252 réponses à ce sujet

[C9316]

I thought ME3 and GOW3 looked the same graphically, but with my time with the Gears 3 beta I believe Gears will have more responsive controls. That aisde the fact that ME3, a RPG/Shooter hybrid can even come close to a pure shooter like Gears is an accomplishment in itself

[Mann42]

Razorburn wrote...

Where is BioWare promising to add more RPG elements? All I've seen is gun customization, and the lack of story mechanics is what RPG fans are talking about. There's lots of content coming out but all of it is in favor of combat mechanics, and not one mention of the plethora of RPG mechanics that could be in game; such as meeting new races, what's replacing planet scanning, crew interactions (aside from the squad), etc.

As for making predictions, I never said the game was going to be garbage. But when I hear "mission was supposed to be X but was in practice Y," and with a seemingly passing interest in story, I usually prepare for the worst.

Sure, most of the RPG stuff has been verbal or written promises from Bioware, either on this forum or in interviews, but in this particular case I do trust them.

I was pretty sure we weren't going to see a lot of the RPG mechanics and systems this E3 if only because the game is 9 months away from shipping, and I know how much can change in those last 9 months. Nobody wants to show off and promise something that's going to change about 15 times between this month and next. I know that in the course of any game project, your game systems can go through drastic overhauls in just the last leg of the project as you iterate, iterate, iterate.

Showing off anything more complex than basic mechanics right now would be stupid on Bioware's part, even if they're pretty certain a specific system is going in, because everything will change between today and the day the game ships, even if it's only a tweak here and an iteration there. The shooter mechanics are basic mechanics, along with generic information about 'melee'. Even if they change every class and the way their class powers work, you're still going to be hiding behind cover, rolling around, and shooting things.

Everything we've seen or been told has either been very general or very tentative, with lots of qualifiers. You can not judge the final systems of a game based on an E3 demo a year before the game launches. If you could, they wouldn't wait a year to bring the game out.

Modifié par nexworks, 07 juin 2011 - 08:04 .

[Razorburn]

nexworks wrote...

Sure, most of the RPG stuff has been verbal or written promises from Bioware, either on this forum or in interviews, but in this particular case I do trust them.

Well BioWare is the premier RPG studio, I've been a fan since the first Baldur's Gate. They have made great products for years and am still expecting the same quality in ME3.

However, with the shooter mechanics of ME that crowd has become interested in the game, and the "PVP" crowd always has a way of complaining until they get what they want, usually to the point of ruining games. All people like myself are asking for is the ME formula that we had for years.

Edit: Don't get me wrong, I enjoy pure action shooters, and other genre's like strategy games. But when I play any game with RPG in there, whether it's an MMORPG, ARPG, or a straight RPG, I expect RPG elements. The original ME set the bar with what RPG elements were in game, and that bar should be raised, not lowered.

Modifié par Razorburn, 07 juin 2011 - 08:34 .

[MissMaster]

I fail to see how Mass Effect is anything like Gears of War.

[Razorburn]

MissMaster wrote...

I fail to see how Mass Effect is anything like Gears of War.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

[Mann42]

MissMaster wrote...

I fail to see how Mass Effect is anything like Gears of War

I guess it's the fact that I see all of the core shooter mechanics inherent in Gears of War: cover, sprinting, combat rolls, rush-melee. I supposed I've been close enough to systems like these to see them as relatively agnostic, or at least, recognizing the inherent mechanical and gameplay similarities. Oh, and the fact that they use the same game engines.

I also expect MORE than that, too. Just the layer of powers that ME2 added made it a better 'shooter' to me, and was the start of some good RPG tactics and decision making.

Razorburn wrote...
The original ME set the bar with what RPG elements were in game, and that bar should be raised, not lowered.

I agree! However, I also appreciate that ME2 raised their shooter bar as well (within its own franchise), helping fill out the hybrid part. I think all standards should be raised, and I just don't want to see the shooter part get killed by RPG mechanics; I want it complimented.

