1169 réponses à ce sujet

[Gatt9]

Selene Moonsong wrote...

There has been no mention by the Developers that ME 3 will be a MP game. The so-called evidence people are presenting as 'proof' is just a vague as the no comments you will get from a Developer.

From the evidence I have seen presented, the only conclusion I can come to is a possibility that somewhere in the future there could be multi-player capabilities, such as in DLC, but I see no direct proof that ME 3 will be anything more than a SP game, just like ME and ME 2.

1.  They had 3 projects in development,  Star Wars,  DA2,  and ME3,  when they were hiring a multiplayer dev.  Star Wars has no need of such a person since it's built in.  DA2 didn't have multiplayer.  So that leaves only one option.

2.  They were hiring QA specifically for multiplayer a couple weeks ago.  They have only one game in a development stage that would require QA just for multiplayer.

I'm really not sure why anyone is still doubting this.  It's just process of elimination.

This is the kind of arguments I hate. Why? Becuase it's a lie and I know the poster knows it as well, yet still deliberately lies to portray the game & the studio in bad light. You KNOW yourself this is simply not true. You are a big fan, you follow the news and updates. Even though the marketing's been focused on combat, you KNOW that:

- weapon mods are coming back
- leveling system is getting expanded with multiple power evolutions
- larger skill trees
- quadrilions powers
- level cap back to 60
- expanded economy
- more loot
- granades are back
- squad weapon & armor customization
- greater variety of weapons & armors
- XP system's going back to ME1, no more mission summary screens
- mission debrieefings are coming back
- party banter will be back and possibly bigger than ever
- bigger, more open & varied levels (including the Presidium on the Citadel)
- smaller squad to allow greater interaction
- greater exploration & traversal (vehicle planet exploration also possibly back)

Yes, there will still be ammo & regenerable health. But apart from these few streamlined mechanics 'surviving' from ME2, it is simply clear ME3 will be sigificantly backtracking to ME1's greater complexity in nearly every aspect. And what we've already seen (leveling & mods) proves their promises are not just empty words, they're actually implementing the changes they've promised/announced.

Not really,  in same order as your list...

-No arguement.
-Potentially redundant due to level scaling,  you killed a YMIR at level 2 with starter weapons in ME2,  if ME3's the same,  then there's no real point to it.  A leveling system implies the ability to handle more difficult things,  not kill the same stuff for the next 40 hours a little bit faster.
-No arguement.
-No idea what you're talking about.
-Leveling cap is meaningless if level scaling is present.  Level scaling makes it a redundant feature that in effect,  does nothing,  and as such wasted resources.
-Yet to be seen.  No evidence of this as of yet.
-If there's 1 loot item in the whole game,  there's more loot than ME2.  This has yet to prove itself due to the horrible implementation of ME2.
-Um...those are a hallmark feature of a Shooter...
-No arguement.
-Has yet to be seen.  If it's another case of "Gain some completely insignificant percentage" that you'll never see any real effect from,  it's pointless.
-Last I heard XP/kill was gone,  has this changed?  Pleased about the "Level over!" screens being gone though.
-No arguement.
-No arguement.
-I want evidence.  Theoretically,  you could argue that the Thresher Maw was "Big and wide open" even though you could only use a tiny portion of the perspective.  Same with the final battle.  I want proof of this.
-Cop-out.  Smaller squad doesn't imply more interaction.  Unless the reference is to the total number of party members on the Normanday.  In which case,  it could.
-As with loot,  adding one side-room off a corridor would be more exploration than ME2 had,  this needs to be demonstrated. 

There's alot of iffy assertions Bioware has made,  given their recent track record. 

[shepskisaac]

Gatt9 wrote...

There's alot of iffy assertions Bioware has made,  given their recent track record. 

And at the same time they've already proven mods are back and leveling gets significantly expanded (what actual effect will it have in-game is a different discussion, post-game one). So yeah, I'm willing to believe them on the rest. Everyone's free to remain sceptical, but even sole presence of mods & expanded leveling means it does not become even more of a shooter like some people claim.

[whywhywhywhy]

Selene Moonsong wrote...

