249 réponses à ce sujet

[Stompi]

Why wouldn't it be a great entry point? There will be a comic that explains the events of the first games. We will visit the home planet of almost every major race and other important places like the Citadel and Illium. This way, new players will learn much about the Mass Effect universe and will probably be as interested in the continuation of the series as old fans. More Mass Effect fans means more Mass Effect games. I don't think I'm very horrified by that vision. And yes, the world is about money.

Modifié par Stompi, 02 septembre 2011 - 11:32 .

[k177sh0t]

There will be a comic that explains the events of the first games

Nope

[Someone With Mass]

k177sh0t wrote...

There will be a comic that explains the events of the first games

Nope

Which is just good, considering that Genesis was garbage at best.

[Kusy]

Orly? You didn't like Genesis? Next thing you tell me is that the other comics were bad as well! :trollface:

[CaptainZaysh]

Silverman makes an interesting point in that article - that only people who'd played the first game really gave a rat's ass about the decisions anyway. ”Do I hook up with this girl, or this girl? Well… this one’s blue, so, sure!” It's probably better just to have videos and a set of default decisions rather than an interactive comic.

[Dunmer of Redoran]

It's an entry point because some people are going to go back and play the older two games. Not a gigantic number of people, but there'll be some.

[Gatt9]

SomeKindaEnigma wrote...
You obviously don't seem to be grasping the fact that the 2nd entry in a trilogy usually is the toughest as far as keeping continuity goes (especially in a choice-oriented series)...  of course you aren't going to see massive ramifications for your decisions made in the first game, if they played a major role in how the 2nd game unfolded it would be an absolute nightmare/damn near impossible trying to account for all of that in the 3rd, considering how many different variables will then have been created.  since ME3 is the final game, they no longer have to account for these decisions in the future, so I think it's reasonable to assume that you WILL see major repercussions and differences in the ways events unfold based on your prior decisions.

Someone's grasp is a little weak,  but it isn't mine.

Your first major problem is the assertion that "The 2nd entry...",  there's never been a game series that connected choices from each preceeding title before.  So it cannot be possible for it to be the "Usually toughest",  for that to be true,  there'd have to be other series to show it.  There aren't any.  As such,  pretty much your entire point in the paragraph is false.

Your each entry weaker than the last comment is pure bias/personal taste; I don't think there's anything wrong with you liking ME1 more, but I and plenty of others happen to disagree and like ME2 more (not to mention the critics disagree with you as well).  So, you really made no point with that comment.

Here you've got even bigger problems.

First,  it is demonstrable.  The entire entry is bordering on nonsensical with it's inclusion of magical events (Resurrection) and magical powers(Putting ammo in allies guns from 30 yards away),  combined with the fact that no one notices or cares.  The AI is a relic from the 1990's,  it's a linear corridor without any exploration,  eerily similiar to what we had in 1994's FPS's.  It can't even maintain it's own logic,  with the aforementioned thermal clips.  I can keep going if you want?

As far as the critics go,  you really might not want to rely on that arguement,  I can bust out a large number of links outlining how "Objective" they are.  I'll just point out here,  DA2 was given 10/10's.

And marketing promo is just that, marketing promo.  The marketing team members' jobs likely depend on how well they can spread word of the game and make it appeal to more than just the loyal fans they already have.  The dev team has stated on numerous occasions how everything you did in ME1 and ME2 will definitely affect how your 3rd game experience unfolds, but if you're someone new to the series, has no idea what the backstory is really about, and don't really care to play the first 2 games first because the 3rd seems much more awesome, do you really want to be told you NEED/HAVE to play the first 2 to get the 3rd?  

I don't really completely like the stuff I hear in the marketing campaign so far, but I know enough to realize that Bioware is catering to the long-time fans just as much as, or probably more so in the long run than the average newcomer.

1.  The Dev team claimed that what you did in ME would effect ME2 too,  it was nothing but emails.  They claimed it would effect DA2 as well (From DAO),  and it was the same.  How many times do you accept the same lie before you realize it's not true?

2.  They aren't catering to their long term fans,  they threw them all out in the last 2 years. 

@whoever the guy below his post was,  if you're going to "Own" me,  do try and bring some arguements that aren't fabricated,  and don't rely on the "Arguement from on high" tactic,  especially when the God being referenced is the gaming press we have substantial proof reviews advertisers and not games.

Modifié par Gatt9, 02 septembre 2011 - 10:29 .

[111987]

Not going to get into this debate, but just because Dragon Age II got a 10/10 from some reviews doesn't mean critic opinion is baseless/useless. DA2's average score on Gamerankings, which is an average of reviews, has DA2 at 77.07%

[Fiery Phoenix]

FoxShadowblade wrote...

It's a great entry point because people will buy it, go "huh", look online, see how if you play the first two, your experience is much greater, and boom. BioWare has made a lot of money.

You guys act shocked that the Video Game Industry wants money, pull your heads out of your puckers and you'll learn a thing or two.

This!

[Texhnolyze101]

How can people be so foolish as to why there saying what there saying?.

[Kusy]

Here's video games reviews for you.

Modifié par Mr.Kusy, 02 septembre 2011 - 11:09 .

[111987]

Mr.Kusy wrote...

Here's video games reviews for you.

If this is in reply to my post, then the game site I showed was an average of dozens of review websites, and it showed by DA2 having its understandbly low score of 77%.