I know a lot of people felt burnt by ME2's lack of RPG complexity. But making a better shooter doesn't instantly preclude making it a better RPG, especially since a lot of the shooter code has already been written by somebody else.

Modifié par nexworks, 07 juin 2011 - 09:01 .

[SalsaDMA]

As long as they are not showing evidence of rpg stuff, but only talking difusely and vaguel bout it in a rather generic term while continuing to ram down pictures or trailers showcasing combat, I will continue to be extremely critical of them in this regard.

Heck, if anything the trailers they showed have turned down expectations int his regard. Most glaring case: Trailer showing Shepard and Anderson running around with shepard jumping to Normandy in the end.

2 things stand out to me where IF they actually had bothered doing anything on the roleplaying part, they should have showed it:

The kid in the duct: 2 possible choices and the result we got form the picked one in the trailer could have lead to something, yet it is quite clear the other choice will result in no more difference than what was showed. A choice without consequence is meaningless for a roleplayer. They COULD have showed off an 'increased rpg' by letting the choice dictate, for example, wether or not you had to protect the little kid as you were trying to make your escape. As is, it's just a wasted opportuinity and might as well had been done without the dialouge wheel popping up at all, the choice is that inconsequential to look at.

Second place is Ashley and some other guy helping Shepard aboard the normandy at the end. Ash is looking.... different than what you would expect her to. What COULD have been done here, were the devs saying that Ash looked like this because she was the LI of the Shepard in the demo in ME1 and wanted to look 'fine' first time they saw each other again, despite the rather chaotic meeting (hey, love makes people silly), and that if Ash weren't the LI of Shepard she would have showned up in full battlearmor and helmet. They didn't and yet another opportuinity was wasted to improve roleplaying. Cause if they don't tell things like this, you can be damn sure it's because it's not in the game. Things like these are what is worth showing off, but instead we get: "oohh pretty effects and lights... And look at those combat moves..."

Sorry. It's a shooter and they have abandoned the rpg if they can't even show any rpg in their PR stuff that is supposed to make us want the game.

[Mann42]

SalsaDMA wrote...

Cause if they don't tell things like this, you can be damn sure it's because it's not in the game.

You seem pretty entrenched in your opinion, so I won't argue with it. However, as someone that has made games for a living, there is no truth to this statement.

As the developer, sometimes it's just not ready, and sometimes you just don't know. Sometimes you DO know, but marketing wants it to be a surprise some other time. Sometimes you know you're going to do something, but you're still prototyping or iterating on the idea and you don't want to show it to players because, as you are proving with this statement, players will assume it is a promise, and if anything about it changes, you've now lied. Sometimes you're just waiting for the last day of the convention so you have something to reveal.

Also, this is E3. E3 is an industry show, and the demos they show are designed to be played in 5 minutes so they can rotate bodies through the floor. RPG mechanics do not lend themselves to be shown off in 5 minutes, neither does dialogue. I've seen plenty of streamlining for E3 demos; this looks just like that. Trim out any micromanagement and reduce your dialogue choices to 2 options so that people can get into your booth and then get out again feeling like they saw more than a few menus. 

Sometimes it's just not ready, and they're not going to tell you anything until it's ready. Especially not Bioware (after DA2), and especially not EA Marketing (one of the most insane and draconian marketing departments in the industry). 

However, just because they don't show it nine months before the game ships, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Modifié par nexworks, 07 juin 2011 - 09:01 .

[The Spamming Troll]

so they show off the new melee system in ME3 and its deemed better then gears???

i dont think so.

the melee sound is already annoying me.

[SalsaDMA]

nexworks wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

Cause if they don't tell things like this, you can be damn sure it's because it's not in the game.

You seem pretty entrenched in your opinion, so I won't argue with it. However, as someone that has made games for a living, there is no truth to this statement.

