108 réponses à ce sujet

[CroGamer002]

smudboy wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...
The decisions really didn't have much more impact that I would have liked. You ended up in the same place at the end no matter what. Also none of the characters really tied into the game very well. It was pretty much a bunch of characters in three acts without a proper fourth act. Only a couple came together at the end but they were there the whole time.

Every side mission impacted the main mission it was part of.

The ending changed on who was involved, who ends up being the person you're fighting, what you learn about some and are revealed of others, who helsp you and how, who you go off into the sunset with, how you deal with the agency, and ultimately who lives or dies.

The fourth act was put together brilliantly, all based on the choices you've made up to that point.

You did have good choices but I disagree with the "Choose one, this chick who you barely know, or these people you have never met". Even if presented in ME that would be a lame decision. At least its contemporaries in BDTS and Zoyra were better written.

This results may have been smaller in scope (death toll), but it has greater impact than the Save/Leave Council choice.

Also the dialogue system was interesting it should have had more work. Basically you were prompted to spam one line of thought more often than not than follow the flow of the conversation. What was nice about them though was that they actually seemed like conversations.

You were not prompted to spam one line of thought.  That's what ME does.  ME is P/R everything, because it grants you P/R points, and if you don't get those, future choices can't be made, making social encounters be only a problem solving event of getting P/R points.  The only optional choices in AP were either based on other choices, or whether you had dossier information.

For once smudboy, we agree.

[Skilled Seeker]

Mesina2 wrote...

Skilled Seeker wrote...

Hell no. That video featured some fo the worse and cheesiest dialogue I've heard. And you have no idea what the PC is going to say. If you want AP play AP.

I don't want AP in ME3, I want ME3 to have choices that will have heavy consequences like AP.

Well thats what they are going for already right? I think what ruins it is they insist on making each game standalone. Money > Quality it seems.

[Estelindis]

smudboy wrote...
Every side mission impacted the main mission it was part of.

The ending changed on who was involved, who ends up being the person you're fighting, what you learn about some and are revealed of others, who helsp you and how, who you go off into the sunset with, how you deal with the agency, and ultimately who lives or dies.

The fourth act was put together brilliantly, all based on the choices you've made up to that point.

Agreed.  I have never seen player choice have this kind of an impact in any other game. 

Modifié par Estelindis, 30 juillet 2010 - 03:05 .

[Astranagant]

Mukora wrote...

Really?

The choices in ME are vague enough already. No.
At least this way I know SOMEWHAT what Shepard is going to say. With AP's system I'm completely in the dark.

ME2's dialogue options are vague because Bioware apparently thinks that two completely different sentences mean exactly the same thing.

[Anezay]

I think both ME1 and ME2 will affect ME3 a lot more than ME1 did ME2. I think they've said that ME3 is when it all comes together. The first two games are just preparing you for the third. It had better be one hell of a game.

[DurkBakala]

Wow, did Thorton even care about her death. People give Meer s**t but whoever voices him is in dire need of acting classes.

[CroGamer002]

DurkBakala wrote...

Wow, did Thorton even care about her death. People give Meer s**t but whoever voices him is in dire need of acting classes.

He is soldier and controls his emotions for sake of mission. Like Shepard.
But after mission you get cutescene of him caring about her death in his safe house.

[jklinders]

Mesina2 wrote...

DurkBakala wrote...

Wow, did Thorton even care about her death. People give Meer s**t but whoever voices him is in dire need of acting classes.

He is soldier and controls his emotions for sake of mission. Like Shepard.
But after mission you get cutescene of him caring about her death in his safe house.

^^^this^^^

The man he was confronting was the Saren Arcturus (only way cooler and more dangerous) of Alpha Protocol. If Mike Thorton lost his focus he would have been dead.

[Onyx Jaguar]

Every side mission impacted the main mission it was part of.



The ending changed on who was involved, who ends up being the person you're fighting, what you learn about some and are revealed of others, who helsp you and how, who you go off into the sunset with, how you deal with the agency, and ultimately who lives or dies.



The fourth act was put together brilliantly, all based on the choices you've made up to that point.

The fourth act was just there. You had three options and they all played out the same.



You only had control over who lived or died, other than that you had minor narrative changes and store changes (narrative changes like ME) but no real branching paths.

This results may have been smaller in scope (death toll), but it has greater impact than the Save/Leave Council choice.

