31 réponses à ce sujet

[Wulfram]

So Casey Hudson said this

And so all the different things that you do, if
you do a little side quest, or you go off and do a major plot, these
things contribute to the war effort. If you just rip straight down the
critical path and try and finish the game as soon as you can, and do
very little optional or side stuff, then you can finish the game," continued Hudson.

"You
can have some kind of ending and victory, but it’ll be a lot more
brutal and minimal relative to if you do a lot of stuff. If you really
build a lot of stuff and bring people to your side and rally the entire
galaxy around you, and you come into the end game with that, then you’ll
get an amazing, very definitive ending."

But with the game starting with the Reapers arriving on Earth, surely there should be an incentive to hurry and defeat the reapers ASAP, rather than wander around the galaxy fixing everybody's problems?

It annoys me in both of the previous games that we're given reasons to hurry but then rewarded for dawdling.  Waiting to pick up the IFF is unquestionably the right thing to do, because the Collectors will wait for you to fix peoples daddy issues.  But at least in ME2 you could still get no one left behind even if you actually made fighting the collectors a priority.

[JayhartRIC]

I agree about ME1, but I think ME2 give give you a reason to wait to go through the relay. Also I'm pretty sure you can't get "No One Left Behind if you go as soon as possible. If you go to the IFF and SM as soon as possible you can't do enough loyalty missions to have a loyal leader and biotic and tech.

[Flashlegend]

JayhartRIC wrote...

I agree about ME1, but I think ME2 give give you a reason to wait to go through the relay. Also I'm pretty sure you can't get "No One Left Behind if you go as soon as possible. If you go to the IFF and SM as soon as possible you can't do enough loyalty missions to have a loyal leader and biotic and tech.

You might be able to. I was actually playing yesterday and had just finished on the collector and had the option to go get the iff. Obviously I didn't take it but at that point I had miranda's loyalty, Kasumi's loyalty and still needed to recruit Samara. Had I immediately gone for the iff I would still have 2 missions  before the collector's take your crew in which I could have gotten Samara or Jack's loyalty.(And I think average hidden values would be high enough for everyone to hold the line right? maybe not.)

[AlanC9]

Wulfram wrote...
It annoys me in both of the previous games that we're given reasons to hurry but then rewarded for dawdling.  Waiting to pick up the IFF is unquestionably the right thing to do, because the Collectors will wait for you to fix peoples daddy issues.  But at least in ME2 you could still get no one left behind even if you actually made fighting the collectors a priority.

This is what they meant by bringing back more RPG elements. Regrettably, rewarding people for wandering around and doing silly things is a CRPG tradition.

[Neverwinter_Knight77]

I like to be rewarded for my sidequests. If you breeze through a game in a couple of hours, where's the $60 worth?

Addition: With the sidequests in ME1, I felt like I was doing good for the Alliance.  I actually got paragon and renegade points out of the deal too.  In ME2, the sidequests (referring to the ones you get from exploring planets) felt completely pointless.  Nothing but a paycheck from Cerberus.

Modifié par Neverwinter_Knight77, 11 juin 2011 - 05:07 .

[JayhartRIC]

Flashlegend wrote...

JayhartRIC wrote...

I agree about ME1, but I think ME2 give give you a reason to wait to go through the relay. Also I'm pretty sure you can't get "No One Left Behind if you go as soon as possible. If you go to the IFF and SM as soon as possible you can't do enough loyalty missions to have a loyal leader and biotic and tech.

You might be able to. I was actually playing yesterday and had just finished on the collector and had the option to go get the iff. Obviously I didn't take it but at that point I had miranda's loyalty, Kasumi's loyalty and still needed to recruit Samara. Had I immediately gone for the iff I would still have 2 missions  before the collector's take your crew in which I could have gotten Samara or Jack's loyalty.(And I think average hidden values would be high enough for everyone to hold the line right? maybe not.)

It would make it easier with Zaeed and Kasumi cause you can get them loyal before the loyalty section.  In the instance you talked about you'd have to take 2 loyal people at the end.  I think you'll take losses holding the line.  Add a loyal Zaeed and you may successfully do it.

[Spectreshadow]

I think there is going to be a dance between recruiting races and stopping the reapers. You pretty much have to unite as much of the galaxy as you can to have a chance but at the same time if you take too long there won't be much of a galaxy left to save.

