202 réponses à ce sujet

[Mr. MannlyMan]

xSTONEYx187x wrote...

Regarding the comic, I'm so so happy they are including it. I only have two main accounts that I'm importing into ME 3, so when I finish them at least I can use the comic to make choices from the previous two games and go on from there, instead of having to play through ME 1 and 2 all over again.

You're not saying you're not going to play at least one full playthrough of the trilogy, are you?

[CroGamer002]

Mesina2 wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

- All classes can wield all weapons unhindered now
- Adept, Engineer, and Sentinal will likely be limited to two weapons, three for Vanguard and Infiltrator

Regarding the "nays" from me:

- This is the worst one, IMO. What's the point of having classes at all anymore if any of them can just use whatever weapon they like. Seems like more streamlining to me.
- See above basically.

Streamlined?

By giving you choice to have any weapon you want only limited number by specific class?

How?

Could you answer this one Terror?

[Terror_K]

Mesina2 wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

- All classes can wield all weapons unhindered now
- Adept, Engineer, and Sentinal will likely be limited to two weapons, three for Vanguard and Infiltrator

Regarding the "nays" from me:

- This is the worst one, IMO. What's the point of having classes at all anymore if any of them can just use whatever weapon they like. Seems like more streamlining to me.
- See above basically.

Streamlined?

By giving you choice to have any weapon you want only limited number by specific class?

How?

Could you answer this one Terror?

Because I feel that  in a way the classes are defined by the weapons now, to a degree. It seems like the equivalent of letting warriors use a mage's staff in a fantasy RPG. Part of the point of classes like Adepts and Engineers was that they had to resort to lesser weapons and rely on their skills, and I believe classes should be limited like that. Now we're just going to see a massive amount of people using Assault Rifles because they can for every class. Why use a Pistol or SMG or Shotgun when you can just use an AR? Especially the SMG which was always kind of a case of "mini assault rifles for those who can't have them"). Besides, what's wrong with just letting us either finish the game or come across something that adds the weapon skill as an optional bonus like we had before? I've always felt that in RPGs how they work and how well classes are determined are done so as much by their restrictions as they are by their freedom. And I always felt that --as a whole-- ME2 gave players freedom where it should have restricted them, and restricted them where it should have had freedom.

I'm actually guessing this is BioWare's way of trying to encourage people to branch out into other classes and not just be Soldiers after the data they got told them more people played Soldiers than all the other classes put together. They're probably doing it this way so more players will go, "I can now have the AR with any class, so let's try something else" since they won't have to be worried about being saddled with less effective weapons. I just get the feeling that it's going to end up with other weapons being redundant now. I'm personally not going to use anything that I feel wouldn't suit my class, with the exception of my favourite Sniper-Vanguard who I always specced to use SR's.

I can see a plus-side to this though. Aside from encouraging other classes to be played, I can perhaps hopefully not be saddled with a weapon I don't want, ala ME2. Being forced to have to have a Shotgun for my Pistol Vanguard was always a pain because I'd designed her as a pistol specialist from the original game, while another different Vanguard was my Shotgun one. Originally they played rather differently in ME1, but in ME2 they played almost the same weapon-wise. If it means that aspect goes, I'll be happy.

Modifié par Terror_K, 09 avril 2011 - 07:10 .

[Kim Shepard]

YAY:

- Game begins with Shepard on Earth
- Shepard is on trial in regard to the events in Arrival*
- Reapers invade while the trial is happening
- Prologue: Shepard escapes to the Normandy, off to start finding allies, fighting Reaper troops
- Squadmates include Garrus
- Confirmed appearances (may not be squadmates): Wrex, Mordin, Legion, and Anderson
- Enhanced RPG elements
- More freedom with character skills
- Larger skill trees
- Powers will evolve several times, not just once
- Weapons are like the ones in ME2, have a set list
- All classes can wield all weapons unhindered now
- There will be limited slots to carry these weapons
- Soldier can carry all weapons at once
- Adept, Engineer, and Sentinel will likely be limited to two weapons, three for Vanguard and Infiltrator
- Numerous endings
- Who you have in your squad and which allies you recruit greatly impact the endings that are available
- No multiplayer

NAY:

- Squadmates include Liara and Ashley/Kaidan**

Undecided/Not enough information/Don't care either way:

- Squadmates include James Sanders***
- Screenshot of Ashley with her hair down
- Game will show a "previously on Mass Effect" comic to make decisions if you're starting from scratch
- Illusive Man plays a big role****
- Cerberus is out to kill Shepard****
- Mods returning, swap out parts such as barrels, scopes (effect both the weapon's combat performance and its appearance)

* I haven't played any of the DLC, but I'm sure they'll go over the basics during the trial.
** Only if they're required squadmates. If not, I don't mind.
*** Don't know enough about him to judge.
**** I don't have the magazine yet, so I'm not sure how these two things are explained, and I'm trying to reserve judgement until then. Does it ever say that TIM wants to kill Shepard, or just Cerberus, as if they're independent from each other? From what we know now, I can't see any reason for TIM to betray a loyal Shepard, or one that has been nothing but helpful. Even a Shepard who destroys the base is still the galaxy's best hope. If TIM does want to kill Shepard, that'll be in the "NAY" category. I want the option to work with him. If Cerberus, independent of TIM, wants to kill Shepard... well, that's interesting.

[Elite Midget]

Oh you Garrus fans i want to say...

Welcome to the party! Liara and Ashley/Kaiden were wondering when you would ditch the rest of the killables and return as one of the few returning Squaddies from past ME games!

[CroGamer002]

Terror_K wrote...

Because I feel that  in a way the classes are defined by the weapons now, to a degree. It seems like the equivalent of letting warriors use a mage's staff in a fantasy RPG. Part of the point of classes like Adepts and Engineers was that they had to resort to lesser weapons and rely on their skills, and I believe classes should be limited like that. Now we're just going to see a massive amount of people using Assault Rifles because they can for every class. Why use a Pistol or SMG or Shotgun when you can just use an AR? Especially the SMG which was always kind of a case of "mini assault rifles for those who can't have them"). Besides, what's wrong with just letting us either finish the game or come across something that adds the weapon skill as an optional bonus like we had before? I've always felt that in RPGs how they work and how well classes are determined are done so as much by their restrictions as they are by their freedom. And I always felt that --as a whole-- ME2 gave players freedom where it should have restricted them, and restricted them where it should have had freedom.

I'm actually guessing this is BioWare's way of trying to encourage people to branch out into other classes and not just be Soldiers after the data they got told them more people played Soldiers than all the other classes put together. They're probably doing it this way so more players will go, "I can now have the AR with any class, so let's try something else" since they won't have to be worried about being saddled with less effective weapons. I just get the feeling that it's going to end up with other weapons being redundant now. I'm personally not going to use anything that I feel wouldn't suit my class, with the exception of my favourite Sniper-Vanguard who I always specced to use SR's.

I can see a plus-side to this though. Aside from encouraging other classes to be played, I can perhaps hopefully not be saddled with a weapon I don't want, ala ME2. Being forced to have to have a Shotgun for my Pistol Vanguard was always a pain because I'd designed her as a pistol specialist from the original game, while another different Vanguard was my Shotgun one. Originally they played rather differently in ME1, but in ME2 they played almost the same weapon-wise. If it means that aspect goes, I'll be happy.

I can see where you're going but I still don't see how is that streamlined?

Or do I just don't know real meaning of that word?

[Barquiel]

I see...Liara and VS haters are having a field day.

Fiery Phoenix wrote...

Call me whatever, but it's a big fat yay for every single one of them for me.

more or less this...

[Clover Rider]

GodWood wrote...

Yay
Ash is a squaddie.

Nay
She's been Mirandafied

Yay
More RPGness

Nay
classes streamlined

Yay
Garrus is a squaddie

Nay
Liara is a squaddie

This.

[Terror_K]

Mesina2 wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

Because I feel that  in a way the classes are defined by the weapons now, to a degree. It seems like the equivalent of letting warriors use a mage's staff in a fantasy RPG. Part of the point of classes like Adepts and Engineers was that they had to resort to lesser weapons and rely on their skills, and I believe classes should be limited like that. Now we're just going to see a massive amount of people using Assault Rifles because they can for every class. Why use a Pistol or SMG or Shotgun when you can just use an AR? Especially the SMG which was always kind of a case of "mini assault rifles for those who can't have them"). Besides, what's wrong with just letting us either finish the game or come across something that adds the weapon skill as an optional bonus like we had before? I've always felt that in RPGs how they work and how well classes are determined are done so as much by their restrictions as they are by their freedom. And I always felt that --as a whole-- ME2 gave players freedom where it should have restricted them, and restricted them where it should have had freedom.

