2338 réponses à ce sujet

[Jaron Oberyn]

SmokePants wrote...

theelementslayer wrote...

1. ME2 was focused on squad, moreso then any other BW game that I know of. Why would they spend this much time in a trilogy that was already written, if they were just blowing smoke out the bunghole.

The trilogy was not "already written". And why NOT make a game that is focused on characters? Content is content. It doesn't have to (and probably doesn't) mean anything.

Think of it in terms of Mega Man. You spend the whole game chasing robot masters that are destined to be replaced in the next game. They are just content -- something to do.

theelementslayer wrote...

2. CH said big conswquences, and also that now since they are in the 3rd act they can just take the consequences and expand on them.

According to Hudson, we've already gotten huge consequences. It's classic dev-speak. Don't let your imagination run away with you. No one will know what he means until we see it.

theelementslayer wrote...

3. Over 1000 story variations to be carried over. What else would make it so many? There arent 1000 variations without the characters.

Has nothing to do with anything. No one is arguing that the characters won't pop up in some form or that any veriables will be ignored. They just won't be full-time squadmates.

theelementslayer wrote...

4. You need TWO (2) (Dues) squadmates to survive the final mission if you are going to survive it. How many people you need in a squad. TWO (2) (Dues). If they werent setting it up why couldnt just one survive, cause in the cutscene only one pulls you up.

Because you need two guys to be able to play leftover/DLC missions after the suicide mission.

Easy money. Those particular arguments have long since been sliced and diced.

1. where did he say we already have the huge consequences? Proof or it didn't happen. 

2. Sorry but your mega man example doesn't exactly prove anything. 

3. That's a pretty bold statement you made that they will not be full time squadmates? Have anything to back it up other than your own narrow minded opinion?

-Polite

[Jaron Oberyn]

xlavaina wrote...

^ This. Polite and element slayer basically just summed up what I was trying to say perfectly.

Bioware has dedicated a game to the characters. The perfect way to show consequence is to deny you the access to their character and squad capabilities (and perhaps even extra missions) because they died in the previous game.

Don't think it's over or anything. I've posted much stronger arguments, and have even provided many articles, yet Smudboy continues to "dismiss" them without any counter evidence, just his "glorified opinion" 

-Polite

[SmokePants]

Oh, access will be denied. It's just that the player will miss out on 5 minutes of content, as opposed to 5 hours.

[xlavaina]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

xlavaina wrote...

^ This. Polite and element slayer basically just summed up what I was trying to say perfectly.

Bioware has dedicated a game to the characters. The perfect way to show consequence is to deny you the access to their character and squad capabilities (and perhaps even extra missions) because they died in the previous game.

Don't think it's over or anything. I've posted much stronger arguments, and have even provided many articles, yet Smudboy continues to "dismiss" them without any counter evidence, just his "glorified opinion" 

-Polite

Don't worry I know. Its never over. 

[Jaron Oberyn]

SmokePants wrote...

Oh, access will be denied. It's just that the player will miss out on 5 minutes of content, as opposed to 5 hours.

Once again, your wrong. 

In the same article where hudson said that the way Mass 3 plays out will be wild in variation, he also says that he's not worried about people missing out on content. That because some content won't be seen in some playthroughs, it adds to the replay value. Same thing Mass 2 did. Once again, you have a weak argument. Try again. 

-Polite

[xlavaina]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

SmokePants wrote...

Oh, access will be denied. It's just that the player will miss out on 5 minutes of content, as opposed to 5 hours.

Once again, your wrong. 

In the same article where hudson said that the way Mass 3 plays out will be wild in variation, he also says that he's not worried about people missing out on content. That because some content won't be seen in some playthroughs, it adds to the replay value. Same thing Mass 2 did. Once again, you have a weak argument. Try again. 

-Polite

This is another supporting example of why the ME2 squad could be the ME3 squad. It adds replay value. I'm sure the default import will have most alive if this is the case, and therefore, players could have to replay the game multiple times from multiple imports in order to interact with all the characters and enjoy all the content.

How cool would it be if the default non-import Shepard for ME3 randomized the characters alive and dead from the suicide mission? 

