whatever public statements are made by BW employees even if interpretation of them is varied. So, for example, the mining minigame AS IMPLEMENTED sucks and BW has noted that though Casey says they did not expect people to do what they did. So we can expect the mining minigame to be changed though NOT necessarily a lot.

With the above in mind we can arrive at a point where we might have a few competing theories on the squad composition upon which we can use what info we do get to rule out one or more of them until we get one that works.

Modifié par glacier1701, 09 août 2010 - 02:31 .

[Zulu_DFA]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

PoliteAssasin wrote...
you obviously don't know how to think logically.

-Polite

Sorry, kid, it's you who can't think logically!

Sure. 

-Polite

Not exactly? Wow, you're beginning to make progress, my young argumentative friend!

Next step: admit, that at this point you can't convince anybody about anything that is actually going to happen in ME3, because nobody outside of BioWare knows it, and they are not yet speaking about it, so you can't have any "proof". Unless, of course, you are another "BioWare writer".

[Harley_Dude]

I played ME1 paragon and renegade paths but deleted the entire folder on my 360 hard drive. When ME2 was released I created a new character assuming this was my only option. When I started a second play though I opened the ME1 import out of curiousity and to my surprise there were several games I could import even though nothing related to ME1 was on the 360. The ME1 import changed very little in the game though. A few conversion references and cameos but nothing that had a material impact on the core game. I would expect the same from ME3. I would like to have Grunt again but I'm guessing he has moved to greener pastures at the female Krogan camp.

[smudboy]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

smudboy wrote...

PoliteAssasin wrote...
You can't predict how Mass 3 will play out based on what happened from Mass 1 - 2. You just can't. You talk about science and logic, you obviously don't know how to think logically. I can't seriously believe your still on this. 

-Polite

In relation to the topic, yes we can.

However, because ME2's plot is a giant steaming pile has nothing to do with anything, it's anyone's guess wtf is going to happen to ME3s plot.

So because you, the most childish person in this discussion, say so I'm supposed to take you word for it? Mass Effect 2 didn't follow the same pattern as the 1st game, what makes you honestly think Mass 3 will follow the same as the second game?

-Polite

What pattern of importing characters as squadmates are you referring to, when ME1 has no prequel?  I listed how ME1 squadmates were handled in ME2.  The conclusions for what ME2 does are obvious, regardless of the direction or design of the game and story of ME2.  Lazarus Project 2.0 doesn't seem doable to all squadmates, especially since 1) the base can be destroyed, 2) Cerberus/no one else will want these people rebuilt/will know how.

[redplague]

Bluko wrote...

Maybe you can woo your old romance interest again by buying them flowers or something like that while you are away. In fact this could ultimately lead to some pretty interesting new game mechanics/scenarios when you think about it.

Sounds like The Sims.

[Stanley Woo]

Let's keep the name-calling and insults out of the conversation, please.

[krasnoarmeets]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Let's keep the name-calling and
insults out of the conversation, please.

Indeed. Let's keep it civil, people.

Historically, characters you killed in ME1 do not mysteriously appear in ME2.
If you killed Wrex he doesn't appear in ME2.
If you left Ashley/Kaidan to die on Virmire, then the one you left doesn't appear in ME2.
Shiala, Gianna Parasini, Rana Thanoptis, need I go on?

Modifié par krasnoarmeets, 09 août 2010 - 08:01 .

[KingDan97]

SmokePants wrote...

Do you know how science works? Science makes predictions and tests assumptions. If there was a guy standing around saying, "Yeah, but you don't really KNOW! God didn't tell you!" who wasn't immediately punched in the face, we'd still be in the stone age. 

Between ME1 and ME2, we have the Rosetta Stone for deciphering the rest of the series. Like all scientific theories, it represents the best model for what we can expect. Now, if you want to dismiss the actual Rosetta Stone and say, "You Egyptologists don't KNOW what hyeroglyphs mean. They might have changed everything after the Rosetta Stone was made."  -- that is your right. But don't be surprised when a fist connects with your face.

