145 réponses à ce sujet

[Annihilator27]

Chris Priestly wrote...

Interesting guess. Not correct, but still quite interesting.

Looks like this claim *Shades* Has been dismissed. YEEEEAAAAHHH

[Shadow_Soul]

I don't know if this is good or bad. I really don't want Thane and Mordin to die but other trailers would be cool. I'm going to say that it's not correct.

[Chala]

Chris Priestly wrote...

Interesting guess. Not correct, but still quite interesting.

[levi0000]

Chris Priestly wrote...

Interesting guess. Not correct, but still quite interesting.

Does that mean the part about the British soldier in the trailer being unimportant is false as well?

[Uhh.. Jonah]

I believe Chris.

If it were true, I don't think that he would come on here and say that it's not.

But i really hope that your background will have a greater effect on ME3..

[Pacifien]

Evil Chris Priestly is notorious for believing Obi-Wan was telling Luke the truth about his father "from a certain point of view."

[--Master of All--]

Chris' comment aside, why would Bioware suddenly decide to put such a huge focus on the player's choice of background when most people probably don't even remember which one they chose at this point? I know I'm not certain which one I chose back in ME1.

Modifié par --Master of All--, 25 décembre 2010 - 08:05 .

[sympathy4saren]

I thought the trailer said "Earth", not "Earthborn".

[Brockololly]

shinobi602 wrote...
 It was hinted though that there could be early squad member deaths i.e. the suicide mission of ME2, so maybe at that point there could be new members to recruit or to fill the void.

Oh lovely, they'll pull an Alien 3 on us.

[Revenant_Mortalus]

Chris reply seems very much like the words of someone who's just heard a guess that's too close to the truth for comfort. I'm guessing that there will be other trailers highlighting elements of choice, but not necessarily the choice of background. Someone suggested on these forums, not long after ME2's release that possibly ME2 was never meant to have any drastic consequences of the choices that you made in ME1, and that when ME3 hits, THAT's when we'll see the real consequences of all the choices we've made so far. I'm also happy to believe that the Big Ben sniper is not a significant character.



Another thing that intrigues me - I always felt that Mass Effect was perfectly suited to a system whereby choosing a certain quest may have the result that another quest is no longer available. It was certainly hinted at in ME1's "distress call" trailer. The replay value with something like this would have been phenomenal, however after having imported a character across the two previous games, ME3 would have had a mind-bending amount of permutations, so it really wasn't feasible.



That being said, this is the final instalment in Shepard's trilogy, and judging from the teaser trailer, the tone they're going for is "the sh*t has REALLY hit the fan now" and mutually exclusive missions would really add to that. It'd give us a real sense of consequence, and of being able to impact the story in a truly meaningful way...

[Fiery Phoenix]

Chris Priestly wrote...

Interesting guess. Not correct, but still quite interesting.

I'd appreciate it if you could correct the guess for us, then.

Honestly, though, that sounds VERY intriguing. I hope the info is reliable because it really is something.

Thank you for sharing, OP!

[SomeKindaEnigma]

Revenant_Mortalus wrote...

Chris reply seems very much like the words of someone who's just heard a guess that's too close to the truth for comfort. I'm guessing that there will be other trailers highlighting elements of choice, but not necessarily the choice of background. Someone suggested on these forums, not long after ME2's release that possibly ME2 was never meant to have any drastic consequences of the choices that you made in ME1, and that when ME3 hits, THAT's when we'll see the real consequences of all the choices we've made so far. I'm also happy to believe that the Big Ben sniper is not a significant character.

Another thing that intrigues me - I always felt that Mass Effect was perfectly suited to a system whereby choosing a certain quest may have the result that another quest is no longer available. It was certainly hinted at in ME1's "distress call" trailer. The replay value with something like this would have been phenomenal, however after having imported a character across the two previous games, ME3 would have had a mind-bending amount of permutations, so it really wasn't feasible.

That being said, this is the final instalment in Shepard's trilogy, and judging from the teaser trailer, the tone they're going for is "the sh*t has REALLY hit the fan now" and mutually exclusive missions would really add to that. It'd give us a real sense of consequence, and of being able to impact the story in a truly meaningful way...

Completely agree.  Similar to how I think Bioware's last QR code they revealed to us ended up being the red herring - they knew we knew what their reveal was and that was their last-ditch effort to throw us off, admitting defeat.

I've only been on these forums, sparingly at that (until recently), since ME2 was released.  However, correct me if I'm wrong but to my understanding, Chris Priestly is somewhat of a misinformation provider.  So I'm not gonna back the article up completely, but nor am I gonna entirely trust what Chris has said.

[Uszi]

Brockololly wrote...

Oh lovely, they'll pull an Alien 3 on us.

Baaah.  I'll be so PO'd if we lose squad members in some sort of bull**** cinematic, that narrows it down to like, 3 or 4 people or something and that I have no control over.

I also don't like the fact that the soldier is random.

Kinda hoping it isn't true--at all.  The unique cinematics might be cool, but not worth the trade off, IMO.

[Revenant_Mortalus]

SomeKindaEnigma wrote...