[Syreniac]

I have a feeling the side missions will be a bit more important seeming than the ones in ME1 and ME2. Besides, in a galactic war, doesn't it make sense that you might need to do more than just appear on the critical worlds to turn the tides?

[Montana]

As long as the sidequests are relevant to the main plot and not "explore random planet and fight random enemies for cash" you should be rewarded for doing them.

I've been waiting a long time for a game that makes basically every quest relevant to the main story.
Could ME3 be that game?

[Someone With Mass]

I think it's better to prepare to the point where you know your attempt won't fail/be half-assed.

And considering that the Reapers destroyed the Alliance fleet like nothing, rushing would be the most nonsensical thing to do right away.

[BubbleSauce]

I unfortunately, am a completionist, so no matter what I'll probably get the everybody lives HOORAY! ending...

[TUHD]

Someone With Mass wrote...

I think it's better to prepare to the point where you know your attempt won't fail/be half-assed.

And considering that the Reapers destroyed the Alliance fleet like nothing, rushing would be the most nonsensical thing to do right away.

/Agreed

As for the missions, I've dug up some stuff out of the demo.


http://i1187.photobu...ragon/MESS1.jpg


http://i1187.photobu...ragon/MESS2.jpg


http://i1187.photobu...ragon/MESS3.jpg

Seems interesting IMHO. Sorry for the bad quality, had to screenshot from Quicktime, which isn't a good quality in itself.

It seems that if you want a truly happy ending, you'll need to take some time to do sidemissions. I just hope the 'punishment' for doing so isn't too bad, though :/ Or maybe there's no restriction on sidemissions, who knows

Modifié par TUHD, 11 juin 2011 - 06:42 .

[Gatt9]

AlanC9 wrote...

Wulfram wrote...
It annoys me in both of the previous games that we're given reasons to hurry but then rewarded for dawdling.  Waiting to pick up the IFF is unquestionably the right thing to do, because the Collectors will wait for you to fix peoples daddy issues.  But at least in ME2 you could still get no one left behind even if you actually made fighting the collectors a priority.

This is what they meant by bringing back more RPG elements. Regrettably, rewarding people for wandering around and doing silly things is a CRPG tradition.

Actually,  what is regrettable is that developers keep using "ZOMG the world is going to end in 10 minutes!!!" storylines,  instead of taking the 5 minutes to logic out that the plot makes no sense in context with the rest of the game.

The sidequests aren't the problem,  they're the symptom.

Oblivion's the single best example of why Developer's need to spend more than a coffee break coming up with their primary storyline.  "ZOMG the demons are invading to kill us all...sometime...actually...don't worry about it,  you can wander around for a century or two and they'll wait for you..."

Of course,  the other part of the problem is that in an RPG,  you're generally attempting to either discover the opponent's motivations,  or become powerfull enough to challenge the super-villian.  Since Bioware and Bethseda have discarded the RPG mechanics in ME and pretty much everything Bethseda touches,  you're capable of killing the end boss at level 1 because it's just a standard Shooter.  Which makes the remaining RPG mechanics make less sense.

If Bioware hadn't made ME2 a Shooter,  and had actually used RPG mechanics,  the whole game would've made alot more sense,  as you wouldn't be able to kill the end boss with any arbitrary level.

So essentialy there's two regrettable problems,  the absolute emergecy storyline,  and the discarding of the RPG mechanics,  leaving you with a dire emergency you could in fact take care of in 5 minutes at level 1 if you could see the end boss. 

[Il Divo]

Gatt9 wrote...

Actually,  what is regrettable is that developers keep using "ZOMG the world is going to end in 10 minutes!!!" storylines,  instead of taking the 5 minutes to logic out that the plot makes no sense in context with the rest of the game.

This was the established plot line in Mass Effect 1. Reapers enter galaxy-exterminate all life.What precisely should the plot be about, if not how the galaxy is going to end? They've been doing this for 37 million years.

Of course,  the other part of the problem is that in an RPG,  you're generally attempting to either discover the opponent's motivations,  or become powerfull enough to challenge the super-villian. 

Typically in a bad RPG. Leveling up is  a gameplay mechanic. Sometimes, the narrative ties your level into the plot (KotOR 2). Other times, no mention of it is made and it's simply an abstraction (Dragon Age: Origins). No one mentions the idea that the Warden + Alistair have to be level 21+ in order to tackle the Archdemon.

