165 réponses à ce sujet

[V-rex]

Above all else, I fear how they will portray Ashley in Mass Effect 3.
I worry about whether or not she'll even be in the game.
I worry about whether or not she'll be made into a default 'enemy' of Shepard.
I worry about whether or not they will use that stupid 'she was indoctrinated on Horizon' theory as a plot twist.
Most of all though, I worry about whether or not she'll suffer from 'flanderization' and be made into the stereotypical racist that everyone keeps declaring her as, even though it would flat out contradict her actual characterization in the first game.

So yeah, I got a lot of concerns about the treatment of one of my favorite characters.

Also, of course, I worry about the story being bad or once again it all being all about recruiting the 'best of the best' again. I worry about the inclusion of multiplayer and I worry about what might happen to what would now be a 'campaign' in the event of multiplayer.
I worry about whether or not my choice will actually have any impact on the story.

Finally, I wonder about what I'm going to do after it's all over. After everything has ended and I've gotten closure, what do I do next?

[Collider]

Squad mates from ME1 and ME2 don't return.

That's my primary concern.

[GodWood]

iCanHearTheScreaming wrote...
You do realize that the canon Shepard is renegade in virtually every choice? Just sayin...

I don't see how this is relevent but...
1/ There is no canon Shepard. There is only a default Shepard.
2/ The choices for the default Shepard are not chosen because they are the renegade choices, they are chosen to minimize past references/decisions in ME1.
e.g) If ME3 was to follow the same formula and have a default ME2 Shepard he would have - Destroyed the Geth Heretics (renegade) and blew up the Collector Base (stupid paragon)

jeweledleah wrote...
if you mean "and they lived happily ever after" for shepard, I'm hoping that its an option just not the only option. if you are hoping its not an option at all - then umm...poor Bioware. some of us really would love to give our Shepards a bit of lasting happiness you know, don't you think they earned it?

I suspect ME3's ending will be presented similar to Dragon Age in the sense that there will be epilogue screens/a slide show that tell the player the results of their actions over the past 3 games. (obviously after some epic cutscene or whatever)
What I want is for it not to be 'everything works out and everyone lives happily ever after'

e.g) Save the genophage? Krogan war breaks out.
Kill the council? Hostilities between Council races and humans continue.
Save the council? Council races interests take precedence over humans (or something to that effect)

So basically both positives and negatives for all our choices.

paragon=/=win - there are plenty renegade decisions that make your playtime smoother,

I'm talking major decisions not "oh you shot X here's an extra 20 creds".
I want paragon decisons to have both positives and negatives similar to what the renegade gets.

e.g)If you Focus on Sovereign/Kill the Council - humans get more power (good), but all the aliens hate you (bad) however an arms race develops between the turians and humans which may end up helping against the Reapers (good AND bad)

See? That one decision has both good and bad consequences as opposed to the paragon relsult which was 'everyone loves you and you have no obvious negative side effects'.

and plenty paragon decisions that end up backfiring.

I can think of......one, maybe two.

Modifié par GodWood, 27 février 2011 - 03:28 .

[Gentleman Moogle]

I do hope that some of our paragon decisions in the previous two games come back to bite us in the ass. Spare the crazy former-biotic in Jack's quest? He comes back after you. Blow up the collector base (I did, incidentally)? Now you don't get fancy guns when the Reapers attack.

[Pwener2313]

The galaxy is a big place, even more when it's plunged into war. How can one unstable biotic track down the most dangerous guy in the universe in the most sophisticated ship ever made? That makes no sense.

[jeweledleah]

V-rex wrote...

Above all else, I fear how they will portray Ashley in Mass Effect 3.
I worry about whether or not she'll even be in the game.
I worry about whether or not she'll be made into a default 'enemy' of Shepard.
I worry about whether or not they will use that stupid 'she was indoctrinated on Horizon' theory as a plot twist.
Most of all though, I worry about whether or not she'll suffer from 'flanderization' and be made into the stereotypical racist that everyone keeps declaring her as, even though it would flat out contradict her actual characterization in the first game.

So yeah, I got a lot of concerns about the treatment of one of my favorite characters.

now concider that they made Ashley and Kaidan interchangable in ME2 and imagine him written as doing all of the above (if you thought making Ashley sound racist rather then cynical was bad, think about it happening to the guy who suggests you save the council over every alien squad mate in a game?)

At least Ashley fans get to see her in some of the advertising :/

as for happy endings and consequences of paragon/renegade actions - yeah, council decision was definitely one of the examples of what I was talking about and I suspect that collector base/Geth/Rachni  will also end up being those decisions.  and happy endings- as long as all hell breaks loose couple of decades after or so - I'm fine with that.  I just don't want there to never be any reprieve.

