494 réponses à ce sujet

[littlezack]

If I wasn't looking forward to Mass Effect 3, I wouldn't keep coming here. Don't get why anyone would, but whatever.

[csfteeeer]

Rockworm503 wrote...

csfteeeer wrote...

Frankly, the Latest Trailer, at Gamescom, was just.... damn, i don't know, it just turned me off(not in THAT way....), it just looked.....*sigh* i don't know, iffy i think, the animations where.....ugh, and the trailer just seemed just put together without thought, it seemed....Rushed (oh my god..... are they Rushing everything now?!?!), and the music at the end of the trailer was NOT helpful.

Overall very, very, very bad trailer(IMO).

this doesn't mean i'm not interested in the game though, it's still one of my most anticipated games of 2012, but if they keep on with these trailers, i'm going to loose interest, and i'm sure a lot of people will (i have seen a lot of people saying the trailer was S**t.)

Your not gonna make it 7 months from now.
Your ADD will kick in and your gonna find something else.  If a trailer this far from release is gonna get you this worked up then you might as well find a different hobby... one that doesn't give you brain anurysms.

WTF are you talking about?

i just said that i didn't liked the latest trailer, i said that to answer the OP (whether i felt pessimistic and disappointed from ME3 thus far), and that i'm hoping that they improve it, which i'm sure they will giving how far the game is, Nothing else.

F**ks sake

[Rockworm503]

csfteeeer wrote...

Rockworm503 wrote...

csfteeeer wrote...

Frankly, the Latest Trailer, at Gamescom, was just.... damn, i don't know, it just turned me off(not in THAT way....), it just looked.....*sigh* i don't know, iffy i think, the animations where.....ugh, and the trailer just seemed just put together without thought, it seemed....Rushed (oh my god..... are they Rushing everything now?!?!), and the music at the end of the trailer was NOT helpful.

Overall very, very, very bad trailer(IMO).

this doesn't mean i'm not interested in the game though, it's still one of my most anticipated games of 2012, but if they keep on with these trailers, i'm going to loose interest, and i'm sure a lot of people will (i have seen a lot of people saying the trailer was S**t.)

Your not gonna make it 7 months from now.
Your ADD will kick in and your gonna find something else.  If a trailer this far from release is gonna get you this worked up then you might as well find a different hobby... one that doesn't give you brain anurysms.

WTF are you talking about?

i just said that i didn't liked the latest trailer, i said that to answer the OP (whether i felt pessimistic and disappointed from ME3 thus far), and that i'm hoping that they improve it, which i'm sure they will giving how far the game is, Nothing else.

F**ks sake

all the........ << .......... made it look like you were having a stroke and I had totally imagined Mordin talking like that. 
It just seems like your taking this little video way to personal like OMG if Bioware doesn't show us something other than combat I'll just DIE.  "i'm going to lose interest"  It just sounds like your looking for an excuse to get out.

[sympathy4saren]

It's funny I am called a fanboy. People who criticize called fanboys? I thought that was an ad hominem for people who were giddy and couldn't take opinion and criticism that put their beloved series or game in a bad light?

The irony of ironies.

[Sailears]

Yeah what we've seen so far is all geared towards the action, but that doesn't bother me so much - I'm too keen to see how the story can end, and I'm sure the game will deliver on all fronts.

[Walker White]

GodWood wrote...

ME1 went out of it's way to try and seem 'plausible'.
ME2 went more or less "**** it. Rule of Cool".

The economy in ME1 made zero sense and was completely implausible.  The vendors and monetary system were designed as if it were a fantasy RPG, completely ignoring the advances in manufacturing and distribution that exist TODAY, much less in the 22 century.  ME2 got it right.

[armass]

Ive only seen the combat and graphics so far, they are satisfactory. Story, characters and settings will be the decisive thing.

[Sepewrath]

Walker White wrote...

GodWood wrote...

ME1 went out of it's way to try and seem 'plausible'.
ME2 went more or less "**** it. Rule of Cool".

The economy in ME1 made zero sense and was completely implausible.  The vendors and monetary system were designed as if it were a fantasy RPG, completely ignoring the advances in manufacturing and distribution that exist TODAY, much less in the 22 century.  ME2 got it right.

