Aller au contenu

Photo

ME3: Known Features - Closing Comments


4243 réponses à ce sujet

#3826
AdmiralCheez

AdmiralCheez
  • Members
  • 12 990 messages

Lizardviking wrote...

What character did you hate in SC2?

Frickin' Ariel.  Ugggghhhh, shut up about your stupid PhD, save those stinking colonists yourself, cease your romantic advances on my space husbando, and stop looking like Sarah Palin.

SIDED WITH THE PROTOSS, NO REGRETS WHATSOEVER

It's funny because I fuss at people here for character bashing.  OH WELL.

I hope by god that those news are not true, I don't need my Mass effect to become a job I need to attend to do every week.

Indeed.  It's the Milky Way, not a friggin' Tamogatchi.

#3827
Colintastic

Colintastic
  • Members
  • 203 messages

Chewin3 wrote...


Colintastic wrote...

Colintastic wrote...

*snip*


I guess sorta answering my own question here: http://social.biowar...index/5585014/1

This thread includes the discussion of my quandry. Revelation does say that the population is 40million. People suggested that the 13.2 is permanant population and the rest is visitors, though that seems strange too. The ratio is kinda crazy for tourists.


I don't see how it is an impossibility, about there only living 13.2 million people and the amount of turists that visits the Citadel.

Population density and cost of living are extremely high, so no wonder why not a lot of people live there. And the Citadel serves as the political, cultural, and financial capital of the galactic community, so I can see people the "tourims" being high. New York has 47 million "visiting" it every year. I wouldn't be surprised if the Citadel had that amount every few months or so.



Well the NYC metro area has a population of 20million. The 5 burroughs make up about 8million of that. Since the Citadel can't really have a "metro area" since it's a space station, it just has what it has. I also think the citadel is physicaly bigger than the land area occupied by NYC proper. Each arm is almost 30miles long. There are 5 of them. That's BIG! Due to this, I'm going to compare it to the 20million figure. 

If NYC only has 47million visitors A YEAR, that tells you something about the ratio. Almost 2.5 times the permanant population every year is substantialy less than 3 times that population (40/13.2) at any given moment. Now, NYC is the financial capital of the country and in many respects the world. It also has the primary UN building. There is equally as much reason to go to NYC as there is the Citadel. It just feels wrong there would be such a discrepancy in visitors, even if travel was substantially easier in the future.

Of additional note is that Omega is supposedly 8ish million inhabitants. In ME: Retribution, Omega is described as sparsely populated. There are countless abandoned areas that criminals can disappear into. Additionally in the codex, it is described being as long as a single arm of the citadel. Granted it is not flat like the citadel, but that shouldn't make up for being 3/4's the pop of the citadel. 

It just feels wrong!

#3828
Catsith

Catsith
  • Members
  • 492 messages
That is nonsense. They've made it very clear that MP is entirely optional. They even went out of their way to do cross multi/singleplayer achievements.

#3829
Arppis

Arppis
  • Members
  • 12 750 messages

Catsith wrote...

That is nonsense. They've made it very clear that MP is entirely optional. They even went out of their way to do cross multi/singleplayer achievements.


Again, it didn't say you HAVE to play multiplayer, just that it makes things a lot easier if you are gunning for "good" ending.

#3830
mineralica

mineralica
  • Members
  • 3 310 messages

Vez04 wrote...

This new official ME3 messagaing really has to something no one, will totally not see coming, if it means both this thread/the twitter thread gets unsticked. 

Sucks but oh well, keep this amazing thread alive indeed people!

I really thought that someone messes with my mind because Twitter thread got stickied / unstickied several times. So either of two possible events is coming: epic news in fabulous quantities or my migraine of impressive magnitude.

#3831
Tyrannosaurus Rex

Tyrannosaurus Rex
  • Members
  • 10 793 messages

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Lizardviking wrote...

What character did you hate in SC2?

Frickin' Ariel.  Ugggghhhh, shut up about your stupid PhD, save those stinking colonists yourself, cease your romantic advances on my space husbando, and stop looking like Sarah Palin.

SIDED WITH THE PROTOSS, NO REGRETS WHATSOEVER


I can see where you are coming from but she never bothered me that much.