Modifié par jeweledleah, 27 février 2011 - 03:38 .

[Dark Specie]

iCanHearTheScreaming wrote...
And I agree with you on the ending. I appreciate a happy ending, but a story is all the better for a well-executed sad ending. They've supposedly said they're going to end it on a light note though.

I personally think there should be happy ending(s) available, but of the "Earn Your Happy Ending"-kind, if you know what I mean.

As for my own fears... Well, I guess I have a few, but I guess scripted deaths/unpreventable events tops my list...

[V-rex]

jeweledleah wrote...

V-rex wrote...

Above all else, I fear how they will portray Ashley in Mass Effect 3.
I worry about whether or not she'll even be in the game.
I worry about whether or not she'll be made into a default 'enemy' of Shepard.
I worry about whether or not they will use that stupid 'she was indoctrinated on Horizon' theory as a plot twist.
Most of all though, I worry about whether or not she'll suffer from 'flanderization' and be made into the stereotypical racist that everyone keeps declaring her as, even though it would flat out contradict her actual characterization in the first game.

So yeah, I got a lot of concerns about the treatment of one of my favorite characters.

now concider that they made Ashley and Kaidan interchangable in ME2 and imagine him written as doing all of the above (if you thought making Ashley sound racist rather then cynical was bad, think about it happening to the guy who suggests you save the council over every alien squad mate in a game?)

I certainly agree with this, Ashley and Kaidan aren't the same person and they shouldn't be given a role that's basically a pallet swap, and Kaidan doing something completely out of character would bother me quite a big deal.
I guess I'm worried about how they would portray the VS in general, basically anything I've said for Ashley can be applied for Kaidan too.
Especially the indoctrinated on Horizon plot twist, seriously that's one thing that Ashley/Kaidan fans shouldn't have to deal with.

[Shadow of Sparta]

i'm going to be a little disappointed if the paragon/renegade system is back as it restricts the moral ambiguity of choices.more choices like virmire survivor would be good (i.e.no clear 'right' choice).i hope it's not the same length as ME2.this is the finale,make it 60hrs long!
alas i am but an insignificant post in an ocean of posts so my opninon counts for squat and bioware won't care about it.

[landis963]

Without even dipping into story issues, I fear returning to the clunky mess of gameplay that was ME1, especially the arcless grenades that were hard to aim and to time. As this will probably not happen, it is, obv., a minor fear.

However, I also fear characters being killed off with the emotion spent on the drop of a hat; especially if that is the last time they are mentioned. This applies to the VS as well; don't tell me "oh they died off screen" and then march off without a backwards glance. Other fears: railroading on par with the 10 to 12-man sardine can in ME2, dropping plot threads like hot potatos after the Reapers are defeated, bad endings that do not require making counter-intuitive and frankly idiotic steps at every turn, and introducing clones to replace squad members. If Tali died on the SM, for example, don't give us another bubbly quarian techie, give us Reegar, and likewise for other squad members. I have faith in you Bioware, you can do this.

[Tazzmission]

my major concern is the saved data choices from both 1 and 2... i loved me2 but i felt dissapointed that the choice data was over hyped and honestly didnt do much for the game. my 2nd big dissapointment was the collectors werent that much of a threat even though i think harbinger is cool but throught the whole game you have about 3 situations with them. i did however enjoy the whole loyalty pitch with the crew and i just pray that in me3 the final battle wont be a let done like the human reaper....

[Tazzmission]

and for the love of god please do NOT pull a paul grayson human reaper stunt with shepard

[Mr. MannlyMan]

- Story that drops all political intrigue & high-brow, provocative themes, and instead focuses solely on the *pewpewpew EPIC CUTSCENE pewpew BADASS LINE pew ASS SHOT* while Casey Hudson basically neuters the writers.
- Too much comedy (ie. I would think that with all that's going on, the atmosphere would be darker for the final act)
- Generic Hollywood soundtrack that departs too much from the original style.
- Having 10+ squadmates (leaving little room for actual interaction).
- Multiplayer: there's a reason Bethesda chose not to include multiplayer in Skyrim, and I commend them for realizing how redundant it is to include multiplayer in such a singleplayer-centric game. Of course, they don't have their hands down EA's pants, so I'm still wondering whether Bioware made that call. There can't be any harm in following the form of such a successful RPG series like The Elder Scrolls, can there?

[Bluko]

I'm namely concerned the game will be shorter in length, since they really seem to be rushing it this time. The game no matter how you spin it is being released in less then 2 years. That's not a lot of time to make a proper sequel. Yeah yeah they're using the same engine and they've been working on it since before ME2 was released. Although I'm not so sure about that last part. Thing is it takes time to make levels, etc. There's only so much streamlining and you can do to make it go faster.