There has been no mention by the
Developers that ME 3 will be a MP game. The so-called evidence people
are presenting as 'proof' is just a vague as the no comments you will
get from a Developer.

But you have to admit the no comment stance on something "not planned" warrants that it's being considered or potentially pursued in general, in this industry.

@isaac  I usually ignore your post because of the boring, uninteresting content.  That and they are ususally just attacks but since you went out of the way to say "lie" + "I know it" = "I'm a liar."   I'll give you this one time only priviledge.

IsaacShep wrote...
This is the kind of arguments I hate. Why? Becuase it's a lie and I know the poster knows it as well,

It isn't a lie, it's just truth you haven't come to accept.

IsaacShep wrote...
yet still deliberately lies to portray the game & the studio in bad light.

First let's established what I said about me2.  It's mentioned within the first minute.  Now that I've done that let's move along to ME3 to find the truth.

IsaacShep wrote...
You KNOW yourself this is simply not true. You are a big fan, you follow the news and updates. Even though the marketing's been focused on combat, you KNOW that:

But by your own admission if they've talked about 90% combat even after a delay and 5 months til launch maybe that 10% of features they covered won't be so great or added at the last minute.  Otherwise why not get into the release features more if the fanbase is information starved?

IsaacShep wrote...
-feature list snipped-

  I found myself responding to each bullet point so in the spirit of a short post I decided against it.  When I look at your list point by point I find few that don't have a shooter implementation, one that differentiates itself from the shooter genre or found exlusively in a different genre.  What's left means little, doesn't wow me and doesn't help your argument.  Did you look at the post before you clicked submit ?

IsaacShep wrote...
Yes, there will still be ammo & regenerable health. But apart from these few streamlined mechanics 'surviving' from ME2, it is simply clear ME3 will be sigificantly backtracking to ME1's greater complexity in nearly every aspect. And what we've already seen (leveling & mods) proves their promises are not just empty words, they're actually implementing the changes they've promised/announced.

What I've seen so far is fps designed levels (closed in spaces with plenty of obstructions) with backdrops. 

Modifié par whywhywhywhy, 04 octobre 2011 - 11:43 .

[Gorosaur]

whywhywhywhy wrote...

Selene Moonsong wrote...

There has been no mention by the
Developers that ME 3 will be a MP game. The so-called evidence people
are presenting as 'proof' is just a vague as the no comments you will
get from a Developer.

But you have to admit the no comment stance on something "not planned" warrants that it's being considered or potentially pursued in general, in this industry.

@isaac  I usually ignore your post because of the boring, uninteresting content.  That and they are ususally just attacks but since you went out of the way to say "lie" + "I know it" = "I'm a liar."   I'll give you this one time only priviledge.

IsaacShep wrote...
This is the kind of arguments I hate. Why? Becuase it's a lie and I know the poster knows it as well,

It isn't a lie, it's just truth you haven't come to accept.

IsaacShep wrote...
yet still deliberately lies to portray the game & the studio in bad light.

First let's established what I said about me2.  It's mentioned within the first minute.  Now that I've done that let's move along to ME3 to find the truth.

IsaacShep wrote...
You KNOW yourself this is simply not true. You are a big fan, you follow the news and updates. Even though the marketing's been focused on combat, you KNOW that:

But by your own admission if they've talked about 90% combat even after a delay and 5 months til launch maybe that 10% of features they covered won't be so great or added at the last minute.  Otherwise why not get into the release features more if the fanbase is information starved?

IsaacShep wrote...
-feature list snipped-

  I found myself responding to each bullet point so in the spirit of a short post I decided against it.  When I look at your list point by point I find few that don't have a shooter implementation, one that differentiates itself from the shooter genre or found exlusively in a different genre.  What's left means little, doesn't wow me and doesn't help your argument.  Did you look at the post before you clicked submit ?

IsaacShep wrote...
Yes, there will still be ammo & regenerable health. But apart from these few streamlined mechanics 'surviving' from ME2, it is simply clear ME3 will be sigificantly backtracking to ME1's greater complexity in nearly every aspect. And what we've already seen (leveling & mods) proves their promises are not just empty words, they're actually implementing the changes they've promised/announced.