Between Mass Effect 1 and 2, we have the old testament, to hold your religion analogy from the beginning of your post. Science makes predictions and then runs experiments based on said predictions. Until then you're just guessing. Also, the "stone age" didn't have a set of organized religion, that didn't start until the bronze age. If you were to say we'd been stuck in the dark ages you'd be right, but even then, the dark ages only ended due to the "enlightened monarchs", who allowed for the search for truth and expression of the self, not because religion was thrown by the wayside.

We don't have a model for what to expect for ME3 because they didn't have a blockbuster game in the series before ME2, as much as we'd all like to believe everyone and their mother owned ME1. The closest comparison we could get would be by looking at other developers, who may have very different mindsets or development contracts/schedules/publisher limitations/etc/etc. The Rosetta stone said the same thing in all 3 languages that were on it, one of which we knew how to read previously. The difference is they may not be saying the same thing during this development cycle.

I'm sure there were many people who thought that Nintendo's E3 this year would be entirely casual, based on last year and the year before that. They, were dead wrong. I'm not claiming to have evidence they'll return or to the contrary, but to say that you're using scientific evidence when you've got no more data then we do, well you're wrong in that, if nothing else.

Currently this thread is a debate of interpretation, essentially we're Roman Catholics arguing with Eastern Orthodox Christians arguing with Protestants. We've all got the same words but we see different meanings in it.

[KingDan97]

Luc0s wrote...

PoliteAssasin wrote...

Luc0s wrote...


1. I'm not saying that I know what BioWare will do.

2. *assuming that Liara indeed will join your squad during the Shadow Broker's lair mission in her upcomming DLC.

1. Um, yeah that's kind of what you were saying up there. 
2. She's not joining your squad. She goes back to illium after the sidequest.

-Polite

1. No I didn't.
2. Please read what I said. I said TEMORARY join your squad (as in, for just one specific mission), like Liara will in her DLC.

And that's the whole point that I'm trying ot make here all the time. The ME2 crew most likely won't join your squad again in ME3. They will be TEMPORARY ONE-MISSION co-op cameos (like Liara will be in her ME2 DLC) at the most!

1. I'm not addressing this point, it's not why I'm making the post.
2. You ASSUME she'll join our squad. The only screen we've seen with her holding a weapon and in armor already had 2 squadmates. That would mean a serious modification to the engine which was built on having only 2 squadmates for just the one DLC. This is less likely then ME2 squadmates coming back.

[KingDan97]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

1. That's also kind of what you were saying up there, so your friend with that annoying flickering portrait might as well consider quoting a couple of your posts as an example of unwanted "I know, I got proof" stuff.

I went to the nearest post that used the word. I'm not going to sort through 30+ pages of posts just to find a single word when I know it's nearby.

[krasnoarmeets]

Actually, I'd like to draw your attention back to the suicide mission in which a 3rd party member does accompany you: the biotic. Sure, the biotic only walks a set path and follows set actions, but the 3rd party member is still there and there is a limited amount of possible interaction.

[KingDan97]

MaxQuartiroli wrote...

He's not making predictions based on what happened between ME1 and ME2 but looking at what always happened in the world of videogames.

ME3 won't be a gift for people who played the first  two games, but it will be a full stand alone game for everybody and this means it must follow some principles.
I said many times that it would be really COOL to have a game which act in a different way depending on how you played before, but think that a company would really release a game which can provide contents which differs by 50% from a player to another in my opinion is dreaming the impossible.

Let's image that I am a casual player who doesn't read forums, who avoid any spoilers and without know anything I go buy Mass Effect 3 when it is released. In my suicide mission I keep alive only 2 squadmembers. I start the game and then I know that I have only those 2 members, lack of possibilities, lack of dialogues. lack of choices, 50% of the contents cut, for a game I payed 50$ . How would I react then?

Same thing if I am a new player. I begin the game and I have a ship full of person. I don't know who they are, I don't know why they are here, I don't know their story, I just pick up them and I begin space missions. My reaction would be "what's this crap?!"
A full game must have an history with a beginning and an end, everyone must be able to enjoy and understand in the same way that story, you just cannot begin a story from "nowhere.