[Jaron Oberyn]

xlavaina wrote...

PoliteAssasin wrote...

SmokePants wrote...

Oh, access will be denied. It's just that the player will miss out on 5 minutes of content, as opposed to 5 hours.

Once again, your wrong. 

In the same article where hudson said that the way Mass 3 plays out will be wild in variation, he also says that he's not worried about people missing out on content. That because some content won't be seen in some playthroughs, it adds to the replay value. Same thing Mass 2 did. Once again, you have a weak argument. Try again. 

-Polite

This is another supporting example of why the ME2 squad could be the ME3 squad. It adds replay value. I'm sure the default import will have most alive if this is the case, and therefore, players could have to replay the game multiple times from multiple imports in order to interact with all the characters and enjoy all the content.

How cool would it be if the default non-import Shepard for ME3 randomized the characters alive and dead from the suicide mission? 

I don't think the default shepard would have anyone dead. At least not more than 1-2. But yes, the different variations in the story allow for replay value. That alone is one of the strongest pieces of evidence for the same squad. 

-Polite

Modifié par PoliteAssasin, 09 septembre 2010 - 11:01 .

[Harley_Dude]

The default ME2 game has the council, Wrex and the Rachni queen dead. So we are going to get hours of gameplay on the 360 version of ME3 because we kept them alive in our ME1 import while the PS3 owners get nothing? That is truly suspension of disbelief.

[xlavaina]

We just said that the majority, if not all of the ME2 -> ME3 squad members would be alive in an import. I proposed randomizing it, having a few dead, so that everyone could get all the content at one point or another.



Also, the PS3 gamers, as much as I am going to sound like a jerk, are kinda getting a bonus here with ME2. I'm a 360 gamer. Do you know how much I would love to have access to games like Littlebigplanet, Killzone 2 and the upcoming 3, Resistance? It kills me that I cant play those games. So frankly, the PS3 gamers will kinda just have to deal.



So its not really a suspension of disbelief. Mass Effect was originally going to be a PC and 360 only game.

[Jaron Oberyn]

 It's beyond three or four dimensions, because you have all the consequences from a certain playthrough and many different things that happen and different things that happen within those. But then all those things different for a different play through and then times your class and times your gender and all these things. We're pulling in probably over a thousand variables from Mass Effect 2 into Mass Effect 3 if you're importing your save game. It's more of an organic approach where we're opportunistic about how the game can change based on those variables. So the writers have to experts in what's happened before and what choices you could have made, and then as they write the story, they find places where it would be really cool to have different things happen based on those variables.

http://www.joystiq.c...-mass-effect-2/

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

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.

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


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

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

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

Our chat closed with talk about the challenges BioWare is facing in terms of delivering real choice to the player without letting the story spiral out of control.

"It has to be one or the either. Either you really let people's choices have repercussion. Or, the choice doesn't really affect things and then things end up coming back together.As we're doing parts one and two, we have a really difficult challenge in terms of creating very different outcomes and yet being able to continue the story. The good thing about the third one will be that we no longer have that constraint and things can diverge as far as we can make them go.

That actually will be our goal with the whole trilogy. To take all of the things you've done in Mass Effect 1 and Mass Effect 2 and then just let it go. Let it diverge into wildly different conclusions.That's the real fun of having played Mass Effect 1 and 2 and then going into the third one will be that you've set all of these things in motion and now we can let them diverge. I'm not worried that people will play it and think 'Oh well I missed all of this content that would have been different if I had made other choices' because what that does is make you interested in replaying it. The replay value of Mass Effect 1 was huge, but Mass Effect 2 is much more so and I think it just continues into the conclusion of the trilogy."

http://uk.xbox360.ig.../1055366p2.html

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

Just a couple of things that I've posted throughout the thread. Decided to post them in one post, for future reference and for present discussion.

-Polite

Modifié par PoliteAssasin, 09 septembre 2010 - 11:33 .

[Jaron Oberyn]

Double Post

-Polite

Modifié par PoliteAssasin, 09 septembre 2010 - 11:31 .

[epoch_]

ugh, no way you guys are still arguing about this.

[theelementslayer]

PoliteAssasin wrote...