As the developer, sometimes it's just not ready, and sometimes you just don't know. Sometimes you DO know, but marketing wants it to be a surprise some other time. Sometimes you know you're going to do something, but you're still prototyping or iterating on the idea and you don't want to show it to players because, as you are proving with this statement, players will assume it is a promise, and if anything about it changes, you've now lied. Sometimes you're just waiting for the last day of the convention so you have something to reveal.

Also, this is E3. E3 is an industry show, and the demos they show are designed to be played in 5 minutes so they can rotate bodies through the floor. RPG mechanics do not lend themselves to be shown off in 5 minutes, neither does dialogue. I've seen plenty of streamlining for E3 demos; this looks just like that. Trim out any micromanagement and reduce your dialogue choices to 2 options so that people can get into your booth and then get out again feeling like they saw more than a few menus. 

Sometimes it's just not ready, and they're not going to tell you anything until it's ready. Especially not Bioware (after DA2), and especially not EA Marketing (one of the most insane and draconian marketing departments in the industry). 

However, just because they don't show it nine months before the game ships, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

The problem with your logic is that if they had any real thing to show, they would have done so. They don't. All we get is flash and bangs and action scenes. The dialog scenes we get seem inconsequential, and for all their talk about rpg, they are showing NONE, zero, nada, zilch of it in presentations. Heck, they can't even describe what they mean with 'improved rpg' aside an off remark that they "improved the skill trees"...

If you claim you have something in your game and think it is a selling point, you show it at presentations. For all the yells made at 'dumping down' and 'this might be DA2 all over again' they are showing none of the rpg to show that they do indeed pay attention to the roleplaying aspect.

I'm sorry, but I cannot believe a salesman trying to sell me something he won't show me while he instead shows me all other kind of stuff instead to try and impress me, but adamantly refuses to show the thing he keeps claiming is in the product he wants to sell me, yet cannot produce evidence of. If anything, it feels like they are dishonest in their claims of it improving in the rpg when they cannot show anything for it while trying to 'hide' the question with flashy stuff instead which have everything to do with another type of genre entirely.

Buying into such a product with that kind of marketing would be outright stupid.

Modifié par SalsaDMA, 07 juin 2011 - 09:09 .

[sp0ck 06]

SalsaDMA wrote...


Sorry. It's a shooter and they have abandoned the rpg if they can't even show any rpg in their PR stuff that is supposed to make us want the game.

This is the kind of attitude that drives me nuts.  Do you want "deep RPG combat," like the great fun that was swordplay in Oblivion?  I feel like all the haters who whine about RPG elements feel some kind of resentment that the combat in ME has become equal to premium shooters.  So it has great combat mechanics.  And based off a few minutes of demo footage from e3, you state "they have abandoned the rpg."  What did you want to see on the huge movie sized screen in the arena?  A skill tree?  A few ways a meaningless conversation could play out?  Squad banter?  These are all things that I, as a diehard ME fan, can't wait to see, but I'm not so nieve that I think I'll see it at the e3 reveal.

[Mann42]

SalsaDMA wrote...

I'm sorry, but I cannot believe a salesman trying to sell me something he won't show me while he instead shows me all other kind of stuff instead to try and impress me, but adamantly refuses to show the thing he keeps claiming is in the product he wants to sell me, yet cannot produce evidence of. If anything, it feels like they are dishonest in their claims of it improving in the rpg when they cannot show anything for it while trying to 'hide' the question with flashy stuff instead which have everything to do with another type of genre entirely.

Buying into such a product with that kind of marketing would be outright stupid.

They're trying to sell you something that's not finished yet, that won't be done for at least 9 more months. 

To me, it's more dishonest to tell you about things in the game that may change or may even be pulled out because it's not done.