Yeah its amusing that someone would try to claim anything about ME1 is plausible. A person carrying 50 guns and 20 armors on them is plausible? Finding armor that can fit a full grown person in a tiny little bin is plausible? Being on a military operation, from two government organizations that is complete unfunded or supplied is plausible? Though that part is fine since, it took 2 weeks to become the richest person in the galaxy. Or maybe its plausible that the military would have armor that is easily outshined by something you find on a random planet that no one has set foot on for a hundred years? A seasoned soldier is incapable of aiming a gun, that has aim assist? Interesting.

People need to just admit it, ME1 relied on outdated genre mechanics, you can like it or prefer those mechanics, nothing wrong with that. I'll take a 2D fighter over a 3D one any day of the week. But just say that, don't try and drag plausibility or reality into any of this, like it really matters. There is very little in the way of realistic about this series in ME1,2 and I'm guessing 3.

[shep82]

ReveurIngenu wrote...

Yes, I really feel that ME3 will disappoint me.  I was really disappointed with ME2 and its nonexistant storyline.  What I fear will be the case with ME3 is that I think it will be much too similar to Dragon Age Origins and ME2 in the sense that you know what the "final mission" is just a few hours into the game and you spend the whole game either recruiting or finding allies and preparing for it.

The official description of ME3 pretty much sums it up to rallying races to help you.  Earth is attacked and you have to mount a "final mission" to take it back.  You want the Quarians to help?  Well, you have to solve their problem and find them a home world first!  You want Krogans?  They won't help unless you cure the genophage!  You want Geth?  Free them from whoever they need to be freed from and they'll help you out!

Seriously, the whole freakin' galaxy is at stake and all these races do is worry about their own little problem.  Well, I guess it's only normal that the game is focused on Earth then, right?  I mean, each race only cares about their own little problem and why the hell would humans care about the galaxy when the Earth is being attacked, right?

Plus, I have to admit that I am quite sick with Bioware's storyline.  Find an ally, but ally has a problem, so need to solve that person or that species or that races problem first.  Do this enough times and then final mission.  Wow, can't they come up with another type of storyline for once?  And making it the same length as ME2?  Replace one person from ME2 with
a race in ME3, replace the beginning of ME2 with Earth being attacked
in ME3, and replace taking out the collectors with taking out the Reapers in ME3, and you have ME3!<_<

I will certainly wait for reviews, spoil myself and see just how "spend whole game rallying races then final mission" the game actually is.  But I feel that at best, I'll wait for a price drop. And at worst, I'll skip it altogether.

I couldn't disagree more. ME 2 had an amazing storyline and ME 3 seems to be just as good.

[Faust1979]

I think this will be the best game Bioware has put out yet

[shep82]

Faust1979 wrote...

I think this will be the best game Bioware has put out yet

That I agree with.

[Crackseed]

And here I thought you were going to knee-jerk less Saren Way to jump the shark again.

Romances already confirmed in. We've been shown very small slivers of story, which are enough to tantalize. There have been showcases now of the improved levelling and skills, confirmation that more choices matter in addition to the return of weapon modding. Combat complaints also appear to be getting addressed and Bioware is starting the hype train up by showing off one of the bigger facets of the ME universe - it's combat.

I don't see how there's alot of room to be so doom and gloom. You might argue "Where's the story?!" - do you really want them to do ME2's advertising and kick off with some big plot points like the Normandy going boom and Shep dying and watch these boards erupt in "OMFG SPOILER" threads everywhere? Try to look at it from their perspective - the fans seem to be largely behind the whole "Don't show us spoilers or alot of story so we can see it for ourselves" which leaves them to show us...what exactly? Right - combat engine, combat vids and a smattering of the RPG trappings.

If we're so adamant that they show us no story or as little as possible, with 7 months to go - what else can we expect to see or be shown of ME3 then what we are seeing now?

[Gatt9]

Sepewrath wrote...

Walker White wrote...

GodWood wrote...

ME1 went out of it's way to try and seem 'plausible'.
ME2 went more or less "**** it. Rule of Cool".

The economy in ME1 made zero sense and was completely implausible.  The vendors and monetary system were designed as if it were a fantasy RPG, completely ignoring the advances in manufacturing and distribution that exist TODAY, much less in the 22 century.  ME2 got it right.

Yeah its amusing that someone would try to claim anything about ME1 is plausible. A person carrying 50 guns and 20 armors on them is plausible? Finding armor that can fit a full grown person in a tiny little bin is plausible? Being on a military operation, from two government organizations that is complete unfunded or supplied is plausible? Though that part is fine since, it took 2 weeks to become the richest person in the galaxy. Or maybe its plausible that the military would have armor that is easily outshined by something you find on a random planet that no one has set foot on for a hundred years? A seasoned soldier is incapable of aiming a gun, that has aim assist? Interesting.

