188 réponses à ce sujet

[Skilled Seeker]

ErichHartmann wrote...

Doom and gloom!

What most of this forum is about. You people make me sad.

[Skilled Seeker]

Da_Lion_Man wrote...

I hope you can pick your character in the multiplayer like in Gears and Uncharted.

I'd pick Saren and Zaeed da mofo.

LOL same here.

And I disagree with the OP, I see ME3 giving us more options and RPG elements.

[DarthCaine]

The way I see it ME Multiplayer Shooter will influence ME3 in a good way, since they won't waste resources making Multiplayer in ME3

Modifié par DarthCaine, 19 novembre 2010 - 01:13 .

[Itkovian]

The OP seems to make the assumption that the rumoured ME shooter will be made before ME3, and so the fan reaction to it or some such will influence ME3.

The problem with that, of course, is that ME3 is certainly already under development by the Edmonton Mass Effect team, and I recall Christina Norman (or some other dev, but I think it was her) posting once that they would stick with ME2's successful formula (with improvements, no doubt).

Since both titles are being developed in parallel, I doubt the multiplayer title will have any influence on ME3. And really, if anything happens in ME3, it will be the improvement of its RPG elements, as their focus in ME2 was clearly to fix the Third Party Shooter aspect, which was extremely successful, and now they can focus on improving other aspects.

The rumoured multiplayer title, if true, is simply another game set in the same IP, and there is no reason for it to impact other games within the IP. After all, it's not like Mass Effect Galaxy somehow influenced ME2.

Thank you.

Itkovian

[VutaatVerd]

You all are misinformed.

[Jakeul200493]

How'd you know that they aren't developing a multiplayer FPS game so they can focus more on the RPG elements of ME3 and keep both markets?

[netfire_]

I still think the main character could be Kai Leng.

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

An ME3 that is more like ME1 is a fail. An ME3 with the same balance of RPG and shooter as ME2... that's a win.

[Phaedon]

CRISIS1717 wrote...

I can guarantee it because it's obvious. You all have the ME2 icons so I'm guessing you atleast played the game for a couple minutes.

ME2 was not a redesign prompted by Bioware's desire to make the Mass Effect games varied, they want to appeal to the shooter market that didn't pick up their game first time around. People daunted by all the stats and figures they need to customize were probably put off but picked it up easily in ME2. They don't want Mass Effect to be an rpg first and foremost before a shooter, they want it to be a shooter before rpg.

Just remember I called it, if we see more stream-lining and increased linearity feel free to come back to this post and apologize to me.

This post explains everything. OP, you can't guarantee anything, you just didn't like Bioware making a great choice and getting all the traditional RPG elements off ME2 (innovation ? change wtf?!?), and you just want to complain about it without having any logical arguments or basis. How do I know that ? You viewed a 3 second video and you concluded that somehow ME3 will be affected and will suck.

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

LiamN7 wrote...

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...

An ME3 that is more like ME1 is a fail. An ME3 with the same balance of RPG and shooter as ME2... that's a win.

I have the exact oppisite oppinion . But that is what it is an opinion.

If we high five, will our opinions cause the entire franchise to cancel out?  ME3 would become a box of air. 

[haberman13]

For me ME has gone the way of the new Star Wars movies, catering to a different audience.



But ... I still love the music! I'll pass on ME in the future though, ME2 was too much of a letdown.



All IMO!

[haberman13]

Spuudle wrote...

CRISIS1717 wrote...

 You could see the influences in Mass Effect 2 that they were gearing up to appeal less to rpg fans and more to shooter fans. At the time I predicted we'd see multiplayer in ME3. Pretty close guess, since this will be a precursor to ME3.

So rpg fans be afraid, whatever we see Mass Effect become next there's no doubt we'll see some implementation in the next game making it less rpg and even more shooter, they want a slice of that cake that CoD and Battlefield gets.

EA have already bombed out on MOH with this CoD obsession. I hope and pray they dont force ME to do the same.

Oh they will, they will.  EA/Bioware is run by people who don't play games, they play the stock market.  When you see "CoD Black Ops" made $60 billion in 2 hours you talk to the board at EA and say "we want that".