I'm actually guessing this is BioWare's way of trying to encourage people to branch out into other classes and not just be Soldiers after the data they got told them more people played Soldiers than all the other classes put together. They're probably doing it this way so more players will go, "I can now have the AR with any class, so let's try something else" since they won't have to be worried about being saddled with less effective weapons. I just get the feeling that it's going to end up with other weapons being redundant now. I'm personally not going to use anything that I feel wouldn't suit my class, with the exception of my favourite Sniper-Vanguard who I always specced to use SR's.

I can see a plus-side to this though. Aside from encouraging other classes to be played, I can perhaps hopefully not be saddled with a weapon I don't want, ala ME2. Being forced to have to have a Shotgun for my Pistol Vanguard was always a pain because I'd designed her as a pistol specialist from the original game, while another different Vanguard was my Shotgun one. Originally they played rather differently in ME1, but in ME2 they played almost the same weapon-wise. If it means that aspect goes, I'll be happy.

I can see where you're going but I still don't see how is that streamlined?

Or do I just don't know real meaning of that word?

I was actually using the more modern definition. Y'know... like whenever BioWare (or another developer) uses the term "streamlined" and what they really mean is "dumbed-down for a more modern audience by making it overaccessible" etc.

Jokes aside (sort of...), what I basically meant is that they've made something that should be restricted (IMO) over-accessible now. It's a little like the same principle as when tech-skills were no longer needed in ME2 to unlock, decrypt and hack things and just any class could do it, taking away a restriction that somewhat defined the class and rightfully restricted the player (IMO) so that anybody could do it with any class. Basically catering to the whiners who want to have their cake and eat it too in an RPG, not realising that such restrictions are largely part of the point and partly what defines various classes, etc. It's very similar here: the AR used to be partly what defined the Soldier. It was the class that didn't get the funky tech or biotic skills, but got the best overall weapon instead. Now anybody can use it and one of the factors that defined the Soldier class has been lost.

[Merci357]

Terror_K wrote...

I was actually using the more modern definition. Y'know... like whenever BioWare (or another developer) uses the term "streamlined" and what they really mean is "dumbed-down for a more modern audience by making it overaccessible" etc.

Jokes aside (sort of...), what I basically meant is that they've made something that should be restricted (IMO) over-accessible now. It's a little like the same principle as when tech-skills were no longer needed in ME2 to unlock, decrypt and hack things and just any class could do it, taking away a restriction that somewhat defined the class and rightfully restricted the player (IMO) so that anybody could do it with any class. Basically catering to the whiners who want to have their cake and eat it too in an RPG, not realising that such restrictions are largely part of the point and partly what defines various classes, etc. It's very similar here: the AR used to be partly what defined the Soldier. It was the class that didn't get the funky tech or biotic skills, but got the best overall weapon instead. Now anybody can use it and one of the factors that defined the Soldier class has been lost.

And the funny thing about "streamlining" is, games like Fallout 3 or New Vegas have a (far) more complex skill/perk/stat system, compared to anything BioWare did in the recent years. Though both games outsold everything BioWare did in those years, as well.

So the question is, why should they get rid of complex RPG features? Why should they cater to the shooter crowd? The question should rather be, how can we make those systems work. To give anyone access to the same weapons is a rather odd choice - why play a Soldier now? The (by far) most played class in ME2...

[CroGamer002]

Merci357 wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

I was actually using the more modern definition. Y'know... like whenever BioWare (or another developer) uses the term "streamlined" and what they really mean is "dumbed-down for a more modern audience by making it overaccessible" etc.

Jokes aside (sort of...), what I basically meant is that they've made something that should be restricted (IMO) over-accessible now. It's a little like the same principle as when tech-skills were no longer needed in ME2 to unlock, decrypt and hack things and just any class could do it, taking away a restriction that somewhat defined the class and rightfully restricted the player (IMO) so that anybody could do it with any class. Basically catering to the whiners who want to have their cake and eat it too in an RPG, not realising that such restrictions are largely part of the point and partly what defines various classes, etc. It's very similar here: the AR used to be partly what defined the Soldier. It was the class that didn't get the funky tech or biotic skills, but got the best overall weapon instead. Now anybody can use it and one of the factors that defined the Soldier class has been lost.

And the funny thing about "streamlining" is, games like Fallout 3 or New Vegas have a (far) more complex skill/perk/stat system, compared to anything BioWare did in the recent years. Though both games outsold everything BioWare did in those years, as well.