I've only been on these forums, sparingly at that (until recently), since ME2 was released.  However, correct me if I'm wrong but to my understanding, Chris Priestly is somewhat of a misinformation provider.  So I'm not gonna back the article up completely, but nor am I gonna entirely trust what Chris has said.

You've actually been a member two days longer than me, but the impression from I get from Chris isn't someone who likes to give misinformation (although he IS Evil Chris Priestly for a reason  ).  Rather, I get the impression that he's someone who gets a real kick out of keeping people guessing.  Speculation and anticipation are all part of the fun of looking forward to a new game, and Chris just loves to add fuel to that fire, whether he's downplaying the relevance of something, or throwing vague little hints...

[SSV Enterprise]

Interesting, if true. The Spacer trailer would probably involve the Alliance fleet being torn apart by the Reapers. Don't know what they would do for the Colonist background...

[Uszi]

Ahh, yes, an "inside source." We have dismissed that claim.

[Hathur]

Chris Priestly wrote...

Interesting guess. Not correct, but still quite interesting.

That's code for "D'oh! We shoulda done that!"

[SomeKindaEnigma]

Revenant_Mortalus wrote...

SomeKindaEnigma wrote...

I've only been on these forums, sparingly at that (until recently), since ME2 was released.  However, correct me if I'm wrong but to my understanding, Chris Priestly is somewhat of a misinformation provider.  So I'm not gonna back the article up completely, but nor am I gonna entirely trust what Chris has said.

You've actually been a member two days longer than me, but the impression from I get from Chris isn't someone who likes to give misinformation (although he IS Evil Chris Priestly for a reason  ).  Rather, I get the impression that he's someone who gets a real kick out of keeping people guessing.  Speculation and anticipation are all part of the fun of looking forward to a new game, and Chris just loves to add fuel to that fire, whether he's downplaying the relevance of something, or throwing vague little hints...

I've been a member for close to a year now, but I've only gotten on here/posted like once or twice a month since then.  Now there's the ME3 chaos and winter break between semesters from school so now I'm pretty active up here lol.  I'm just saying from what I've seen in the bit I've been on here is that he feeds misinformation from time to time, quite possibly as a tool to "add fuel to the fire" as you say.

Anyways, I'm not trying to get this thread closed down by turning it into a discussion about someone from Bioware, so that said, I'm taking the article with a grain salt, but I'm taking what Priestly says with a grain of a neutron star.

[Iakus]

Chris Priestly wrote...

Interesting guess. Not correct, but still quite interesting.

I notice that there are several "guesses" in there though.  background shaping story, Earth being final showdown, soldier being random grunt, ME 3 taking place several years later, and squad deaths taking pace early on.  Wonder which one is incorrect? 

While I'm taking pretty much everything I'm hearing with a large grain of salt, the idea of Shepard's origin having any sort of impact on the game to be quite cool and intriguing.  I for one enjoyed the bonus mission and dialogue in ME 1 based on background and preservice history.  Plus the origins in DAO were just all sorts of awesome.

[JamieCOTC]

Right or wrong, I'd actually like to see background/psych come back into play, but since they f*cked Sole Survivor so much in ME2 I doubt any of it will matter.

[Revenant_Mortalus]

SomeKindaEnigma wrote...

Revenant_Mortalus wrote...

SomeKindaEnigma wrote...

I've only been on these forums, sparingly at that (until recently), since ME2 was released.  However, correct me if I'm wrong but to my understanding, Chris Priestly is somewhat of a misinformation provider.  So I'm not gonna back the article up completely, but nor am I gonna entirely trust what Chris has said.

You've actually been a member two days longer than me, but the impression from I get from Chris isn't someone who likes to give misinformation (although he IS Evil Chris Priestly for a reason  ).  Rather, I get the impression that he's someone who gets a real kick out of keeping people guessing.  Speculation and anticipation are all part of the fun of looking forward to a new game, and Chris just loves to add fuel to that fire, whether he's downplaying the relevance of something, or throwing vague little hints...

I've been a member for close to a year now, but I've only gotten on here/posted like once or twice a month since then.  Now there's the ME3 chaos and winter break between semesters from school so now I'm pretty active up here lol.  I'm just saying from what I've seen in the bit I've been on here is that he feeds misinformation from time to time, quite possibly as a tool to "add fuel to the fire" as you say.

Anyways, I'm not trying to get this thread closed down by turning it into a discussion about someone from Bioware, so that said, I'm taking the article with a grain salt, but I'm taking what Priestly says with a grain of a neutron star.

I know that dude - we're simply discussing someone's response to the OP.  No danger of a lockdown there, unless Evil Chris takes exception to the the slightest hint of a suggestion that he may have a heart after all 

I guess what I'm getting at is that while the suggestions in the OP may be somewhat off the mark, they may indicate the general direction that the final chapter is gonna take...

[Fiery Phoenix]

I'm gonna go ahead and say what's mentioned in the OP is at least partially true.

[Alarieliia]

I'm not going to believe everything I hear at this point. I need more proof before I'd believe it. But this is an interesting theory though. I'd like to see something origins wise done with ME3.

[Bluefuse]

I really need to stop reading any more about Mass Effect 3. I'm buying the game on Day 1 no matter what. I should play through it without spoiling anything for myself with how the game will play out. Argh, going now, bye.