What I've seen so far is fps designed levels (closed in spaces with plenty of obstructions) with backdrops. 

[Someone With Mass]

If you were looking for RPG games that aren't shooters, Mass Effect was a bad choice right from the start.

Just saying.

Edit: Mass Effect can't be a First Person Shooter.

Modifié par Someone With Mass, 04 octobre 2011 - 11:49 .

[whywhywhywhy]

Gorosaur wrote...
Thank you sir for being among the few level headed people on this site. Theres fanboyism and then theres taking a step back and actually appreciating what has been done instead of calling doom and gloom for a game we know relatively nothign about.

Fanboyism ???  Show me how Mass Effect 3 is anything other then combat first, show me how any of the things he/she named will make the modifications and additons to combat pale in comparision.

Modifié par whywhywhywhy, 04 octobre 2011 - 11:50 .

[Someone With Mass]

whywhywhywhy wrote...
Fanboyism ???  Show me how Mass Effect 3 is anything other then combat first, show me how any of the things he/she named will make the modifications and additons to combat pale in comparision.

How can he? They would have to reveal spoilers about the story if you want proof about more impactful choices and such.

[shep82]

whywhywhywhy wrote...

Gorosaur wrote...
Thank you sir for being among the few level headed people on this site. Theres fanboyism and then theres taking a step back and actually appreciating what has been done instead of calling doom and gloom for a game we know relatively nothign about.

Fanboyism ???  Show me how Mass Effect 3 is anything other then combat first, show me how any of the things he/she named will make the modifications and additons to combat pale in comparision.

They have said that comabt was focused on in development but they also tweaked everything else. I think the main issue here is most of us trust that Bioware will do a great job and you don't.

[shepskisaac]

whywhywhywhy wrote...
@isaac  I usually ignore your post because of the boring, uninteresting content. That and they are ususally just attacks

If by attacks you mean arguments in s/s threads you lack arguments to respond to then yes, tons of attacks.

whywhywhywhy wrote...
It isn't a lie, it's just truth you haven't come to accept.

I accept tons of stuff, including the fact ME always been a shooter-RPG hybrid and that it got deeper in ME2 but I won't accept that it gets even deeper with ME3 since it's simply not truth.

whywhywhywhy wrote...
First let's established what I said about me2 within the first minute it's stated.

And where exactly did I say ME2's combat wasn't shooter like?

whywhywhywhy wrote...
But by your own admission if they've talked about 90% combat even after a delay and 5 months til launch maybe that 10% of features they covered won't be so great or added at the last minute.  Otherwise why not get into the release features more if the fanbase is information starved?

Because their marketing departement decided to focus & showcase action and combat mostly. Simple. If you go "what they show is all there is" then wouldn't that mean there would be only a tiny bit of dialogues in ME3? Because we haven't seen almost any dialogues. But we know it will be there, just like it was there even though they didn't show it much in ME2's marketing campaign reither. I personally don't agree with their decision to focus on combat in mass-marketing, but I get their reasons. Shooters have been dominating this console generation sales-wise so I can perfectly see why would they think presenting that would get them the most sales.

whywhywhywhy wrote...
I found myself responding to each bullet point so in the spirit of a short post I decided against it.  When I look at your list point by point I find few that don't have a shooter implementation, one that differentiates itself from shooters genre or found exlusively in a different genre.  What's left means little, doesn't wow me and doesn't help your argument.  Did you look at the post before you clicked post ?

You argued how ME1 didn't feel like shooter & whatnot. Everything from my list is what ME1 had. If it's coming back, by your own logic, it has to mean ME3 will feel less like a shooter. In reality yeah, much of stuff I listed has shooter characterstics but the point is that ME1 had it as well = it felt like a shooter in combat as well. This franchise was concieved as a shooter-RPG hybrid from the beginning and that's what ME1 was as well. It got worse in ME2 but with all the stuff coming back from ME1 in part 3, it definitely should feel more like the first game but that first game already felt like a shooter in significant part.

IsaacShep wrote...
What I've seen so far is fps designed levels (closed in spaces with plenty of obstructions) with backdrops. 