They have nine more months to show you what you want to see. If you're making your decision now, based purely on E3 hype and marketing (which is and always will be nothing more than a flashy dog and pony show for marketing execs to freak out at), nine months in advance of release, then you are the one choosing to not inform yourself about the game as more information becomes available. You are the one that believes they have only one chance to sell the game to you, and that it must be the E3 reveal nine months before launch that shows everything.

You have a made a judgement, and far be it from me to deter you from it.

Modifié par nexworks, 07 juin 2011 - 09:17 .

[SalsaDMA]

sp0ck 06 wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...


Sorry. It's a shooter and they have abandoned the rpg if they can't even show any rpg in their PR stuff that is supposed to make us want the game.

This is the kind of attitude that drives me nuts.  Do you want "deep RPG combat," like the great fun that was swordplay in Oblivion?  I feel like all the haters who whine about RPG elements feel some kind of resentment that the combat in ME has become equal to premium shooters.  So it has great combat mechanics.  And based off a few minutes of demo footage from e3, you state "they have abandoned the rpg."  What did you want to see on the huge movie sized screen in the arena?  A skill tree?  A few ways a meaningless conversation could play out?  Squad banter?  These are all things that I, as a diehard ME fan, can't wait to see, but I'm not so nieve that I think I'll see it at the e3 reveal.

I want to feel we are dealing with actual characters, that you have actual choices which effect the world and setting you are playing in meanginfully and that they actually paid attention to the details of how people behave.

Instead, we get no mention or show of the consequences of choice, heck the trailer showed a direct lack of consequence of choice. We get no show of atmosphere or stuff that makes you get into the roel, but lots lots lots and even more lots of action scenes.

Nobody is saying as part of the PR: "Here this happens because of a choice played out in an earlier game, and if you had taken another choice, this thing wouldn't have happened but instead you would have to deal with an entire different scenario (cue swap depicting different scenario) where...bla bla bla"
Or "Because of your interactins with the character in the past, he treats you like this. (cue same scene, different outcome) here we see the same scene but the character feels different about you because of of how you treated him in the past. So as you can see your past actions have a very real implication in the world... bla bla bla.."

But at least we get to see 215+ different ways of shooting up cerberus troopers...

[SalsaDMA]

nexworks wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

I'm sorry, but I cannot believe a salesman trying to sell me something he won't show me while he instead shows me all other kind of stuff instead to try and impress me, but adamantly refuses to show the thing he keeps claiming is in the product he wants to sell me, yet cannot produce evidence of. If anything, it feels like they are dishonest in their claims of it improving in the rpg when they cannot show anything for it while trying to 'hide' the question with flashy stuff instead which have everything to do with another type of genre entirely.

Buying into such a product with that kind of marketing would be outright stupid.

They're trying to sell you something that's not finished yet, that won't be done for at least 9 more months. 

To me, it's more dishonest to tell you about things in the game that may change or may even be pulled out because it's not done.

They have nine more months to show you what you want to see. If you're making your decision now, based purely on E3 hype and marketing (which is and always will be nothing more than a flashy dog and pony show for marketing execs to freak out at), nine months in advance of release, then you are the one choosing to not inform yourself about the game as more information becomes available. You are the one that believes they have only one chance to sell the game to you, and that it must be the E3 reveal that shows everything.

You have a made a judgement, and far be it from me to deter you from it.

The thing is, these things are not something that you put in at the last moment. If it's not done or even planned by now in the process, it's not gonna happen. The HUD looking like ME2 HUD? Not bothering me at all, cause I know that can change easy, and most likely will. THAT is stuff they change when the large peices are settled.
Effects of actual roleplaying on the gameplay/world? Needs to be handled from the start off, or it won't get done at all. You can't spend the majority of your development time on polishing shooter mechanics and then add in multiple layers of tracking of events and persuasions at the last minute. It just doesn't work that way. With your claim of software development, you should know this.

[Mann42]

SalsaDMA wrote...