[DigitalFallout]

Does EA think becuase there Medal of honor didn't sell well a multiplayer game with the Mass effect name will? I certanly wouldn't buy it, even if it is Mass effect related, it wont be canon in my eyes.

[wrexfan32hanalei]

the only reason I picked up ME1 was I saw Wrex in a review. now they're giving us less and less wrex. how do you thinl i feel

[nelly21]

This argument is absurd.



The rpg fans need to understand that Mass Effect isn't now and never was "their" game. ME has always been a shooter/rpg. It remains a shooter rpg. The argument that there is no customization is also idiotic. Go to the strategy forum and see all the builds for all the classes. The visual interface for leveling has been cleaned up, that's it.



As for the op. Your argument is fluff. Nonsensical gibberish by a disgruntled customer. The sad part is that unlike most people who simply move on when they no longer like a product, you and your ilk have to ruin the experience for overwhelming majority that did love the game. Bioware doesn't owe you anything. They are free to make any game in any genre they want. You are free to decide whether or not to buy it. It is a simple system.



And finally, please stop posting your grand accusations then hiding behind the "IMO" card. If you want validate your thread, give us concrete evidence that Mass Effect would be better off as a Baldur's Gate rip off. Otherwise, don't cite your dumb ass opinions as "fact".

[f1r3storm]

DigitalFallout wrote...

Does EA think becuase there Medal of honor didn't sell well a multiplayer game with the Mass effect name will? I certanly wouldn't buy it, even if it is Mass effect related, it wont be canon in my eyes.

Except that Medal of Honor did sell well.

[NvVanity]

So whats the latest rumor about this next game? I heard something about Abraham Lincoln and Sherlock Holmes trapped on Noveria fighting off Geth with an Incisor rifle in a Call of Duty meets Pikmin like fashion.

[wookieeassassin]

Everyone here has it wrong. There IS no Mass Effect 3. This multiplayer game is ME3. Seriously though, nobody needs to get too worked up considering this is only a rumor. The projects are being worked on by different teams. ME3 is already a decent way into production so I doubt there will be a lot of crossover between what the other team is doing. It has already been said that ME3 is supposed to have more RPG elements anyway.



Phaedon: No, it is YOUR OPINION that taking out RPG elements was a "great choice" that made ME2 better. It didn't, the game was greatly entertaining regardless, but it would have been ever better if it still had more RPG stuff. RPG elements didn't have to be removed to make the game better, they just needed to be fixed. The inventory in ME1 didn't even group like items or stack items that were the same. That could have just been fixed instead of axed to make the game "less overwhelming" to people.

Also, you didn't say this, but the whole thing about people wanting to "have to drink water and fly the Normandy in real time" is stupid. I don't know of anyone that truly wants Mass Effect to have those kind of elements in the game. Anytime I've ever seen anyone complain about the changes to ME2 it is that they took away the inventory, took away about 70% of the skills, and gave enemies immunity to almost all skills so that you had to shoot away for a while before you even got to use them.



Don't get me wrong, the game was great, but it wasn't as much of an RPG as I would've liked it to be. I definitely don't want it to be like some RPGs where the combat is turn based and based purely on your skill accuracy. I like that it is an RPG/shooter hybrid. It is unique. That is why I don't want it to be even more of a shooter. While the improvements in the shooting mechanics were great,aking a lot of the RPG elements out of ME2 didn't make it better. Yes, there wasn't a clunky inventory system, but that is because they completely removed it. Completely removed is not the same as fixing. The shooting mechanics in ME2 were much, much better than the first one, but they came at the expense of making the game more of a shooter than an RPG. If people are so daunted by having to choose skills and god forbid, buy and sell things at a store they don't need to buy RPGs (even hyrbid RPGs) and complain about it.



There are so many shooters on the market out there already. Why take something that is original and make it even less original (more and more of a shooter)? Yeah, there may be more people who prefer just shooting, but this is a prime example of the rule of the majority. The majority may like shooters more than RPGs, but by catering to the majority, the minority, **whose opinions also matter** are shut out.