When a company releases a game I have never seen that it was developed thinking only to historical players, but they do a game with equal contents and possibilities both for historical players and newbies. For faithful players they provide continuity with small contents like cameos, some line of dialogue, short side quests, but for the main contents game companies they have always provided tha same contents for all.
This is obviously my logic, and my motivations for it, feel free to agree or disagree with it

That's why I propose placeholders for those who died(likely 4 max, who would be the same no matter who died), as well as about 4 new characters to round out the bases of the classes.

[KingDan97]

krasnoarmeets wrote...

Actually, I'd like to draw your attention back to the suicide mission in which a 3rd party member does accompany you: the biotic. Sure, the biotic only walks a set path and follows set actions, but the 3rd party member is still there and there is a limited amount of possible interaction.

I'm not saying she won't be there, fighting, but she won't be a squadmate. She'll assist, but not because you're controlling her. The Biotic coming with you on the mission was a presequenced set of animations, with a single button command that could only be initiated after the computer said there were no active hostiles coming. By Liara as a squadmate, he's referring to controlling her, which based on the screenshots, you can't do because of the engine.

[Jaron Oberyn]

Luc0s wrote...
1. No I didn't.
2. Please read what I said. I said TEMORARY join your squad (as in, for just one specific mission), like Liara will in her DLC.

And that's the whole point that I'm trying ot make here all the time. The ME2 crew most likely won't join your squad again in ME3. They will be TEMPORARY ONE-MISSION co-op cameos (like Liara will be in her ME2 DLC) at the most!

So again, how do you arrive at this conclusion? Because your judging Mass Effect 3 based on what's going on in Mass Effect 2. A few days ago you were saying that we'd only get cameos because everyone could die, and that it was the reason Wrex was a cameo. Now your saying that we'll get temporary one-mission co-op cameos. 

Why so specific? Why one mission and not two? And again, where is this coming from? Is there an article that you could provide that would suggest this? Or is this all pure speculation on your part? I'm fairly certain its the latter.

-Polite

[KingDan97]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

Luc0s wrote...
1. No I didn't.
2. Please read what I said. I said TEMORARY join your squad (as in, for just one specific mission), like Liara will in her DLC.

And that's the whole point that I'm trying ot make here all the time. The ME2 crew most likely won't join your squad again in ME3. They will be TEMPORARY ONE-MISSION co-op cameos (like Liara will be in her ME2 DLC) at the most!

So again, how do you arrive at this conclusion? Because your judging Mass Effect 3 based on what's going on in Mass Effect 2. A few days ago you were saying that we'd only get cameos because everyone could die, and that it was the reason Wrex was a cameo. Now your saying that we'll get temporary one-mission co-op cameos. 

Why so specific? Why one mission and not two? And again, where is this coming from? Is there an article that you could provide that would suggest this? Or is this all pure speculation on your part? I'm fairly certain its the latter.

-Polite

It's all pure speculation, he's proposing a mid-ground idea that I'm not entirely opposed to. I'm just holding out hope that Bioware will bring them all back.

[MaxQuartiroli]

KingDan97 wrote...
That's why I propose placeholders for those who died(likely 4 max, who would be the same no matter who died), as well as about 4 new characters to round out the bases of the classes.

To specify, I won't exclude at all they won't bring back someone from the old ME1/ME2 crew as squadmember, just point out that they'll probably have to follow some conditions

1 - they will be the same from all
2 - they must have a valid reason to be alive even if they was supposed to be dead in suicide mission
3 - their presence must "work" in the story allmost in the same way both for new and old players. This should mean to find them somewhere, to recruite them again and so on..

It's not an easy task, but they could also succeed for some of them (4 it's an high number, if I were you my hope would be 2/3),

What I find it difficul to believe (for the reason I explained before) is to see a  variable number of available companions for every player and a variable identity of those characters. Summarizing, I trust at least 80% of the crew will be new, I don't exclude at all someone of the old members will be back but I bet that the crew will be the same for everyone.

Modifié par MaxQuartiroli, 09 août 2010 - 09:00 .