Nobody is saying as part of the PR: "Here this happens because of a choice played out in an earlier game, and if you had taken another choice, this thing wouldn't have happened but instead you would have to deal with an entire different scenario (cue swap depicting different scenario) where...bla bla bla"
Or "Because of your interactins with the character in the past, he treats you like this. (cue same scene, different outcome) here we see the same scene but the character feels different about you because of of how you treated him in the past. So as you can see your past actions have a very real implication in the world... bla bla bla.."

Because this is Mass Effect at E3! Everyone that's already interested knows how Mass Effect and Bioware games work, and how choices impact the game. New people that might become interested are most likely going to become interested because the game 'looks cool', and so you show off Cerberus soldiers getting killed off 215+ ways. That's the way marketing thinks, especially EA Marketing. In fact, on some level, I think EA's marketing is still trying to figure out HOW to sell Bioware games; it's so unlike anything they had ever dealt with.

You're also asking for huge swaths of the game to be done and in alpha quality right now, and that's not going to happen with this much time out. You get the most polished 'zone' of the game, and that appears to be the opening of the game.

If the game were done, they'd show it all to us. If it were done, they'd also be releasing it next week.

[sp0ck 06]

SalsaDMA wrote...

sp0ck 06 wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...


Sorry. It's a shooter and they have abandoned the rpg if they can't even show any rpg in their PR stuff that is supposed to make us want the game.

This is the kind of attitude that drives me nuts.  Do you want "deep RPG combat," like the great fun that was swordplay in Oblivion?  I feel like all the haters who whine about RPG elements feel some kind of resentment that the combat in ME has become equal to premium shooters.  So it has great combat mechanics.  And based off a few minutes of demo footage from e3, you state "they have abandoned the rpg."  What did you want to see on the huge movie sized screen in the arena?  A skill tree?  A few ways a meaningless conversation could play out?  Squad banter?  These are all things that I, as a diehard ME fan, can't wait to see, but I'm not so nieve that I think I'll see it at the e3 reveal.

I want to feel we are dealing with actual characters, that you have actual choices which effect the world and setting you are playing in meanginfully and that they actually paid attention to the details of how people behave.

Instead, we get no mention or show of the consequences of choice, heck the trailer showed a direct lack of consequence of choice. We get no show of atmosphere or stuff that makes you get into the roel, but lots lots lots and even more lots of action scenes.

Nobody is saying as part of the PR: "Here this happens because of a choice played out in an earlier game, and if you had taken another choice, this thing wouldn't have happened but instead you would have to deal with an entire different scenario (cue swap depicting different scenario) where...bla bla bla"
Or "Because of your interactins with the character in the past, he treats you like this. (cue same scene, different outcome) here we see the same scene but the character feels different about you because of of how you treated him in the past. So as you can see your past actions have a very real implication in the world... bla bla bla.."

But at least we get to see 215+ different ways of shooting up cerberus troopers...

The kid in the duct was not atmospheric enough for you?  C. Hudson made numerous references to the fact that Shepard is "recruiting entire civilizations" to aid in the war effort and that choices made in previous games will heavily affect how/if you recruit.

Most of the characters have already been established as real personalities that ME fans are already familiar with.  Theres no need for an Andersen bio in the 5min demo reel.

The dialogue with Mordin certainly hinted at some dramatic content with the fertile krogan females.

Other than that, I'm just not sure what you were expecting to see.  If you'd rather see RPG elements (aka menu screens) than a backdrop of Reapers landing on Earth than I'm afraid I don't have anything to offer you and neither, it would appear, does BioWare at this point.

[SalsaDMA]

nexworks wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

Nobody is saying as part of the PR: "Here this happens because of a choice played out in an earlier game, and if you had taken another choice, this thing wouldn't have happened but instead you would have to deal with an entire different scenario (cue swap depicting different scenario) where...bla bla bla"
Or "Because of your interactins with the character in the past, he treats you like this. (cue same scene, different outcome) here we see the same scene but the character feels different about you because of of how you treated him in the past. So as you can see your past actions have a very real implication in the world... bla bla bla.."