So the question is, why should they get rid of complex RPG features? Why should they cater to the shooter crowd? The question should rather be, how can we make those systems work. To give anyone access to the same weapons is a rather odd choice - why play a Soldier now? The (by far) most played class in ME2...

Sandbox games sell a lot.

[Ahriman]

Terror_K wrote...
With regards to the trial, I personally think it's great. Even if it doesn't go anywhere it's a great way of showing right from the get go a lot of our choices and thus personalising the experience, and that's always a good thing. It should mean that every beginning is different for every player and import, since I imagine it'll be going over events from the past as a whole and not just isolated to the Arrival stuff. Much like the opening of ME2 with Miranda and TIM discussing several key points about what Shepard has done which change depending, and then who the ME1 squaddie/LI you see running to get you is, etc. but even moreso. To me it's not so much about the trial as it is how it personalises things. This is just me guessing again though.

I disagree. It will work only for the first time (for someone who doesn't read anything about ME3), then this trial will be boring. "Terrorist bla-bla muss murderer bla-bla ... where are those damn Reapers?"

Modifié par Wizz, 09 avril 2011 - 09:42 .

[TobyHasEyes]

DxWill10 wrote...

All sound like yays to me although i am curious about some matters

-as someone stated earlier; will SMGs make a return? I imagine if having to choose between SMGs and Assault rifles, it will be the latter every time
-So does TIM want Shepard even if you handed him the base?
-I'm totally for Liara as a squad member, but will she be doing this while simultaneously organizing the massive resource shadow broker ship?
-It's nice to see Ashley let her hair down (literally)
-Comic book seems like an interesting idea, without it, it wouldn't really be fair to those who didn't have access to ME1
Looking forward to it all. I'll need to continue to be on the lookout for games that will distract me until the holidays xD

 Some people (like me) would pick the SMG over the Assault Rifle, for at least one build. I like having an Adept who relies on his powers and pistols. Was some resentment at having to carry another weapon around with me, stopped a bit of my roleplaying

[Phaedon]

Elite Midget wrote...

Oh you Garrus fans i want to say...

Welcome to the party! Liara and Ashley/Kaiden were wondering when you would ditch the rest of the killables and return as one of the few returning Squaddies from past ME games!

Killables?

I thought that they were called...zombies?

[The BS Police]

Yay: Everything!

Nay: People saying Liara returning as a squadmate is a Nay!

Modifié par The BS Police, 09 avril 2011 - 11:04 .

[lovgreno]

Phaedon wrote...

Elite Midget wrote...

Oh you Garrus fans i want to say...

Welcome to the party! Liara and Ashley/Kaiden were wondering when you would ditch the rest of the killables and return as one of the few returning Squaddies from past ME games!

Killables?

I thought that they were called...zombies?

Why not just call them variables? Damn variable zombies.

[Terror_K]

Wizz wrote...

Terror_K wrote...
With regards to the trial, I personally think it's great. Even if it doesn't go anywhere it's a great way of showing right from the get go a lot of our choices and thus personalising the experience, and that's always a good thing. It should mean that every beginning is different for every player and import, since I imagine it'll be going over events from the past as a whole and not just isolated to the Arrival stuff. Much like the opening of ME2 with Miranda and TIM discussing several key points about what Shepard has done which change depending, and then who the ME1 squaddie/LI you see running to get you is, etc. but even moreso. To me it's not so much about the trial as it is how it personalises things. This is just me guessing again though.

I disagree. It will work only for the first time (for someone who doesn't read anything about ME3), then this trial will be boring. "Terrorist bla-bla muss murderer bla-bla ... where are those damn Reapers?"

I still think it can be more than just that. The prosecutor and/or defendant for Shepard can both list off examples of how Shepard is a threat to galactic peace or a big damn hero depending on choices you've made throughout the game.

For example, the prosector could say things like...

"You've been known to put the entire galaxy's fate in your hands and deem yourself judge, jury and executioner before, Shepard! On Noveria you let loose a Rachni Queen; a species known for causing galaxy-wide destruction! On Virmire you sacrificed one of your own squadmembers, Lieutenant Kaidan Alenko, who died in a nuclear explosion! When The Geth attacked The Citadel you chose to sacrifice thousands of human lives to protect a single ship just because it had three aliens you considered better than us aboard! You deliberately wasted an opportunity to destroy a major Geth stronghold, instead choosing to rewrite them to serve you! You even admit to destroying a Collector base rather than keep it for study, without any input from Alliance officials."