The Save/Leave Council choice is about as big as the choice to join up with the bad guys/kill everyone/save Alpha Protocol. A couple minutes of dialogue at the end, nothing more nothing less. Both have the same outro scene just with different characters.

You were not prompted to spam one line of thought. That's what ME does. ME is P/R everything, because it grants you P/R points, and if you don't get those, future choices can't be made, making social encounters be only a problem solving event of getting P/R points. The only optional choices in AP were either based on other choices, or whether you had dossier information.

Yes and when I want to ****** off Marbug I get all suave on him, when I want him to like me I get professional. And that applies to most of the characters in that game. Other than Sie, you spam Aggressive stance for like and the others to dislike/neutral. And Nathan Drake, there you are prompted to **** with him and htat was the nice one.



AP isn't that different from ME. Both only had minor narrative differences. AP only has a better dialogue system. However much like ME is strung into a soldier archetype you ultimately come off as someone with Antisocial Personality Disorder in AP



Hell even the setup of AP in how its designed on paper is pretty much exactly like ME



Start out with two linear levels



Oh no, pick from three ones in a non-linear scheme



Then end with one linear one, that is where the damn game started



Just like ME (except in that it would be the second level)

[CroGamer002]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Every side mission impacted the main mission it was part of.

The ending changed on who was involved, who ends up being the person you're fighting, what you learn about some and are revealed of others, who helsp you and how, who you go off into the sunset with, how you deal with the agency, and ultimately who lives or dies.

The fourth act was put together brilliantly, all based on the choices you've made up to that point.

The fourth act was just there. You had three options and they all played out the same.

You only had control over who lived or died, other than that you had minor narrative changes and store changes (narrative changes like ME) but no real branching paths.

This results may have been smaller in scope (death toll), but it has greater impact than the Save/Leave Council choice.

The Save/Leave Council choice is about as big as the choice to join up with the bad guys/kill everyone/save Alpha Protocol. A couple minutes of dialogue at the end, nothing more nothing less. Both have the same outro scene just with different characters.

You were not prompted to spam one line of thought. That's what ME does. ME is P/R everything, because it grants you P/R points, and if you don't get those, future choices can't be made, making social encounters be only a problem solving event of getting P/R points. The only optional choices in AP were either based on other choices, or whether you had dossier information.

Yes and when I want to ****** off Marbug I get all suave on him, when I want him to like me I get professional. And that applies to most of the characters in that game. Other than Sie, you spam Aggressive stance for like and the others to dislike/neutral. And Nathan Drake, there you are prompted to **** with him and htat was the nice one.

AP isn't that different from ME. Both only had minor narrative differences. AP only has a better dialogue system. However much like ME is strung into a soldier archetype you ultimately come off as someone with Antisocial Personality Disorder in AP

Hell even the setup of AP in how its designed on paper is pretty much exactly like ME

Start out with two linear levels

Oh no, pick from three ones in a non-linear scheme

Then end with one linear one, that is where the damn game started

Just like ME (except in that it would be the second level)

How many times did you pass AP?

[Mallissin]

I'll abstain in the "ME should have more attitude options like AP" discussion and just say one thing.



ME SHOULD NEVER HAVE SHATNER SUBTLES LIKE AP!



God damn those were annoying.

[CroGamer002]

Mallissin wrote...

I'll abstain in the "ME should have more attitude options like AP" discussion and just say one thing.

ME SHOULD NEVER HAVE SHATNER SUBTLES LIKE AP!

God damn those were annoying.

Will EVERYONE miss point of this thread?

[jklinders]

Mesina2 wrote...

Mallissin wrote...

I'll abstain in the "ME should have more attitude options like AP" discussion and just say one thing.

ME SHOULD NEVER HAVE SHATNER SUBTLES LIKE AP!

God damn those were annoying.

Will EVERYONE miss point of this thread?

Well I got iot and agree with you.

[Mallissin]

Mesina2 wrote...

Will EVERYONE miss point of this thread?

HEY! I understood the point of the thread. You want Bioware to spend tons of time making more dialog options so you can project yourself more accurately into the game, driving up the cost of voice acting and giving in to the cult of personality.

[jklinders]

looking at the first post OP may not have been clear enough. How IO read it is he was looking for in ME3 to have real consequences go with the choices that are presented. There just are not many examples of how seemingly small choices affect the story in ME3.