People need to just admit it, ME1 relied on outdated genre mechanics, you can like it or prefer those mechanics, nothing wrong with that. I'll take a 2D fighter over a 3D one any day of the week. But just say that, don't try and drag plausibility or reality into any of this, like it really matters. There is very little in the way of realistic about this series in ME1,2 and I'm guessing 3.

The mechanics weren't outdated,  some of them may have been poorly implemented,  but they're not outdated.

-The guns and armor are a result of the "People who hate RPG's but claim to like them crowd" spending the last 10 years whining about limited inventory space and encumbrance.  This is what those people wanted,  so there's no point in complaining about it since people spent a decade demanding it.

-Armor in a bin is an implementation issue,  not a mechanics issue.  A well designed RPG has multiple tables so that things like that don't happen.

-Shepherd never requested funding.

-Of course it's plausible,  since we're talking about a race that's relatively in it's infancy,  compared to races both living and extinct with thousands of years of progress beyond what humanity had.  No offense,  but people really need to look at the big picture and let go of the "Humans are the best of everything!" idea.

-No matter how "Seasoned" you are (And that's never really established,  the extent of his seasoning),  shooting a weapon while under fire is nowhere near as easy as people seem to think it is.  You're not aiming,  you're moving,  he's moving,  this is not something you just become perfect at really fast.  Hollywood has told everyone lies for decades,  most "Seasoned" soldiers aren't going to hit their target on the first shot.  Or to put it another way,  there's a reason why Automatic and Burst fire modes exist,  and it's *not* because soldiers are able to aim perfectly under all conditions after their first battle.

As far as the other poster goes,  the second quote in,  seriously,  do you *really* think that Humanity's technology surpassed races with thousands of years of progress over them?  .

[sympathy4saren]

crackseed wrote...

And here I thought you were going to knee-jerk less Saren Way to jump the shark again.

Romances already confirmed in. We've been shown very small slivers of story, which are enough to tantalize. There have been showcases now of the improved levelling and skills, confirmation that more choices matter in addition to the return of weapon modding. Combat complaints also appear to be getting addressed and Bioware is starting the hype train up by showing off one of the bigger facets of the ME universe - it's combat.

I don't see how there's alot of room to be so doom and gloom. You might argue "Where's the story?!" - do you really want them to do ME2's advertising and kick off with some big plot points like the Normandy going boom and Shep dying and watch these boards erupt in "OMFG SPOILER" threads everywhere? Try to look at it from their perspective - the fans seem to be largely behind the whole "Don't show us spoilers or alot of story so we can see it for ourselves" which leaves them to show us...what exactly? Right - combat engine, combat vids and a smattering of the RPG trappings.

If we're so adamant that they show us no story or as little as possible, with 7 months to go - what else can we expect to see or be shown of ME3 then what we are seeing now?

Yeah. No crap romances are confirmed for Mass Effect 3. But beyond, if there are any future ME games, don't be shocked if romances get ripped out. See...it takes away from the shooting. It is likely to be eliminated down the line. I mean....streamlined. Yeah...

I understand story points wouldn't be given away, but when I hear guitars and nonstop shooting, energy swords and a rail gun sequence against a Reaper (really....you shoot at a Reaper with a gun in a rail sequence????? Corny.), it doesn't much feel like Mass Effect. Or the energy sword swing at the end of the trailers.

I would like to see a little vehicle exploration and confirmation on the Hammerhead. Maybe a little more dialogue and a combat demonstration how weapon and armor mods affect a similar situation. What about the looting system? Can we see that? How about a little info on new characters? Will i even be able to have Tali, or am i gonna be forced to buy the Collector's Edition?

As far as Mass Effect 2 goes....writing was very good overall...characterization was phenomenal but story was a tad weaker. Overall excellent though.

[sympathy4saren]

Walker White wrote...

GodWood wrote...

ME1 went out of it's way to try and seem 'plausible'.
ME2 went more or less "**** it. Rule of Cool".

The economy in ME1 made zero sense and was completely implausible.  The vendors and monetary system were designed as if it were a fantasy RPG, completely ignoring the advances in manufacturing and distribution that exist TODAY, much less in the 22 century.  ME2 got it right.