Or, something like this...

"You've been known to put the entire galaxy's fate in your hands and deem yourself judge, jury and executioner before, Shepard! On Noveria you committed genocide by killing a Rachni Queen; a species once thought to be extinct! On Virmire you sacrificed two of your own squadmembers, Urdnot Wrex and Gunnery Chief Ashley Williams, who both died in a nuclear explosion! When The Geth attacked The Citadel you chose to sacrifice the Citadel Council aboard The Destiny Ascension when you could have saved them! You destroyed a major Geth stronghold without an authorisation! You even admit to giving a Collector base to the terrorist organisation Cerberus."

And that's just one rant from one person. That doesn't even cover what could be said by a defendant, those who support and speak out against Shepard (which could be almost anybody, from Anderson and Udina, to The Council and any squaddie, and even more minor characters like Shiala, Captain Kirrahe, etc.) and even Shepard him/herself. All of these characters could also refer to prior events during the whole thing.

Modifié par Terror_K, 09 avril 2011 - 11:06 .

[AngryFrozenWater]

YAY

- Prologue: Shepard’s escape to the Normandy, off to start finding allies, fighting Reaper troops
- Squadmates include Liara, Ashley/Kaiden, Garrus, James Sanders
- Screenshot shown of Ashley with her hair down
- Confirmed appearances (may not be squadmates): Wrex, Mordin, Legion, and Anderson
- Game will show a “previously on Mass Effect” comic to make decisions if you’re starting from scartch
- Enhanced RPG elements
- More freedom with character skills
- Larger skill trees
- Powers will evolve several times, not just once
- Mods returning, swap out different parts such as barrels, scopes (effect both the weapon’s combat performance and its appearance)
- There will be limited slots to carry these weapons
- Soldier can carry all weapons at once
- Adept, Engineer, and Sentinel will likely be limited to two weapons, three for Vanguard and Infiltrator
- Numerous endings
- Who you have in your squad and which allies you recruit greatly impact the endings that are available
- No multiplayer

NAY

- Game begins with Shepard on Earth
- Shepard is on trial in regard to the events of Arrival
- Reapers invade while the trial is happening
- The Illusive Man plays a big role
- Cerberus is out to kill Shepard
- Weapons are like the ones in Mass Effect 2, have a set list
- All classes can wield all weapons unhindered now

Remarks

- About the trial: Yes... We know the Council never believes Shepard. It is getting old.
- TIM is angry too? What's new? We've dealt with him before.
- The inventory thingy is still not resolved. What a crap.
- The weapon set was part of the class differentiation. Too bad that's gone now.
- I like that the prologue wants to get into the meat of the game as soon as possible.
- I welcome more complexity to the RPG elements. Let the ME team inform the DA team about why they did it.
- Numerous endings are cool as long as they branch early enough. Otherwise it is still cosmetic.
- I can understand the importance of allies, but question the importance of crew members (unless done well).
- Very happy that there is no MP.

[Phaedon]

[quote]Terror_K wrote...
Because I feel that  in a way the classes are defined by the weapons now, to a degree.[/quote]
No. classes were always defined by their powers.

[quote]It seems like the equivalent of letting warriors use a mage's staff in a fantasy RPG. Part of the point of classes like Adepts and Engineers was that they had to resort to lesser weapons and rely on their skills, and I believe classes should be limited like that.[/quote]
Limited to 2 weapons...
An SMG is an SMG, it has nothing to do with the classes, and a mage's staff is a very bad example. A trained soldiers should know how to use firearms, regardless if they are less effective on some depending on their class.

[quote]Now we're just going to see a massive amount of people using Assault Rifles because they can for every class. Why use a Pistol or SMG or Shotgun when you can just use an AR? Especially the SMG which was always kind of a case of "mini assault rifles for those who can't have them").[/quote]
You are disliking a gameplay design decision and speculating on possible outcomes (all of which are negative???). I'd like to think that a bunch of certified gameplay designers are more than capable of predicting that and making adjustements in order to avoid everyone not using all types of weapons.

[quote]Besides, what's wrong with just letting us either finish the game or come across something that adds the weapon skill as an optional bonus like we had before?[/quote]
You mean the accuracy stat?
Yeah, I'd like to have things restricting shooter elements and stopping the game from being a perfect hybrid just so that we can say that 'Hey, look we have an RPG-like element!' 