Nelly21: All you shooter fans need to realize it was never "your game". Mass effect has always been an rpg/shooter and is still an rpg/shooter. I just did exactly what you did.Your argument is awful. I haven't heard a single person YET say they wanted to turn this into more of a pure RPG. What has been repeated over and over again is that they want it to remain a good balance between skills and all the standard RPG elements and the shooting mechanics. What people are vehemently opposed to is for ME3 to be even more of a shooter, because that would take away from the RPG part of it. Face it, Bioware is primarily an RPG making company. They made the great KOTOR, they made ME1, they made Dragon Age. People expect Bioware titles to be hybrid RPGs at the very least.



Anyway, you are right, there is customization, but not near the level that there was in ME1. There are 3-5 different armor mods for each piece of the armor, and one or two of them (at least in my playthrough) ended up being more useful than the others in basically every situation. I did like that each of the parts actually changed appearance though, instead of all being the same. Being able the change the color and pattern on your armor was a GREAT addition, I hated getting a really nice piece of armor in the first only to have it look like total crap (ex: a light human armor with good stats for Kaidan that ended up being pink and white). As far as leveling goes, it has changed. They removed 70% of the skills from the first game. There are no non-combat skills anymore. Also, instead of having skills you can upgrade a point at a time, its quite possible to end up at level 30 and have 2 or 3 skill points that are wasted.

I

[nelly21]

I'm not a shooter fan. There are three shooters that I can tolerate. That's total.

I am, however, a video game fan. If the game is good, I'm onboard. I don't care about the genre as long as the experience is there. But please don't insult my intelligence by saying you don't want it to be more of pure rpg. All your arguments are based on your checklists for what an rpg should be. Nevermind what vision Bioware already had for their IP. Nevermind that Bioware wants to be innovative. No. You look at the elements of the game with a theoretical checklist of what rpgs should have.

Furthermore, criticizing Phaedon for stating his opinion and then backing up your argument with your opinion is a perfect example of your inability to state facts. The facts are that ME 2 outsold ME 1. If your going to pull the tyranny of the majority argument, fine. But please don't say that ME 2 would have been better with more bullet points from your rpg-o-meter. The numbers don't back up your arguments.

Modifié par nelly21, 19 novembre 2010 - 11:34 .

[Phaedon]

wookieeassassin wrote...

Everyone here has it wrong. There IS no Mass Effect 3. This multiplayer game is ME3. Seriously though, nobody needs to get too worked up considering this is only a rumor. The projects are being worked on by different teams. ME3 is already a decent way into production so I doubt there will be a lot of crossover between what the other team is doing. It has already been said that ME3 is supposed to have more RPG elements anyway.

Phaedon: No, it is YOUR OPINION that taking out RPG elements was a "great choice" that made ME2 better. It didn't, the game was greatly entertaining regardless, but it would have been ever better if it still had more RPG stuff. RPG elements didn't have to be removed to make the game better, they just needed to be fixed. The inventory in ME1 didn't even group like items or stack items that were the same. That could have just been fixed instead of axed to make the game "less overwhelming" to people.
Also, you didn't say this, but the whole thing about people wanting to "have to drink water and fly the Normandy in real time" is stupid. I don't know of anyone that truly wants Mass Effect to have those kind of elements in the game. Anytime I've ever seen anyone complain about the changes to ME2 it is that they took away the inventory, took away about 70% of the skills, and gave enemies immunity to almost all skills so that you had to shoot away for a while before you even got to use them.

Don't get me wrong, the game was great, but it wasn't as much of an RPG as I would've liked it to be. I definitely don't want it to be like some RPGs where the combat is turn based and based purely on your skill accuracy. I like that it is an RPG/shooter hybrid. It is unique. That is why I don't want it to be even more of a shooter. While the improvements in the shooting mechanics were great,aking a lot of the RPG elements out of ME2 didn't make it better. Yes, there wasn't a clunky inventory system, but that is because they completely removed it. Completely removed is not the same as fixing. The shooting mechanics in ME2 were much, much better than the first one, but they came at the expense of making the game more of a shooter than an RPG. If people are so daunted by having to choose skills and god forbid, buy and sell things at a store they don't need to buy RPGs (even hyrbid RPGs) and complain about it.