Really? ME2 got it right? I disagree. It was far too easy to become wealthy...way too many credits available for what there was to purchase in stores. Which leads me into my second issue....where was all the stuff to purchase? In traversing the galaxy, there was only that to purchase? There should be 10 times or twenty times more items to buy. If that would have been the case, then the credit amount would have been fine.

Mass Effect 2's economy wasnt bad in the way it was presented....it was just way, way too simplistic and thin. Far too easy. IMO, it wasn't close to being right at all. Not that ME was, either, but an economy like ME2 is needed interface wise but with much, much more to purchase, with strong variances in items.

Modifié par sympathy4saren, 20 août 2011 - 08:40 .

[Drone223]

OP the cyclops from Halo Wars was an exo-suit ment for repairs not a mech (Halo has it own charm as does Mass Effect), there also happens to be a mech called the Atlas from the Mechwarrior so the mech in ME3 is proberly a reference to mechwarrior

Modifié par Drone223, 20 août 2011 - 08:58 .

[Lunatic LK47]

Gatt9 wrote...


-No matter how "Seasoned" you are (And that's never really established,  the extent of his seasoning),  shooting a weapon while under fire is nowhere near as easy as people seem to think it is.  You're not aiming,  you're moving,  he's moving,  this is not something you just become perfect at really fast.  Hollywood has told everyone lies for decades,  most "Seasoned" soldiers aren't going to hit their target on the first shot.  Or to put it another way,  there's a reason why Automatic and Burst fire modes exist,  and it's *not* because soldiers are able to aim perfectly under all conditions after their first battle.

Something called EXTENSIVE TRAINING involved? Why the hell does Military Operations on Urban Terrain Training courses exist? To prepare soldiers for urban environments like Iraq? What's next, saying it's perfectly fine for Snipers to miss their first shots in a life-or-death situation that could get a potential hostage or civilian killed? Apparently, common sense does not exist for you, douchebag.

[TwistedComplex]

I'm disappointed from what im seeing from the forums

[aridor1570]

KingDan97 wrote...

Deylar wrote...

Foryou wrote...

You can't really advertise RPG stuff. You get to set your stats for this power doesn't really have the same ring as you can make a vortex

Skyrim seemed to do well advertising RPG stuff alongside combat.

I don't know my feelings of ME3. Being disappointed in DA2, I fear for ME3.

Skyrim comes out in November, the first time I saw any RPG element outside of the stat screen was Quakecon. Even that was just the rotation of items and displaying their stats and one conversation, and that was just to make the point of every item being modeled.

Mass effect 3 had demos at E3 with weapon modding, conversations, the unveiling of 2 squadmates, the display of Mordin, Legion and Wrex. And at that point it was 9 months off. We've got months until Mass Effect is at the polination point that Skyrim is at now, and we've already seen a land reaper and the intro of the game.

Exactly!

[Il Divo]

Gatt9 wrote...

-The guns and armor are a result of the "People who hate RPG's but claim to like them crowd" spending the last 10 years whining about limited inventory space and encumbrance.  This is what those people wanted,  so there's no point in complaining about it since people spent a decade demanding it.

It doesn't matter what the reasoning was. As implemented the inventory is terrible. And since Bioware didn't even implement an attribute system, it's not clear how they would even make a proper inventory/encumbrance limit.

-Shepherd never requested funding.

Which demonstrates the stupidity of the inventory system. Most RPGs get around this by having the protagonist 
start from humble beginnings, which provides a logical motivation behind their need to pull items off corpses. Shepard is a highly trained Alliance marine, currently under the employ of the most powerful government in the galaxy. Your argument makes no sense. Shepard should have been able to request funding.

-Of course it's plausible,  since we're talking about a race that's relatively in it's infancy,  compared to races both living and extinct with thousands of years of progress beyond what humanity had.  No offense,  but people really need to look at the big picture and let go of the "Humans are the best of everything!" idea.

No, it's not. I'm working for the most powerful government in the Galaxy as a Council Spectre. Logically speaking, they would have some of the strongest weapons/armor available, not a group of rogue Biotics. It's simply another example of gameplay-lore segregation.

-No matter how "Seasoned" you are (And that's never really established,  the extent of his seasoning),  shooting a weapon while under fire is nowhere near as easy as people seem to think it is.  You're not aiming,  you're moving,  he's moving,  this is not something you just become perfect at really fast.  Hollywood has told everyone lies for decades,  most "Seasoned" soldiers aren't going to hit their target on the first shot.  Or to put it another way,  there's a reason why Automatic and Burst fire modes exist,  and it's *not* because soldiers are able to aim perfectly under all conditions after their first battle.
  .