ME1 didn't lack such levels either.

Modifié par IsaacShep, 05 octobre 2011 - 12:04 .

[karatemanchan37]

What exactly are there any "New Features" involve in the Mass Effect world that they haven't done except multiplayer?

[whywhywhywhy]

Someone With Mass wrote...

whywhywhywhy wrote...
Fanboyism ???  Show me how Mass Effect 3 is anything other then combat first, show me how any of the things he/she named will make the modifications and additons to combat pale in comparision.

How can he? They would have to reveal spoilers about the story if you want proof about more impactful choices and such.

You act as if shooters don't have storylines.  Gameplay is a big part of what games are defined by, ME3 gameplay is gravitating towards shooters.  This is the conversation.  This is what I'm being acused of having "lied about." 

whywhywhywhy wrote...
It's moving closer and closer to being a shooter first and everything else second...

Invalidate this statement if you can, my reasons for it are already listed in the post this was quoted from. 
Amuse me.

edit:

jreezy wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

whywhywhywhy wrote...
Fanboyism ???  Show me how Mass Effect 3 is anything other then combat first, show me how any of the things he/she named will make the modifications and additons to combat pale in comparision.

How can he? They would have to reveal spoilers about the story if you want proof about more impactful choices and such.

Which makes neither Issac nor whywhywhywhy able to make a fair assessment of this whole situation.

It makes isaac unable to make a fair assessment, combat has been shown how his points impact the game haven't.  Especially since a large portion of the points are combat related features, my point stands.

NEXT!

Modifié par whywhywhywhy, 05 octobre 2011 - 12:12 .

[shep82]

whywhywhywhy wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

whywhywhywhy wrote...
Fanboyism ???  Show me how Mass Effect 3 is anything other then combat first, show me how any of the things he/she named will make the modifications and additons to combat pale in comparision.

How can he? They would have to reveal spoilers about the story if you want proof about more impactful choices and such.

You act as if shooters don't have storylines.  Gameplay is a big part of what games are defined by, ME3 gameplay is gravitating towards shooters.  This is the conversation.  This is what I'm being acused of having "lied about." 

whywhywhywhy wrote...
It's moving closer and closer to being a shooter first and everything else second...

Invalidate this statement if you can, my reasons for it are already listed in the post this was quoted from. 
Amuse me.

edit:

jreezy wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

whywhywhywhy
wrote...
Fanboyism ???  Show me how Mass Effect 3 is anything other
then combat first, show me how any of the things he/she named will make
the modifications and additons to combat pale in comparision.

How
can he? They would have to reveal spoilers about the story if you want
proof about more impactful choices and such.

Which
makes neither Issac nor whywhywhywhy able to make a fair assessment of
this whole situation.

It makes isaac unable to make a fair assessment, combat has been shown how his points impact the game haven't.  Especially since a large portion of the points are combat related features.  My point stands.

NEXT!

No it doesn't. Your point is clearly that everyrything other than combat has been dumbed down or ignored and you have no proof of that.

[Someone With Mass]

whywhywhywhy wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

whywhywhywhy wrote...
Fanboyism ???  Show me how Mass Effect 3 is anything other then combat first, show me how any of the things he/she named will make the modifications and additons to combat pale in comparision.

How can he? They would have to reveal spoilers about the story if you want proof about more impactful choices and such.

You act as if shooters don't have storylines.  Gameplay is a big part of what games are defined by, ME3 gameplay is gravitating towards shooters.  This is the conversation.  This is what I'm being acused of having "lied about." 

whywhywhywhy wrote...
It's moving closer and closer to being a shooter first and everything else second...

Invalidate this statement if you can, my reasons for it are already listed in the post this was quoted from. 
Amuse me.

You should tell me how it can't be more than a shooter when all we've seen of the gameplay is fragments of three levels with little to no context and what the developers earn on spoiling the story and the characters instead of keep on telling how they're improving the power and level system, since the combat apparently has nothing to do with ME3 being an RPG.

Entertain me instead. I really want to know.

[whywhywhywhy]

shep82 wrote...

whywhywhywhy wrote...