There are so many shooters on the market out there already. Why take something that is original and make it even less original (more and more of a shooter)? Yeah, there may be more people who prefer just shooting, but this is a prime example of the rule of the majority. The majority may like shooters more than RPGs, but by catering to the majority, the minority, **whose opinions also matter** are shut out.

Nelly21: All you shooter fans need to realize it was never "your game". Mass effect has always been an rpg/shooter and is still an rpg/shooter. I just did exactly what you did.Your argument is awful. I haven't heard a single person YET say they wanted to turn this into more of a pure RPG. What has been repeated over and over again is that they want it to remain a good balance between skills and all the standard RPG elements and the shooting mechanics. What people are vehemently opposed to is for ME3 to be even more of a shooter, because that would take away from the RPG part of it. Face it, Bioware is primarily an RPG making company. They made the great KOTOR, they made ME1, they made Dragon Age. People expect Bioware titles to be hybrid RPGs at the very least.

Anyway, you are right, there is customization, but not near the level that there was in ME1. There are 3-5 different armor mods for each piece of the armor, and one or two of them (at least in my playthrough) ended up being more useful than the others in basically every situation. I did like that each of the parts actually changed appearance though, instead of all being the same. Being able the change the color and pattern on your armor was a GREAT addition, I hated getting a really nice piece of armor in the first only to have it look like total crap (ex: a light human armor with good stats for Kaidan that ended up being pink and white). As far as leveling goes, it has changed. They removed 70% of the skills from the first game. There are no non-combat skills anymore. Also, instead of having skills you can upgrade a point at a time, its quite possible to end up at level 30 and have 2 or 3 skill points that are wasted.
I

RPG= Role Playing Game

I don't see how inventories holding 15 versions of an item help me play a role. You talked about 'removal of RPG elements'. I disagree, I think that ME2 added RPG elements. More in-depth customization and interrupts. What was cut exactly ? Stats ? Yes, stats.

Why do we need stats, anyway ? Do they help you live the RPG experience ? No they don't. The only reason is that the RPGs you are playing today are originated from board games. Is rolling a dice more RPG-ish than clicking on 'Investigate' ? Do stats affecting accuracy make you feel like playing a role, instead of using skill ?

Traditional RPG elements is something that keeps the industry back. Any innovation, succesful or not, should be welcome. I am Commander Shepard, when I shoot, he shoots. Not the other way around. When I shoot, there should be no stat to calculate the chances of me missing the target.

The shooter argument doesn't have any justification behind it. I don't like shooters ? It's a game with guns, you'll have to shoot. I felt like playing a role when I was shooting at a husk, not when I was pausing the game and deciding what kind of firing mode I should use in KOTOR.

Modifié par Phaedon, 20 novembre 2010 - 12:39 .

[durasteel]

I don't see how an inventory is an RPG element. To me the inventory has always been one of the biggest immersion breaking aspects of games, because you are carrying enough garbage to equip an entire squad in your pockets, and because an inventory system means loot. Loot is, traditionally, absolutely ridiculous. If you don't strip every corpse, smash every vase, break open every crate, rummage through every trash can, and sift through every pile of crap you see, you will miss the best equipment. Also, every dungheap seems to have an item or two that the best shops in town will buy from you. Let's not forget the fact that those same "best shops" often only sell lame equipment, while much better equipment is often to be found on wild animals and wretched humanoids wearing rags.

The only real improvement that the ME2 gear system needs is for companions, most of whom should have "clothes" on the ship and "armor" on missions, and all of whom should have some real choices that Shepard can unlock and apply.

Oh, and helmet toggles for all the DLC armor. Must have.

Modifié par durasteel, 20 novembre 2010 - 01:22 .

[Googlesaurus]

ME1's inventory broke immersion because there was too much redundant stuff and you could instantaneously change weapons in the middle of a battle. You had more money than some governments and an armament that could win a war. 

ME2's inventory broke immersion because there were no weapons to be found at all anywhere. I'm Command Shepard, and I can't buy a damn sniper rifle unless I scavenge it in the cold corner of an abandoned construction site. How pathetic for the supposed savior of the galaxy.

It's not that hard to ask for something in the middle. 

Modifié par Googlesaurus, 20 novembre 2010 - 01:34 .