If Bioware hadn't made ME2 a Shooter,  and had actually used RPG mechanics,  the whole game would've made alot more sense,  as you wouldn't be able to kill the end boss with any arbitrary level.

Levels have never had plot-significance. This was the case in Mass Effect 1. From a narrative perspective, how is Shepard's level relevant to his ability to kill Saren? He's already N7 class, top of his game.

Modifié par Il Divo, 11 juin 2011 - 07:53 .

[olymind1]

as i can see in the demos, the action is fast enough and it is understandable if some missions need to complete in time, but in the galaxy map let me choose where and when i want go. i don't like being forced.

Modifié par olymind1, 11 juin 2011 - 08:02 .

[TUHD]

@Olymind, look at my screenshots. They're from the ME3 demo

[olymind1]

TUHD wrote...

@Olymind, look at my screenshots. They're from the ME3 demo

i saw the vids, but in me2 you were forced to move quickly (iff, omega4), because if you don't, some of your shipmates died. and i don't like that. so if even in the galaxy map you have to hurry i think it is not a good thing.

[Bozorgmehr]

The option to destroy the Reapers when they arrive would be the ultimate anti-climax - finishing the game before it started

It would be cool if Bioware added some sort of time mechanism. So waiting longer (doing more side-quest / gathering a larger force) would result in more Reaper destruction - rallying all possible allies would leave the earth in ashes when Shep finally returns.

[silentassassin264]

The sidequests that matter will probably be about solidifying the resistance against the Reapers. If you breeze through without gathering all the possible alliances and getting everyone's logistics set, you should do worse against the Reapers. There is a difference between doing something with urgency and half-assing it. You should be punished if you do not give the effort to adequately fight back.

[Demigod]

In this case I think the speed v slow is done very well as Casey says. You can rush the game try and be the hero do just what can be done to save earth and this may save more humans. But as the two previous games have shown there are more than just humans in the galaxy. in rushing to save humans will this cost more alien life? Can a whole race other than humans be lost because we just rush to save humans? If you don't care rush save earth and sacrifice aliens the developers seem to be giving us that question/option.

If you want to find a different way you can play more do more optional content and perhaps have more options in saving earth and perhaps save more aliens along the way. This extra time may seem to cost more human life on earth but may reduce the casualties of the allies you bring indeed it may reduce human casualties in the long run as there will be more aliens to help after the fact.

They aren't punishing you if you do rush, you are just limited in what you can achieve by rushing to save earth alone.  ( do you really want "THE BEST" ending for doing the least possible?)

As has been said in the interviews this is a galactic war not just earth is under attack. rushing to save just earth may seem right in one respect but why save just earth is the rest of the galaxy is in ruins?

The decision for what to sacrifice is up to us.

Modifié par Demigod, 11 juin 2011 - 08:40 .

[Oblivious]

Come on, Earth is already as good as dead after a week judging from the VGA reveal. I'm guessing that Earth would be similar to Lothering in DAO, after the first few main missions time runs out and it is destroyed. Then you really get the "omg I better prepare" feeling.

It took the 5th Fleet and the Destiny Ascension to destroy Sovereign, what makes you think a half-arsed army will be able to do anything against a fleet of Reapers?

[TUHD]

In other words, those who are Renegade and/or support Cerberus' cause might just rush it, while Paragons will often take it slow?

[nitrog100]

If you try to power through, you won't be as successful. You could still finish the Suicide mission in Mass Effect 2 without doing any side quests or upgrading the ship, but you and your squad will most likely die. Mission accomplished, but not in a very satisfactory way.

[AlanC9]

Gatt9 wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Wulfram wrote...
It annoys me in both of the previous games that we're given reasons to hurry but then rewarded for dawdling.  Waiting to pick up the IFF is unquestionably the right thing to do, because the Collectors will wait for you to fix peoples daddy issues.  But at least in ME2 you could still get no one left behind even if you actually made fighting the collectors a priority.

This is what they meant by bringing back more RPG elements. Regrettably, rewarding people for wandering around and doing silly things is a CRPG tradition.

Actually,  what is regrettable is that developers keep using "ZOMG the world is going to end in 10 minutes!!!" storylines,  instead of taking the 5 minutes to logic out that the plot makes no sense in context with the rest of the game.

The sidequests aren't the problem,  they're the symptom.

Yep. I was taking the urgent plot for granted. But I like those plots.