Because this is Mass Effect at E3! Everyone that's already interested knows how Mass Effect and Bioware games work, and how choices impact the game. New people that might become interested are most likely going to become interested because the game 'looks cool', and so you show off Cerberus soldiers getting killed off 215+ ways. That's the way marketing thinks, especially EA Marketing. In fact, on some level, I think EA's marketing is still trying to figure out HOW to sell Bioware games; it's so unlike anything they had ever dealt with.

You're also asking for huge swaths of the game to be done and in alpha quality right now, and that's not going to happen with this much time out. You get the most polished 'zone' of the game, and that appears to be the opening of the game.

If the game were done, they'd show it all to us. If it were done, they'd also be releasing it next week.

Actually I'm going by the comments form the devs themselves were they stated that it was in a complete enough state and definately not what you and I would call alpha.

Are you telling me that they don't have even one place completed enough to show off such a thing IF it were in the game with the statements from the devs about how complete the game is already and they are only delaying because of other stuff, not because the game itself weren't going as the schedule warranted?

Colour me doubtfull:bandit:

[Mann42]

SalsaDMA wrote...

The thing is, these things are not something that you put in at the last moment. If it's not done or even planned by now in the process, it's not gonna happen. The HUD looking like ME2 HUD? Not bothering me at all, cause I know that can change easy, and most likely will. THAT is stuff they change when the large peices are settled.
Effects of actual roleplaying on the gameplay/world? Needs to be handled from the start off, or it won't get done at all. You can't spend the majority of your development time on polishing shooter mechanics and then add in multiple layers of tracking of events and persuasions at the last minute. It just doesn't work that way. With your claim of software development, you should know this.

Who says they aren't there? They're just not in the demo. Things get intentionally ripped out for E3 so they only see what they want you to see. You are not, and will never, see the full feature set of a game at E3 unless it is launching within 3 to 6 months.

The effect of roleplaying on the world? Writers and cinematic designers are working on that, and most likely working with content assets that they can create seperately and then integrate into the build later. The tracking of events? That literally starts with a viseo diagram, dude. You don't even need to figure out that stuff in code, you just need to know what assets you need and where they need to be plugged in.

The programmers already have the dialogue system, cinematic system, and character flag system to check player actions. Their scripting system (not sure if they're using Kismet from Unreal or not) will most certainly have the ability to check global player flags and variables (like Paragon/Renegade scores, and any other scores they want to add). Adding more of these to an already existing system isn't trivial, but it's not as hard as you're making it to be. Depending on how well they're designed to fit with the current system, maybe a few man weeks.

To top it off, the shooter mechanics themselves are mostly there without tons of extra work from Bioware. The Unreal engine already has GoW in the engine, and they already have the work they've done in ME2. All they need to do is make it work with the power/armor/weapon mechanics that they've added, and plug it into any other new systems they develop.

You are not seeing the whole game. You will never see the whole game at E3 unless it's done. Everyone rips stuff out.

Modifié par nexworks, 07 juin 2011 - 09:32 .

[SalsaDMA]

sp0ck 06 wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

sp0ck 06 wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...


Sorry. It's a shooter and they have abandoned the rpg if they can't even show any rpg in their PR stuff that is supposed to make us want the game.

This is the kind of attitude that drives me nuts.  Do you want "deep RPG combat," like the great fun that was swordplay in Oblivion?  I feel like all the haters who whine about RPG elements feel some kind of resentment that the combat in ME has become equal to premium shooters.  So it has great combat mechanics.  And based off a few minutes of demo footage from e3, you state "they have abandoned the rpg."  What did you want to see on the huge movie sized screen in the arena?  A skill tree?  A few ways a meaningless conversation could play out?  Squad banter?  These are all things that I, as a diehard ME fan, can't wait to see, but I'm not so nieve that I think I'll see it at the e3 reveal.