[Kusy]

It was just a remark, I'm not trying to insult you this time, that's just my opinion about many of the "professional" video games related websites. I used to buy games for granted, because I liked previous works of the developer, because there were good reviews, because well, I had some cash to spend.

Now I don't, I first play, then buy with the only exception being The Old Republic, and if TOR fails to impress me then there will be no more exceptions ever.

[111987]

Mr.Kusy wrote...

It was just a remark, I'm not trying to insult you this time, that's just my opinion about many of the "professional" video games related websites. I used to buy games for granted, because I liked previous works of the developer, because there were good reviews, because well, I had some cash to spend.

Now I don't, I first play, then buy with the only exception being The Old Republic, and if TOR fails to impress me then there will be no more exceptions ever.

Ah okay, sorry for the paranoia. You're right, many review sites are influenced by the gaming companies, so I find that reviews on an individual basis aren't all that effective in most cases. I mean, how can some reviews give DA2 a 10/10, while others gave it a 5/10? That's simply ridiculous. I personally only use metacritic and gamerankings for reviews, as those are averages. And iGN is usually pretty good.

[AtreiyaN7]

DaftArbiter wrote...

It's an entry point because some people are going to go back and play the older two games. Not a gigantic number of people, but there'll be some.

I think that's reasonable, but I expect to see the ranting about marketing to continue. As far as I can tell, logic hasn't been a part of how the forums have operated for a long time.

[Jaron Oberyn]

Gatt9 wrote...
<snip>

Gatt.. I must applaud you. Single handedly taking on these blind fanboys and discrediting their arguments... you make it look too easy.  Keep it up man.


-Polite

[Xewaka]

Gatt9 wrote...
it's a linear corridor without any exploration,  eerily similiar to what we had in 1994's FPS's.

I think you're mistaken with current FPSs there. Early FPS (Doom, Duke Nukem 3D) had huge, expansive levels, with lots of hidden rooms and space to explore. Duke even had to give you a Jetpack so you could see the sheer amount of space the levels had. It is current and former generation FPSs the ones that consist of a straight narrow corridor.

[LGTX]

....what?

ME3 will be the entry point for NEWcomers because by the time they COME, the latest game in the series on the shelves will be ME3. Why read further than that?

Refer to my signature for my further opinion on this matter.

[Aeowyn]

Fiery Phoenix wrote...

FoxShadowblade wrote...

It's a great entry point because people will buy it, go "huh", look online, see how if you play the first two, your experience is much greater, and boom. BioWare has made a lot of money.

You guys act shocked that the Video Game Industry wants money, pull your heads out of your puckers and you'll learn a thing or two.

This!

Or they go "huh", look online, and pirate the first two games. And I would hardly call your experience "greater" if you played Mass Effect since whatever you made there can be summed up in a crappy interactive comic called Genesis.

I don't act shocked that they want to make money. I doubt anyone here does. I personally am disappointed that they announced the Mass Effect - series as a trilogy where our choices would be transferred and affect the story and all we got in ME2 were lousy e-mails, Horizon and random NPCs from the first game coming over to say hi. Unless you were a renegade in the first game, then you got nothing. 

I'm hoping that our choices will have a larger impact than the above in ME3, and I sure hope that "it's a great entry point for new players" won't weaken the story for those of us who have been here from the start.

[matt-bassist]

marshalleck wrote...

How? Easy.

Remember how ME2 had very little to do with anything in ME1? Well, get ready for that again in ME3. The game's plot and characters will be written that it is a standalone game, with a sprinkling of cameos here and there for the importers, as well as tons of email.

it makes me sad because you're so right   Im sure when they made ME1 they fully intended the trilogy to be closely linked, but after the change from Microsoft to EA it's VERY clear things have changed.

What a pity.

[matt-bassist]

jreezy wrote...

Better late than never to the Mass Effect franchise I guess, although starting from ME1 would be ideal.

the biggest obsticle is that many (read PS3) players cannot start at ME1. this whole xbox exclusive / EA takeover thing really f-ed this possibly amazing trilogy up bigtime.

[littlezack]

They say that because telling people 'you must buy and play two games before this in order to fully enjoy it' is a good way to turn off potential buyers. If they do things right, they can make a game that can be played by newcomers without feeling muddled and longtime players without feeling left out.

It's difficult to judge from one way or the other, but based on the Surkesh level, I think they're in the right direction. We have a level that revolves around help from two characters (Wrex and Mordin) who could very possibly be dead. While you can probably still do the level without them, it's been confirmed that there won't be placeholder characters to replace their roles - since Mordin is busy doing computer work to help you from afar and Wrex is giving you air support, it makes since that their absence makes the level more difficult. On top of that, the level's objective is based around ideas and problems that wouldn't be immediately clear to newcomers without a deep explanation - why protecting a female Krogan is so important, the significance of Mordin helping you with this, the importance of Wrex, why it's odd for Cerberus to be attacking you, et cetera.

I also take the inclusion of Vega as a good sign. Like him or not, he's an attempt to catch players up in as none-intrusive a way as possible. The fact that a character like him even needs to exists suggests that the game is going to be fairly heavy in events that ME1 and 2 set up. If ME3 made little reference at all to the previous games, there'd be no real purpose for having him.

So, yes, I'm optimistic, though I wouldn't call my optimism 'blind', if I can be so bold.