Our chat closed with talk about the challenges BioWare is facing in terms of delivering real choice to the player without letting the story spiral out of control.

"It has to be one or the either. Either you really let people's choices have repercussion. Or, the choice doesn't really affect things and then things end up coming back together.As we're doing parts one and two, we have a really difficult challenge in terms of creating very different outcomes and yet being able to continue the story. The good thing about the third one will be that we no longer have that constraint and things can diverge as far as we can make them go.

That actually will be our goal with the whole trilogy. To take all of the things you've done in Mass Effect 1 and Mass Effect 2 and then just let it go. Let it diverge into wildly different conclusions. That's the real fun of having played Mass Effect 1 and 2 and then going into the third one will be that you've set all of these things in motion and now we can let them diverge. I'm not worried that people will play it and think 'Oh well I missed all of this content that would have been different if I had made other choices' because what that does is make you interested in replaying it. The replay value of Mass Effect 1 was huge, but Mass Effect 2 is much more so and I think it just continues into the conclusion of the trilogy."

http://uk.xbox360.ig.../1055366p2.html

Hadnt seen that one before, though Im really glad thats what they are doing. Like REALLY glad. Ill have so many differences.

Take your time BW, and make this game amazing:wizard:

[Jaron Oberyn]

The last quote I posted pretty much ended the discussion. But I'm sure smudboy, creative as he is, will be able to conjure up something "logical" without any sources to back his claims and "successfully" dismiss the article.



-Polite

[Jaron Oberyn]

epoch_ wrote...

ugh, no way you guys are still arguing about this.

No, the thread is just recycling old posts. Nothing to worry about.

-Polite

[SmokePants]

I found a funny quote...

"Anytime we have a plot or a character or situation in Mass Effect 2, we think about what you did, potentially, in the first game that might affect said plot or character or situation in the second. We can look at each variable and dynamically change what happens in the moment. It ranges from small things like, by way of example, Conrad Verner was a fan of Commander Shepard's that you met in the first game, and it's likeyou meet this guy in an alley and you can be nice to him or you can be a jerk to him, and at the time you might have been thinking of it as just a trite role-playing convention, good-guy bad-guy, and that's that.

Jump forward two years. Now you're playing Mass Effect 2, and oh my god, who's this, it's Conrad Verner! And based on what you've done, you
realize that while the moment in the first game maybe seemed throwaway, now Conrad's back and involved in another plot in a game you're playing two years later...and what you did two years ago is meaningfully  affecting what's happening. That's a small example.

[SPOILER]

The larger examples are things like...take the way you navigate through the ending of Mass Effect, how you left the galaxy in a certain state with humans, whether they were in control of the Galactic Council or not, things like that. In Mass Effect 2, when you walk around, you'll see all the areas affected by your decisions, including large scale stuff like the Citadel. You'll see signs all over the place that either humans are in control or that they're working more with the aliens and
the Citadel is more like it was in the first game." - Casey Hudson, PC World, July 2009.

Casey sure talks a lot more these days than he did back then. He's gotten far too good at pimping his wares for me to take any quote from him as gospel. Basically, I'll believes it when I sees it.

Modifié par SmokePants, 09 septembre 2010 - 11:48 .

[Jaron Oberyn]

SmokePants wrote...

I found a funny quote...

"Anytime we have a plot or a character or situation in Mass Effect 2,
we think about what you did, potentially, in the first game that might
affect said plot or character or situation in the second. We can look at
each variable and dynamically change what happens in the moment. It
ranges from small things like, by way of example, Conrad Verner was a
fan of Commander Shepard's that you met in the first game, and it's like
you meet this guy in an alley and you can be nice to him or you can be a
jerk to him, and at the time you might have been thinking of it as just
a trite role-playing convention, good-guy bad-guy, and that's that.
Jump forward two years. Now you're playing Mass Effect 2, and oh my
god, who's this, it's Conrad Verner! And based on what you've done, you
realize that while the moment in the first game maybe seemed throwaway,
now Conrad's back and involved in another plot in a game you're playing
two years later...and what you did two years ago is meaningfully
affecting what's happening. That's a small example.
[SPOILER]
The larger examples are things like...take the way you navigate
through the ending of Mass Effect, how you left the galaxy in a certain
state with humans, whether they were in control of the Galactic Council
or not, things like that. In Mass Effect 2, when you walk around, you'll
see all the areas affected by your decisions, including large scale
stuff like the Citadel. You'll see signs all over the place that either
humans are in control or that they're working more with the aliens and
the Citadel is more like it was in the first game." - Casey Hudson, PC World, July 2009.