He was seasoned enough to be considered for a position as a Council Spectre, of which there are barely a hundred in existence. In a galaxy of beyond trillions, I don't think we need to do the percentages. I should also add that how aiming might work in real life does necessarily not make for a good video game, if it can even be said that Mass Effect has realistic aiming.

Modifié par Il Divo, 20 août 2011 - 12:51 .

[SGT WEAR SK1]

Gatt9 wrote...


-No matter how "Seasoned" you are (And that's never really established,  the extent of his seasoning),  shooting a weapon while under fire is nowhere near as easy as people seem to think it is.  You're not aiming,  you're moving,  he's moving,  this is not something you just become perfect at really fast.  Hollywood has told everyone lies for decades,  most "Seasoned" soldiers aren't going to hit their target on the first shot.  Or to put it another way,  there's a reason why Automatic and Burst fire modes exist,  and it's *not* because soldiers are able to aim perfectly under all conditions after their first battle.

I've had combat experience and where I am fully willing to agree to the statement that soldiers, no matter how much range time they have, don't typically fire as accurately when the **** really does hit the fan and people are firing back at you. This is an elite Special Forces soldier we are talking about, with countless missions under his belt previous to the engagements occurring during ME1. If it were Jenkins we were talking about, it'd be fine, he'd probably ****** himself like I saw a good number of tough guy soldiers did in Iraq, but it's not. To the burst and fully auto toggle..burst is for accuracy (though single shot is by far, still better) and full auto is for suppressive fire. Lay down as much lead as you can to keep the enemy down and not shooting at you, lol. That's what SAWs are for too, though if your trigger finger is sensitive enough, you can get off single shots and have 100 rounds to play with..

I for one, am happy about the accuracy upgrade that came with ME2 for the above stated reasons, but ended up missing a lot of the skill leveling from the first that is making a somewhat return in the third.. I can't wait to mod my flippin weapons, again, lol..

[Terror_K]

Sepewrath wrote...

People need to just admit it, ME1 relied on outdated genre mechanics, you can like it or prefer those mechanics, nothing wrong with that. I'll take a 2D fighter over a 3D one any day of the week. But just say that, don't try and drag plausibility or reality into any of this, like it really matters. There is very little in the way of realistic about this series in ME1,2 and I'm guessing 3.

They aren't "outdated genre mechanics" at all. More like genre mechanics that don't suit the story and medium that was being gone for with Mass Effect, or at least not in the way they were executed. Mass Effect is set in the future and not a "rags to ritches" or "pleeb to God" style RPG, so some of the elements didn't quite work. Had Mass Effect been about a human mercenary starting from scratch or even just a Jenkins style nobody then the mechanics wouldn't have been so much an issue, but the story was about an elite Alliance soldier becoming one of not only humanity's best but the entire galaxy's. Personally I was able to look the other way with ME1 because most of the stuff that didn't fit was purely a gameplay factor and didn't interfere with the lore itself, and was completely ignored by it and the narrative as if it didn't exist. Unfortunately most of the logic issues ME2 had wasn't as easy to ignore, because they weren't purely gameplay factors and often tried to get the lore involved. But that's another matter.

Again, good mechanics are good mechanics, and bad ones are bad ones, and the RPG elements from ME1 are no more or less outdated than a good deal of the mechanics ME2 brought in from the shooter and action genre to improve that side of the gameplay. It's just that they aren't as jarring, though I don't think all of them fit Mass Effect either, and there tends to be too many pure shooter elements implemented as if the game is a pure shooter, and aren't as well adapted to the RPG aspect of the game. This made ME2 feel rather schizophrenic and unbalance, like it wasn't quite sure what it was supposed to be, with systems that didn't really support each other that well. It felt a bit like an RPG/Shooter Frankenstein's Monster-esque monster rather than something naturally bred between the two genres.

The other factor is, shooters are the current popular trend these days. The so-called "new" mechanics ME2 brought to the table aren't that new at all, and are also largely outdated and overused, even more than most of ME1's RPG elements. But because they're popular and the current trend, they aren't seen as outdated at all. So one can say "don't drag plausibility" into this, but one should also not drag "outdated mechanics" into it either, because it too it just as guilty on both sides of the fence.

Modifié par Terror_K, 20 août 2011 - 02:12 .