I want to feel we are dealing with actual characters, that you have actual choices which effect the world and setting you are playing in meanginfully and that they actually paid attention to the details of how people behave.

Instead, we get no mention or show of the consequences of choice, heck the trailer showed a direct lack of consequence of choice. We get no show of atmosphere or stuff that makes you get into the roel, but lots lots lots and even more lots of action scenes.

Nobody is saying as part of the PR: "Here this happens because of a choice played out in an earlier game, and if you had taken another choice, this thing wouldn't have happened but instead you would have to deal with an entire different scenario (cue swap depicting different scenario) where...bla bla bla"
Or "Because of your interactins with the character in the past, he treats you like this. (cue same scene, different outcome) here we see the same scene but the character feels different about you because of of how you treated him in the past. So as you can see your past actions have a very real implication in the world... bla bla bla.."

But at least we get to see 215+ different ways of shooting up cerberus troopers...

The kid in the duct was not atmospheric enough for you?  C. Hudson made numerous references to the fact that Shepard is "recruiting entire civilizations" to aid in the war effort and that choices made in previous games will heavily affect how/if you recruit.

Most of the characters have already been established as real personalities that ME fans are already familiar with.  Theres no need for an Andersen bio in the 5min demo reel.

The dialogue with Mordin certainly hinted at some dramatic content with the fertile krogan females.

Other than that, I'm just not sure what you were expecting to see.  If you'd rather see RPG elements (aka menu screens) than a backdrop of Reapers landing on Earth than I'm afraid I don't have anything to offer you and neither, it would appear, does BioWare at this point.

No, the kid was actually a show of a wasted opportunity. It showed that there was an option where they could have added a element of rpg, yet missed it by giving the player a choice that had no effect.

And you seem to have a very misconstructed perception of what rpg is. I already explained a couple of times in this thread what it is. Feel free to go read it again.

[Mann42]

SalsaDMA wrote...
Actually I'm going by the comments form the devs themselves were they stated that it was in a complete enough state and definately not what you and I would call alpha.

Are you telling me that they don't have even one place completed enough to show off such a thing IF it were in the game with the statements from the devs about how complete the game is already and they are only delaying because of other stuff, not because the game itself weren't going as the schedule warranted?

Colour me doubtfull:bandit:

I've seen AAA titles that were a mess until the last three to six months, with everyone on the floor convinced there's no way they're going to finish in time, and with only one or two zones in a finished state. Those same games also managed to get it together in the last minute, literally, and sell millions of copies. 

There's a reason most people you meet in the game industry have lots of stories about working 80 hour weeks for months at a time. It's mainly because most game developers love what they do enough to work extra hard for the sake of the project, but it's also partially to please people who are inordinately difficult to please, like yourself. 

[SalsaDMA]

nexworks wrote...

. You don't even need to figure out that stuff in code, you just need to know what assets you need and where they need to be plugged in.

Urgh...

Something tells me you and I have vastly different perceptions of good behaviour when undertaking software projects.

I tried the "just plug in the stuff where it's supposed to be" once. After having had to literelly redo the entire project during bugtesting I realized there is a reason why most liteature teaching on the subject advise against that kind of projectwork.

[jamskinner]

marshalleck wrote...

jamskinner wrote...

tfive24 wrote...

Phaedon wrote...

ME2 sold 2 million? Right... ME1 and 2 combined sold over 7 million fyi.


ME2 sold 2 million in the first week, and that was on the XBOX and the PC, without taking Steam and other services into account.

uh. ME2 only sold 1. 4 million on thoe xbox. the other majority of sells came from the pc users. 
Gears will eat ME3 alive on total sales on the xbox and lifte time sales. 

Whats your source?

An EA conference call from May 2010 cited 1.6 million sales for Xbox and PC, including digital downloads, in the last fiscal quarter (January - March 2010). This was from a report to shareholders in which EA are legally obligated to be accurate; it's not the "2 million sales internal estimate" that Phaedon referenced, which was just an early guess.  