Kill the vicious mute gunwoman who ambushed after you have disarmed her? Sure fine, but now you have lost out on a chance to get an ally for the certainty of removing a threat. What seemed obvious in that game often could come back to bite you in the ass. I found myself going "pragmatic" a lot more in that game simply because there were too many problems with trying to be a true blue white knight crusader type.

[Wittand25]

I don't think that would be a good idea. Apart from the fact that you never actually know what Thornton will be saying at many instances you did not have a choice what to say only how you say it,that was often extremely annoying. And frankly while AP did track a lot of small decisions I never felt that I could make big decisions while playing the game ( you save someone just so that they get killed in the next cut-scene; the whole Madison incident; exactly the same situation at another location; the several forced binary choices) Even if the player actions make a bigger impact on the game than in any Bioware game, I personally never felt that any of the decisions was a big or as important as the decisions you can make in Bioware games.

[thegreateski]

If I wanted to play Alpha protocol then I would buy Alpha protocol.

edit: Which I did.

Modifié par thegreateski, 30 juillet 2010 - 07:51 .

[angj57]

A LOT of people in the Dragon Age 2 forum really loathe the dialogue wheel because they say you have no idea what your character is going to say. I never thought that was a big deal in Mass Effect but I can see how it would be in that. Also, I don't think I could go through the whole game listening to that voice acting.

But I do agree with your original point-- I didn't like how there was a "please everybody" option for the squad conflicts in ME2, although to be fair there were a couple times where you had to make these sort of choices, like at the missile base on Franklin.

[thegreateski]

angj57 wrote...

A LOT of people in the Dragon Age 2 forum really loathe the dialogue wheel because they say you have no idea what your character is going to say. I never thought that was a big deal in Mass Effect but I can see how it would be in that. Also, I don't think I could go through the whole game listening to that voice acting.

But I do agree with your original point-- I didn't like how there was a "please everybody" option for the squad conflicts in ME2, although to be fair there were a couple times where you had to make these sort of choices, like at the missile base on Franklin.

Technically you didn't use a "please everybody" option in ME2.

You used a "Shut up and work together for now so we don't all turn into Reaper chow" option.

The only difference between the Paragon option and the Renegade option is that Paragon Shepard says it more nicely.

Modifié par thegreateski, 30 juillet 2010 - 08:41 .

[archurban]

alpha protocol? are you kidding me? this game has a lot of problems. conversation system is bull**** that you don't have more choices or don't have detail on conversation. I think that you misunderstand. this game copied some stuff from ME 2, and other games. don't tell me that ME 2 has to learn something from it. that's bull ****. this kind of circular conversation system actually was invented by bioware first when they released ME 1.

[CroGamer002]

OK, what the f*ck people?!
I AM NOT SAYING ME3 SHOULD HAVE GAMEPLAY LIKE AP!!!!!!!
I said choices like AP that impact plot a lot.

[thegreateski]

Mesina2 wrote...

OK, what the f*ck people?!
I AM NOT SAYING ME3 SHOULD HAVE GAMEPLAY LIKE AP!!!!!!!
I said choices like AP that impact plot a lot.

It does.

Not as noticeably but it does.

krogan cure? Geth rewrite? The council? The Collector base? ect.ect.ect.

[CroGamer002]

thegreateski wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...

OK, what the f*ck people?!
I AM NOT SAYING ME3 SHOULD HAVE GAMEPLAY LIKE AP!!!!!!!
I said choices like AP that impact plot a lot.

It does.

Not as noticeably but it does.

krogan cure? Geth rewrite? The council? The Collector base? ect.ect.ect.

True but only in specific part of game.
I mean from 12 loyalty missions only 4 of them impact plot in ME3.
From N7 missions only 2 may impact plot in ME3.
Rachni Queen? Sure but Council? Both old and new one dismisses Reaper existence. Only diffrence is that humans are hated if you didn't saved old one. Not much impact for plot.
Also choosing councilor from how much I heard doesn't matter since Anderson will resign.
For Collector base in ending of game.


While in AP everything you do can impact plot and side characters liking you or hating you.

Modifié par Mesina2, 30 juillet 2010 - 10:08 .

[kraidy1117]

I agree. With AP it was hard to make choices and I felt like they mattered.

[thegreateski]

If Bioware tried to make ME3 that integrated then they would go bankrupt.