It's funny because I fuss at people here for character bashing.  OH WELL.


We all need a outlet once in a while.

#3832
Almostfaceman

Almostfaceman
  • Members
  • 5 463 messages

Arppis wrote...

Catsith wrote...

That is nonsense. They've made it very clear that MP is entirely optional. They even went out of their way to do cross multi/singleplayer achievements.


Again, it didn't say you HAVE to play multiplayer, just that it makes things a lot easier if you are gunning for "good" ending.


To make MP completely optional there has to be a SP method for boosting the Readiness level. 

End of line.

#3833
Vertigo_1

Vertigo_1
  • Members
  • 5 934 messages

Arppis wrote...

BIT OF SPOILERS AHEAD ABOUT THE GALAXY AT WAR MECHANICS:

"You increase your Galaxy at War score by playing
the game, completing missions, finding war assets, etc. However, that
isn't the only factor in your GAW score. In order to deliver the full
power of your forces to the final confrontation, you need to increase
your Readiness score, which is the percentage of your fleet that you
will bring to end game.


Your Readiness score can only be increased
by playing Multiplayer (which you can play by yourself), or the
facebook or I-OS game. Unless you do, you're GAW will be stuck at 50%
and you'll be hard pressed to get a good ending. The bad part is that
your Readiness decays over time, something like 1%/day, meaning you have
to keep playing those things to stay at full power.
.."

Is this true? I mean... You will have a lot more harder time to get the good ending if you DON'T play the multiplayer?

If so, that blows. :(


Is there a link to this?

Also, I got a notification that they uploaded a Co-op vid on their Youtube page an hour ago but it was pulled:  I believe it was called "Co-op integration" or some such...anyone else get this?

Modifié par Vertigo_1, 07 février 2012 - 05:53 .


#3834
Izhalezan

Izhalezan
  • Members
  • 917 messages
Thread seems to have come unlocked...

#3835
Arppis

Arppis
  • Members
  • 12 750 messages

Almostfaceman wrote...

Arppis wrote...

Catsith wrote...

That is nonsense. They've made it very clear that MP is entirely optional. They even went out of their way to do cross multi/singleplayer achievements.


Again, it didn't say you HAVE to play multiplayer, just that it makes things a lot easier if you are gunning for "good" ending.


To make MP completely optional there has to be a SP method for boosting the Readiness level. 

End of line.


We shall see later.

I hope you are right.

Modifié par Arppis, 07 février 2012 - 05:50 .


#3836
CroGamer002

CroGamer002
  • Members
  • 20 673 messages
Wait what?

This is surprise for you guys?

REALLY?!




Did anyone missed the point we have to do hard to defeat Reapers?

And with Co-Op or other stuff, people who don't feel to be completionist can get good ending with those instead of playing load of side quests.

#3837
Arppis

Arppis
  • Members
  • 12 750 messages

Mesina2 wrote...

Wait what?

This is surprise for you guys?

REALLY?!




Did anyone missed the point we have to do hard to defeat Reapers?

And with Co-Op or other stuff, people who don't feel to be completionist can get good ending with those instead of playing load of side quests.


I don't mind doing loads of quests. That's what I always do in ever RPG. It's fun for me.

But I just wish that I can have exactly same chances as people who play MP do. I will try MP for sure.

#3838
FeralEwok

FeralEwok
  • Members
  • 1 031 messages

Mesina2 wrote...

Wait what?

This is surprise for you guys?

REALLY?!




Did anyone missed the point we have to do hard to defeat Reapers?

And with Co-Op or other stuff, people who don't feel to be completionist can get good ending with those instead of playing load of side quests.


I would rather a game be hard by design. You have to work your butt off in the single player campaign to defeat the Reapers.


NOT hard because you have to work with several different mediums which is a pain and not fun at all.

#3839
Almostfaceman

Almostfaceman
  • Members
  • 5 463 messages

Mesina2 wrote...

Wait what?

This is surprise for you guys?

REALLY?!




Did anyone missed the point we have to do hard to defeat Reapers?

And with Co-Op or other stuff, people who don't feel to be completionist can get good ending with those instead of playing load of side quests.