Link to reports: http://ir.ea.com/res...ter=4&Year=2010

That was over a year ago.  I am sure it has sold many since then.  It basically only covers
2 months of sales.
Edit to fix mistake:I doubt this is that accurate but it shows over 3 million total sales across all platforms.
http://www.vgchartz....e=mass effect 2

Modifié par jamskinner, 07 juin 2011 - 09:43 .

[SalsaDMA]

nexworks wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...
Actually I'm going by the comments form the devs themselves were they stated that it was in a complete enough state and definately not what you and I would call alpha.

Are you telling me that they don't have even one place completed enough to show off such a thing IF it were in the game with the statements from the devs about how complete the game is already and they are only delaying because of other stuff, not because the game itself weren't going as the schedule warranted?

Colour me doubtfull:bandit:

I've seen AAA titles that were a mess until the last three to six months, with everyone on the floor convinced there's no way they're going to finish in time, and with only one or two zones in a finished state. Those same games also managed to get it together in the last minute, literally, and sell millions of copies. 

There's a reason most people you meet in the game industry have lots of stories about working 80 hour weeks for months at a time. It's mainly because most game developers love what they do enough to work extra hard for the sake of the project, but it's also partially to please people who are inordinately difficult to please, like yourself. 

But the devs aren't claiming it's a mess.

They are saying the exact opposite. Heck, the thing is practically done already and they are just polishing things off if we are to read their acknowledgments in an optimistic light

[Mann42]

SalsaDMA wrote...

nexworks wrote...

. You don't even need to figure out that stuff in code, you just need to know what assets you need and where they need to be plugged in.

Urgh...

Something tells me you and I have vastly different perceptions of good behaviour when undertaking software projects.

I tried the "just plug in the stuff where it's supposed to be" once. After having had to literelly redo the entire project during bugtesting I realized there is a reason why most liteature teaching on the subject advise against that kind of projectwork.

The average AAA project has over 100 developers on it. 

The average game project is divided into programmers, designers, and artists. Within each specialization, there are further sub-specializations (which programmers are working on framework, which are working on tools, on supporting new systems, and supporting the scripting systems; which designers are doing level design, writing, cinematic design, or content scripting; which artists are doing character art, animation, cinematics, environment art, particle effects, etc). There are a lot of moving parts. Everyone is doing a small piece, so you HAVE to plan.

However, when I say "you just plug them in", I think you are misunderstanding me. I'm not just talking about 'software' development, I'm talking about GAME development. Usually, by the time the designer is implementing a scene, the code is already done. The code was already programmed based on the design requirements determined by the lead designer or systems designers. 

Designers may have to script something, but that's different than waiting on a full system from the programmers. If they build the tools properly, then you can make quick, iterative changes to your systems and storyline.

Any smart content pipeline for a video game should be that easy, or it will never ship in time. You need to build your game in such as way that a designer can create a new scene, build a map in it, and then script directly on that scene and map with any new assets that the designers or artists create. Is it pre-planned? Absolutely. Do you need approval from your programmer every time you add a new story arc? God no, unless you need the engine to do something new. 

You can have all the systems and code in a workable state, but not have the content done. Content does not, and will never, equate to code. That is why you referring to software development really isn't extrapolating to game development. 

Just because the content isn't there for you to see yet, doesn't mean it won't be, or that the systems aren't in progress or close to done already. Since the 'shooter' part is a part of the Unreal engine, and already half done, it was inevitable that is was going to be in the most finished state first.

Modifié par nexworks, 07 juin 2011 - 09:51 .

[tonnactus]

sp0ck 06 wrote...
 Squad banter?  These are all things that I, as a diehard ME fan, can't wait to see, but I'm not so nieve that I think I'll see it at the e3 reveal.

Mass Effect  E3 footage. Starts with what?