Casey sure talks a lot more these days than he did back then. He's gotten far too good at pimping his wares for me to take any quote from him as gospel. Basically, I'll believes it when I sees it.

Everything he said in that quote was in the game. What's your point?

-Polite

[xlavaina]

I agree with you, SmokePants, after seeing stuff like that its tough to be too optimistic. All we can do is hope.

Edit: @ polite; Yeah it was all in it, but in not nearly as prominent a way as I think we all expected. 

Modifié par xlavaina, 09 septembre 2010 - 11:50 .

[SmokePants]

I've given up on you, remember? "Same team" ring a bell? Anybody else want to explain to him?

[Jaron Oberyn]

xlavaina wrote...

I agree with you, SmokePants, after seeing stuff like that its tough to be too optimistic. All we can do is hope.

Edit: @ polite; Yeah it was all in it, but in not nearly as prominent a way as I think we all expected. 

What more would you expect? The citadel had signs depending on who controlled the council. Conrad verner reacts differently depending on how you treated him, what more? That was everything he said in the article. What else did you want?

-Polite

[Jaron Oberyn]

SmokePants wrote...

I've given up on you, remember?

Um.... no? Given up on me for what?

-Polite

[xlavaina]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

xlavaina wrote...

I agree with you, SmokePants, after seeing stuff like that its tough to be too optimistic. All we can do is hope.

Edit: @ polite; Yeah it was all in it, but in not nearly as prominent a way as I think we all expected. 

What more would you expect? The citadel had signs depending on who controlled the council. Conrad verner reacts differently depending on how you treated him, what more? That was everything he said in the article. What else did you want?

-Polite

I don't want anything more. But I think Smoke wanted a little more. I have just learned to not over think what people are saying nowadays; to not be too optimistic about quotes. 

[smudboy]

theelementslayer wrote...
1. ME2 was focused on squad, moreso then any other BW game that I know of. Why would they spend this much time in a trilogy that was already written, if they were just blowing smoke out the bunghole.

If they already focused on squad, why would they focus on squad again?

How do you know it was already written?

To that end, how do you know it was already designed?

2. CH said big conswquences, and also that now since they are in the 3rd act they can just take the consequences and expand on them.

Okay.  That has no relation to ME2 squads being ME3 squads.  That could mean anything.

3. Over 1000 story variations to be carried over. What else would make it so many? There arent 1000 variations without the characters.

12 characters = 12 variables.  That's what, 1000 - 12?

4. You need TWO (2) (Dues) squadmates to survive the final mission if you are going to survive it. How many people you need in a squad. TWO (2) (Dues). If they werent setting it up why couldnt just one survive, cause in the cutscene only one pulls you up.

I fail to see what you're trying to say.

[SmokePants]

By the way, I'm not calling Hudson a liar. I'm just saying that he has a tendency to make statements that incite people to leap to conclusions. Mass Effect 3 can indeed be divergent without bringing the squad back full-time. At this point, it could mean almost anything and is proof of nothing.

[Jaron Oberyn]

smudboy wrote...

theelementslayer wrote...
1. ME2 was focused on squad, moreso then any other BW game that I know of. Why would they spend this much time in a trilogy that was already written, if they were just blowing smoke out the bunghole.

If they already focused on squad, why would they focus on squad again?

You just shot yourself in the foot. Again. Mass 2 was about the squad. Mass 3 being another recruitment game would be a repeat of Mass 2. Good job Smudboy. 

smudboy wrote...

I fail to see what you're trying to say.

It's ok, keep trying. Your bound to get it one day. 

-Polite

Modifié par PoliteAssasin, 10 septembre 2010 - 12:01 .