[quote]I've always felt that in RPGs how they work and how well classes are determined are done so as much by their restrictions as they are by their freedom. And I always felt that --as a whole-- ME2 gave players freedom where it should have restricted them, and restricted them where it should have had freedom.[/quote]
What? No, why do you want to be restricted. 
RPGs don't have restrictions, they have stats. In a classic RPG, you have almost ZERO control over your character's actions during combat. You can only select powers and assign skill points, and use items, in order for the simulation to be more complex.

The combat in pure RPGs is a simulation.
And it was never intented that way, it was just that, well devs couldn't have you control your character through the technolodgy of that time?

[quote]I'm actually guessing this is BioWare's way of trying to encourage people to branch out into other classes and not just be Soldiers after the data they got told them more people played Soldiers than all the other classes put together. They're probably doing it this way so more players will go, "I can now have the AR with any class, so let's try something else" since they won't have to be worried about being saddled with less effective weapons. I just get the feeling that it's going to end up with other weapons being redundant now. I'm personally not going to use anything that I feel wouldn't suit my class, with the exception of my favourite Sniper-Vanguard who I always specced to use SR's.[/quote]
And, how do you know that it won't, suit your class.
[/quote]

Modifié par Phaedon, 09 avril 2011 - 11:16 .

[Ahriman]

Terror_K wrote...
I still think it can be more than just that. The prosecutor and/or defendant for Shepard can both list off examples of how Shepard is a threat to galactic peace or a big damn hero depending on choices you've made throughout the game.

For example, the prosector could say things like...

"You've been known to put the entire galaxy's fate in your hands and deem yourself judge, jury and executioner before, Shepard! On Noveria you let loose a Rachni Queen; a species known for causing galaxy-wide destruction! On Virmire you sacrificed one of your own squadmembers, Lieutenant Kaidan Alenko, who died in a nuclear explosion! When The Geth attacked The Citadel you chose to sacrifice thousands of human lives to protect a single ship just because it had three aliens you considered better than us aboard! You deliberately wasted an opportunity to destroy a major Geth stronghold, instead choosing to rewrite them to serve you! You even admit to destroying a Collector base rather than keep it for study, without any input from Alliance officials."

Or, something like this...

"You've been known to put the entire galaxy's fate in your hands and deem yourself judge, jury and executioner before, Shepard! On Noveria you committed genocide by killing a Rachni Queen; a species once thought to be extinct! On Virmire you sacrificed two of your own squadmembers, Urdnot Wrex and Gunnery Chief Ashley Williams, who both died in a nuclear explosion! When The Geth attacked The Citadel you chose to sacrifice the Citadel Council aboard The Destiny Ascension when you could have saved them! You destroyed a major Geth stronghold without an authorisation! You even admit to giving a Collector base to the terrorist organisation Cerberus."

And that's just one rant from one person. That doesn't even cover what could be said by a defendant, those who support and speak out against Shepard (which could be almost anybody, from Anderson and Udina, to The Council and any squaddie, and even more minor characters like Shiala, Captain Kirrahe, etc.) and even Shepard him/herself. All of these characters could also refer to prior events during the whole thing.

I understand what you mean. It would be nice to hear 'crime' list of my Paragon. I really supported this trial/convinction idea because it fits both Paragon and Renegade.

For Paragon it would be strong moral point. He/she has done everything for everyone's good and never thought about him-/herself. And what is the result? Everyone calls Shepard traitor and madman, breaking everything what was done to save them. Do these people deserve to be saved?

For Renegade, who solves every problem with bullets, convinction would be good time to think about his/her lifestyle or just increase amount of hate even more. Send to hell Alliance, then send to hell Reapers.

And all that was cuted by cheap Reaper interruption. Why should I care what they think if that just words and nothing more?