The way the rumor is worded, it makes it seem that is it harder to get the "optimal" ending without MP (which gives you an enhanced Readiness Level) than if you played SP only. This would give a clear advantage to those who play MP (they can achieve maximum war assest AND readiness level), which would not make it completely optional.

#3840
Catsith

Catsith
  • Members
  • 492 messages

Arppis wrote...

Catsith wrote...

That is nonsense. They've made it very clear that MP is entirely optional. They even went out of their way to do cross multi/singleplayer achievements.


Again, it didn't say you HAVE to play multiplayer, just that it makes things a lot easier if you are gunning for "good" ending.


You can reach the highest levels of success in the single player experience alone, but Galaxy at War gives you alternative ways to get there. << taken from the site.

I think there is some confusion about this, and the "journalist" who previewed the game got his facts wrong. From what I understand and what Bioware have said, you can get a full "good ending" and full ratings in singleplayer,, but for someone who maybe doesn't want to do all the quests and just wants to shoot dudes in multiplayer instead of trying to max out these reputation scores and asset collections, you can balance it out by bringing in those multiplayer characters as assets, and I assume some sort of assets from the iOS or facebook games.

That seems like a good system to me, and its how they described it before. I really hope this is the way it works, because even though I plan on playing the mutlplayer, I know many who do not and I predict there will be an even bigger uproar than we had over Dragon Age 2.

#3841
CroGamer002

CroGamer002
  • Members
  • 20 673 messages

FeralEwok wrote...

I would rather a game be hard by design. You have to work your butt off in the single player campaign to defeat the Reapers.


NOT hard because you have to work with several different mediums which is a pain and not fun at all.


You're not gonna defeat Reapers by rushing.


You need to find help and resources from whatever place you can.



Besides, your choices will determine best ending as well.

Even if you do Co-Op, Facebook and all side quests, you still won't get good ending if you made bad decisions.

Modifié par Mesina2, 07 février 2012 - 06:05 .


#3842
Arppis

Arppis
  • Members
  • 12 750 messages

Mesina2 wrote...

FeralEwok wrote...

I would rather a game be hard by design. You have to work your butt off in the single player campaign to defeat the Reapers.


NOT hard because you have to work with several different mediums which is a pain and not fun at all.


You're not gonna defeat Reapers by rushing.


You need to find help and resources from whatever place you can.



Besides, your choices will determine best ending as well.

Even if you do Co-Op, Facebook and all side quests, you still won't get good ending if you made bad decisions.


We are talking about things like:
If you like get a stronger fleet thanks to multiplayer, it is clear advantage over singleplayer only.

Ofcourse if you play poorly, you will not get best ending, that's granted.

#3843
Arppis

Arppis
  • Members
  • 12 750 messages

Catsith wrote...

Arppis wrote...

Catsith wrote...

That is nonsense. They've made it very clear that MP is entirely optional. They even went out of their way to do cross multi/singleplayer achievements.


Again, it didn't say you HAVE to play multiplayer, just that it makes things a lot easier if you are gunning for "good" ending.


You can reach the highest levels of success in the single player experience alone, but Galaxy at War gives you alternative ways to get there. << taken from the site.

I think there is some confusion about this, and the "journalist" who previewed the game got his facts wrong. From what I understand and what Bioware have said, you can get a full "good ending" and full ratings in singleplayer,, but for someone who maybe doesn't want to do all the quests and just wants to shoot dudes in multiplayer instead of trying to max out these reputation scores and asset collections, you can balance it out by bringing in those multiplayer characters as assets, and I assume some sort of assets from the iOS or facebook games.

That seems like a good system to me, and its how they described it before. I really hope this is the way it works, because even though I plan on playing the mutlplayer, I know many who do not and I predict there will be an even bigger uproar than we had over Dragon Age 2.


Indeed, let's hope for the best. :)

#3844
RyuGuitarFreak

RyuGuitarFreak
  • Members
  • 2 254 messages
Bioware has stated a while that getting the best most optimal ending would be HARDER to get from playing the single player only than playing it together with the mp. But if the mechanics are like described, I'm gonna be mad. This is bad. I don't wanna be punished for not playing the game for days, this is stupid as hell!!! It's ok to be hard, I buy it, but not with mechanics like this. Decreasing it over time? WTF, reaper forces are infinite or what?