I would really feel better if the game was being released in early 2012. Also the fact that they've been working a lot on ME2 DLC (yes I know it's a seperate team), means ME3 doesn't have as many Devs working on it as there could be. I just have a bad feeling EA is rushing Bioware to release the game in-time for Christmas so it will sell better...

I already got the distinct feeling EA rushed Bioware to release ME2 even. Zaeed and Kasumi for example should have been part of the squad to begin with. They were originally intended to be, but they ran out of time apparently and decided to sell them off as DLC. Well okay they didn't with Zaeed which is nice, but I don't DLC will work so well with ME3 since that game is literally the end.

As long as ME3 has a good story (doesn't need to be a mind-bender like Inception) but you know a little more substantial then the Collector plot I think I'll be okay. I'm namely interested in learning about the origins of the Reapers and their purpose. I'm actually less concerned with who lives, dies, etc. And as long as the game doesn't end in an utterly stupid fashion with Alliance fleets driving back the Reapers I'll be cool with it. If it turns out that we can beat the Reapers simply by banding together the galaxy's fleets I'm going to face-palm hard. I don't care what tech advancements have been made in the past 2-3 years since ME1, there's no way we'll stand a chance against any fleet of Reapers. These Reapers are suppose to be nigh-invincible, it should not be possible to beat them. It's as ludcrious as a bunch of cavemen with sticks destroying modern day tanks.

Anyways as long as the game is good 40 hours or so. Both of my first playthrus in ME1 and ME2 took me about 45 hours. I expect ME3 to be just as long, maybe even a little longer. If it's only 30 hours or so I'll be annoyed, and if it's only about 20 hours long then I'll just be pissed that it's that breif. The best thing about the Mass Effect games is that they actually take some time to beat. I mean I don't want a super long 100 hour RPG game, but I don't want a 12 hour shooter either. ME1 and ME2 really have that good sweet spot in terms of length and content. Though in my mind ME1 had much better replayability. Only thing ME2 has going for it is that the classes are very distinct.

Modifié par Bluko, 27 février 2011 - 07:47 .

[Bluko]

Mr. MannlyMan wrote...

- Story that drops all political intrigue & high-brow, provocative themes, and instead focuses solely on the *pewpewpew EPIC CUTSCENE pewpew BADASS LINE pew ASS SHOT* while Casey Hudson basically neuters the writers.
- Too much comedy (ie. I would think that with all that's going on, the atmosphere would be darker for the final act)
- Generic Hollywood soundtrack that departs too much from the original style.
- Having 10+ squadmates (leaving little room for actual interaction).
- Multiplayer: there's a reason Bethesda chose not to include multiplayer in Skyrim, and I commend them for realizing how redundant it is to include multiplayer in such a singleplayer-centric game. Of course, they don't have their hands down EA's pants, so I'm still wondering whether Bioware made that call. There can't be any harm in following the form of such a successful RPG series like The Elder Scrolls, can there?

Couldn't agree more. While I like multiplayer games, it's either one of two things:

1) Tacked on multiplayer

A lot of singleplayer games do this to entice people to get the game since it will have more replayability. Some examples are Uncharted 2, Dead Space 2, Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood, etc. Most of the time these are fine, and are fun for a couple extra hours. If ME3 does have multiplayer it'll probably be something like those games. Generally speaking this sort of multiplayer does not detract or in any way ruin the game. But when you really look at it, does it really add anything? Yeah you might play it for a few hours and some may even play it often. For the majority of players though these modes become forgettable since they aren't the truly in-depth.

Which really begs the question why even bother? Generally it's better if that effort were spent into "bonus missions", etc. I mean if ME3  were to tack on multiplayer (I won't be surprisedif it does), but to me it really doesn't add anything, since I'll likely be bored of it after a weekend or two. It's pointless and a silly way to help sell a game. Besides ME1 and ME2 have plenty of replayability. That shouldn't even be an issue with ME3 assuming it's anything like the previous titles.

2) Full-fledged multiplayer

This is simply put games like Halo and Call of Duty. Games that are purposely created to have lasting multiplayer. While these games may or may not have great campaigns, it's always all about the multiplayer. If Mass Effect did something like this... then yeah that would be messed up.

But I don't think there's a snowball's chance in hell of this happening. At least not with ME3... future titles maybe, maybe. There's no way ME3 will turn into a Halo or CoD type game.

[Valmarn]

I have to say, thanks to Wall of Sound no longer composing the soundtrack, I have no real fears about Mass Effect 3, since my biggest fear is already a reality.

Emotional detachment FTW.

If I had anything else to fear about Mass Effect 3, it would be:

2. Further dumbing-down of the talents customization, and lack of improvement to it...i.e. a step back towards the way it was in ME 1.