[Jzadek72]

YAY

- Game begins with Shepard on Earth
- Shepard is on trial in regard to the events of Arrival
- Reapers invade while the trial is happening
- Prologue: Shepard’s escape to the Normandy, off to start finding allies, fighting Reaper troops
- Squadmates include Liara, Ashley/Kaiden, Garrus, James Sanders
- Screenshot shown of Ashley with her hair down
- Confirmed appearances (may not be squadmates): Wrex, Mordin, Legion, and Anderson
- The Illusive Man plays a big role
- Cerberus is out to kill Shepard
- Enhanced RPG elements
- More freedom with character skills
- Larger skill trees
- Powers will evolve several times, not just once
- Mods returning, swap out different parts such as barrels, scopes (effect both the weapon’s combat performance and its appearance)
- There will be limited slots to carry these weapons
- Soldier can carry all weapons at once
- Numerous endings
- Who you have in your squad and which allies you recruit greatly impact the endings that are available
- No multiplayer
- Weapons are like the ones in Mass Effect 2, have a set list
- All classes can wield all weapons unhindered now
- Adept, Engineer, and Sentinal will likely be limited to two weapons, three for Vanguard and Infiltrator


NAY

- Game will show a “previously on Mass Effect” comic to make decisions if you’re starting from scartch

The comic we had last time was full of retcons and laughably scripted - "Kaidan Alenko - a good kid".

[Kamagawa]

Hmmm...
Most people guessed the trial...
I agree about the conic thing not beint to great of an idea, thoug that way they can add things that were in the DLCs and in the novels and comics. I am really hoping that the tourian counciler is at the trisl so i can say "we arn't being attacked, you dismissed them, how can they exist if you already dismissed my claim"....or something like that.

[Terror_K]

Phaedon wrote...

No. classes were always defined by their powers.

Funny... because so far they've been defined by both to a degree, just in different ways. In ME1 you could technically use every weapon type, but only train in those suited to your class. In ME2 you were simply restricted to only the weapons that suited your class. Now in ME3 there's absolutely no restriction on the weapon types at all.

You are disliking a gameplay design decision and speculating on possible outcomes (all of which are negative???). I'd like to think that a bunch of certified gameplay designers are more than capable of predicting that and making adjustements in order to avoid everyone not using all types of weapons.

As I said, not all aspects of this are negative. If this means I'm not saddled with weapons I have no interest in taking, that's a good aspect of it. Secondly, no offense, but these are the same gameplay designers who made some really bad decisions in ME2 when it came to gameplay... some retardedly bad, IMO (such as Ammo Powers instead of mods, thermal clips, the God-modding linear research/upgrade system, the removal of mods entirely, removal of passive tech-skills in favour of "anybody can hack/decrypt/unlock now!", The Hammerhead, etc.). And they also designed the system that was responsible for more players going for Soldier than all the other classes put together.

You mean the accuracy stat?
Yeah, I'd like to have things restricting shooter elements and stopping the game from being a perfect hybrid just so that we can say that 'Hey, look we have an RPG-like element!' 

Actually, no... I meant the ability for you to unlock the use of a weapon your class previously couldn't use before, in ME1 by getting the appropriate achievement and in ME2 by choosing it from the "dormant" Collector ship.

What? No, why do you want to be restricted. 
RPGs don't have restrictions, they have stats. In a classic RPG, you have almost ZERO control over your character's actions during combat. You can only select powers and assign skill points, and use items, in order for the simulation to be more complex.

Of course I want to be restricted. classes in an RPG are defined by the skills/abilities/traits they can and can't take and the equipment they can and can't use. Even in those without classes, the good ones at least limit you so you can't take/use everything and have to specialise in certain areas to be good, meaning a Jack of All Trades is a master of none. A pure warrior shouldn't be able to weild magical spells for instance, just like a non-biotic shouldn't be able to use biotic attacks. That's a restriction, and rightfully so. classes and builds are determined just as much by what you can't and don't have as they are by what you can and do. Restriction is necessary for the thing to be defined. Otherwise instead of having classes we may as well just give Shepard every single ability on the list and let them choose them all without restriction. This should apply to equipment as much as it does skills, IMO.

Modifié par Terror_K, 09 avril 2011 - 12:13 .

[AngryFrozenWater]

About the trial... That would also be a convenient place for your first LI interest to turn up. If you cheated on her he or she might betray you. If you didn't cheat he or she helps you escape.

[Dave666]

Phaedon wrote...

Elite Midget wrote...

Oh you Garrus fans i want to say...

Welcome to the party! Liara and Ashley/Kaiden were wondering when you would ditch the rest of the killables and return as one of the few returning Squaddies from past ME games!

Killables?

I thought that they were called...zombies?

I was very tempted to use six or seven (and believe me it wouldn't be hard to find) of Elite Midget's quotes where he states just that and that he's using 'Facts' and 'Logic' and that we're all delusional, but quit frankly?  I cba.

Instead I'll just bump his thread and people can judge his sillyness for themselves.