*sigh

But well, it makes sense for them to do it like this. EA wants to sell their online pass after all. But it's a TERRIBLE, TERRIBLE idea.

Modifié par RyuGuitarFreak, 07 février 2012 - 06:11 .


#3845
FeralEwok

FeralEwok
  • Members
  • 1 031 messages

Mesina2 wrote...

You're not gonna defeat Reapers by rushing.

You need to find help and resources from whatever place you can.

Besides, your choices will determine best ending as well.

Even if you do Co-Op, Facebook and all side quests, you still won't get good ending if you made bad decisions.


ME1 and 2 first took me some 30-40 hours of game time and I did everything there was. That's not rushing. I'm not talking about rushing through the game. Yeah I get it that you need resources to fight an enemy...but taking it that literally and having the player go out of the ME3 game to play something on a website in order to obtain said "resources" is going too far.

"Your choices will determine best ending as well"

Shouldn't be an as well.


Am I really insane in thinking that this is just another way for Mass Effect's name to spread around more and thus pull in more potential clients?

#3846
Arppis

Arppis
  • Members
  • 12 750 messages

RyuGuitarFreak wrote...

Bioware has stated a while that getting the best most optimal ending would be HARDER to get from playing the single player only than playing it together with the mp. But if the mechanics are like described, I'm gonna be mad. This is bad. I don't wanna be punished for not playing the game for days, this is stupid as hell!!! It's ok to be hard, I buy it, but not with mechanics like this. Decreasing it over time? WTF, reaper forces are infinite or what?

*sigh

But well, it makes sense for them to do it like this. EA wants to sell their online pass after all. But it's a TERRIBLE, TERRIBLE idea.


Yeah. It would be terrible idea.

Let's hope it's not so.

#3847
CroGamer002

CroGamer002
  • Members
  • 20 673 messages

Arppis wrote...

We are talking about things like:
If you like get a stronger fleet thanks to multiplayer, it is clear advantage over singleplayer only.

Ofcourse if you play poorly, you will not get best ending, that's granted.


You can still get that same fleet, by playing SP only.

It's just with Co-Op you can it instead of trying hard during SP campaign.
Though that still depends how good you are at Co-Op.



And seriously, so what if some people will have advantage?
Why do you care?
You can still get it SP only!.

It's actually even better that way since you worked so hard to get good ending. That is a great feeling. You done it without any outside help.

#3848
Almostfaceman

Almostfaceman
  • Members
  • 5 463 messages

RyuGuitarFreak wrote...

Bioware has stated a while that getting the best most optimal ending would be HARDER to get from playing the single player only than playing it together with the mp.


I have not read that anywhere.  Source? :)

#3849
CroGamer002

CroGamer002
  • Members
  • 20 673 messages

FeralEwok wrote...

ME1 and 2 first took me some 30-40 hours of game time and I did everything there was. That's not rushing. I'm not talking about rushing through the game. Yeah I get it that you need resources to fight an enemy...but taking it that literally and having the player go out of the ME3 game to play something on a website in order to obtain said "resources" is going too far.

"Your choices will determine best ending as well"

Shouldn't be an as well.


Am I really insane in thinking that this is just another way for Mass Effect's name to spread around more and thus pull in more potential clients?




So wait, having more options is BAD thing now?


Oh but ofcourse.

It wouldn't be typical BSN.

#3850
Chewin

Chewin
  • Members
  • 8 478 messages

Almostfaceman wrote...

RyuGuitarFreak wrote...

Bioware has stated a while that getting the best most optimal ending would be HARDER to get from playing the single player only than playing it together with the mp.


I have not read that anywhere.  Source? :)


Check the MP section in the OP.

EDIT: And as for the "optional MP thing", I find it funny when various articles and statements by BW themselves say that the best ending through MP is optional, while when the first second some article says differently, people start to panic.

I say wait and see before jumping to conclusions. It's not that hard.

Modifié par Chewin3, 07 février 2012 - 06:19 .