3. (as mentioned by others) Linear gameplay. Even though it's a BioWare game, so there's little chance of such a thing happening, this on the least because of how important quality of gameplay is.

4. (also mentioned by others) An unreasonably short amount of gameplay time (less than 60 hours, for a completionist playthrough). Naturally, quantity of gameplay comes after quality, which is why this is at number 4.

5. Continuation of the ridiculous ammo/thermal clip system. A hybrid thermal clip/overheat system would be so much better: swap out the clip to keep shooting, or let it cool down.

[Keltoris]

Unjustified Fear #1: It's going to somehow suck.
Justified Fear #1: Multiplayer.
Unjustified Fear #2: It's going to start with Earth being invaded.
Justified Fear #2: It'll take me less than 30 hours to finish (ME2 took 27 for playthrough number one, and a full DLC run takes ~24 on Veteran).
Unjustified Fear #3: It's somehow going to suck.
Justified Fear #3: The ending will leave me a jibbering wreck, angry that they haven't dealt with plot bunnies 17, 31 & 46.

[I will kill you both]

Pfff Veteran? Not like the game is any hard if...we have been playing shooters since forever...srsly Insanity Mode is almost the same thing.

[Da_Lion_Man]

I think that in these kind of games, it's a bit hard to tell how long your first playthrough will take since it's pretty personal.

I don't understand why people want a longer game... longer does not equal better. ME2 took me 35 hours, I thought that was a perfect length.

[282xvl]

Irrational fear? Maybe... but what I dread in the darkest of my night terrors is a...

Deus Ex Machina ending. No... please... no... NO...!

Terrifyingly it seems to have a high probability of happening and would be a horrific let-down for me personally. I want to see an ending that I can believe is plausible (within the established tech/lore etc.) I do NOT want to see a computer virus loaded into Harbinger and lol-insta-pwn all the reapers. I do NOT want to see a space wizard artifact discovered somewhere that turns them all into toads. I do NOT want 1000 DN-sized super AI's to go full retard or self destruct because one soldier punches out harbinger's "avatar" body... etc etc. I want an epic story and ending with massive fleet battles and galactic-sized force strengths smashing into each other. Win or lose, I want the spectacle of a truly galactic war... and I have a creeping dread down my spine that this might be denied...

[I will kill you both]

Er...I don't want that. Next thing we know they'll add RTS bull**** gameplay into it and it will kill the game. (Brutal LEGEND ANYBODY)

[Flamewielder]

My only fear for ME3:

"I'm Commander Shepard... and I'm coming to get the rest of you reapin' alien bastards!!" *proceeds to kick ass, and chew bubble gum* "I'm your worst nightmare, you uninvited alien reapin' scum-sucker! And right now you're all that stands between me and a planet full of babes - so get ready to bend over and kiss your ass goodbye, Harbinger!"

As much as I'm a day one fan of ol' Duke, I just hope they don't sacrifice a great universe and turn an outstanding action RPG into another mass-appealing shooter.

[CroGamer002]

TheShogunOfHarlem wrote...

 As excited as I am about ME3 there are some worrying thoughts that creep into my head. Now I don't have sky high, unattainable expectations for ME3 unless you find these expectations high:
- 40+ hours of gameplay.
- A strong non-linear open-ended story.
- No Multiplayer. (or a strictly optional MP)

What do you mean by that?
Isn't multiplayer optional in every game that has both Singleplayer and Multiplayer?

Also ME3 with multiplayer is not an option.
Spin off games are welcomed.

The last one maybe pushing it. Especially with EA's (Namely Frank Gibeau) opinion on the future of single player gaming. Now I'm not an EA basher, but some recent comments that the individual has made in conjunction with DICE canceling Mirror's Edge 2 (one of the reasons being mentioned was no multiplayer) has shook my assurance that ME3 will be a quality single player experience.

Wasn't reason of cancellation of sequel poor sales?
Also game had no multiplayer and VERY short singleplayer.
Poor example.

Now I am unsure about the relationship that Bioware has with EA and I tend to think that EA had virtually no say in ME2's development so but rumors of a MP element being added on to ME3 troubles me. I hope that someone from Bioware shoots this rumor down in the coming months. (much like Rocksteady did with Arkham City)

Multiplayer in ME3 is highly possible to be fake one.
No RPG game ever had a multiplayer, unless it's a MMO but that's a different story.

*snip*

Anything below 35-40 hours is unreasonable.

I'm fine with 30 hours, but more the merrier.

Unreasonable: 
Length- ME3 will be a 5-8 hour game. 
Incredibly Linear gameplay

Unfortunately that's all I can come up with now.

5-8 hours game?
Where did you even get the idea that RPG can be THAT short?

Modifié par Mesina2, 27 février 2011 - 03:46 .