Gorosaur wrote...
Thank you sir for being among the few level headed people on this site. Theres fanboyism and then theres taking a step back and actually appreciating what has been done instead of calling doom and gloom for a game we know relatively nothign about.

Fanboyism ???  Show me how Mass Effect 3 is anything other then combat first, show me how any of the things he/she named will make the modifications and additons to combat pale in comparision.

They have said that comabt was focused on in development but they also tweaked everything else. I think the main issue here is most of us trust that Bioware will do a great job and you don't.

Combat was focused on, everything else tweaked.  Which seems to indicate a greater level of scrutiny and effort put forth in design ?  Thought so, btw don't make that assumption it makes a *** out of you and umption.

edit:

shep82 wrote...
No it doesn't. Your point is clearly that
everyrything other than combat has been dumbed down or ignored and you
have no proof of that.

Did you read the original post ?  I said no such thing, those are your words.

NEXT!

Modifié par whywhywhywhy, 05 octobre 2011 - 12:27 .

[shep82]

whywhywhywhy wrote...

shep82 wrote...

whywhywhywhy wrote...

Gorosaur wrote...
Thank you sir for being among the few level headed people on this site. Theres fanboyism and then theres taking a step back and actually appreciating what has been done instead of calling doom and gloom for a game we know relatively nothign about.

Fanboyism ???  Show me how Mass Effect 3 is anything other then combat first, show me how any of the things he/she named will make the modifications and additons to combat pale in comparision.

They have said that comabt was focused on in development but they also tweaked everything else. I think the main issue here is most of us trust that Bioware will do a great job and you don't.

Combat was focused on, everything else tweaked.  Which seems to indicate a greater level of scrutiny and effort put forth in design ?  Thought so, btw don't make that assumption it makes a *** out of you and umption.

From what I've seen they have put forth a great effort in giving us a great game. Just because the only footage is of combat does not mean they have ignored everything else.

[whywhywhywhy]

jreezy wrote...
With only the combat aspects being shown your argument is still unfair. It's the only part of the game being shown so no one can dispute it at this point. So...Your point still stands. Darn it, back where I started.

When did I ever say I'd be fair ? 

[shep82]

Btw combat is not the only vids shown they have shown the new galaxy map as well as story all aspects of ME 3 seem to be as good if not better than ME 2 IMO.

[whywhywhywhy]

Someone With Mass wrote...

You should proud you made me smirk.[smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/wink.png[/smilie]

Someone With Mass wrote...
You should tell me how it can't be more than a shooter when all we've seen of the gameplay is fragments of three levels with little to no context and what the developers earn on spoiling the story and the characters
instead of keep on telling how they're improving the power and level
system, since the combat apparently has nothing to do with ME3 being an
RPG.

Entertain me instead. I really want to know.

I could but I'm not going to do that.  Instead I'll direct you back to the original post in which I said the combat is growing more like shooters.  You've said about that "You should tell me how it can't be more than a shooter" which implies that you consider it at least in part a shooter which validates my point. 

I then said they went on and on about combat, that undisputable.

After that I said and I quote "It's moving closer and closer to being a shooter first and everything
else second..." this is an obvious comment towards gameplay.  So far they've shown the combat in two forms the first is shooter gameplay mechanics.  The second was the onrails shooting segments which is also in shooter games in a similiar nature.  They ususally involves you getting to a point with big gun and firing it at enemies. That's a element of shooter gameplay that wasn't present in ME2.  What gameplay have you seen or is hinted at that makes it anything else ?

This is my position and your trying to argue it so your the one with the burden of proof, not me.

NEXT!

[Someone With Mass]

Of course I'm considering Mass Effect to be part shooter. It's what it always has been.

[shepskisaac]

whywhywhywhy wrote...

What gameplay have you seen or is hinted at that makes it anything else ?

The list I compiled with all the returning ME1 elements. Elements from a game you said felt less like a shooter. By pure logic, it means ME3 will feel less like a shooter-only game than ME2 did.

Analogy:

chocolate - RPG
vanilla - shooter
ice cream - Mass Effect

Mass Effect 1 = chocolate vanilla ice cream
Mass Effect 2 = vanilla ice cream with only some chocolate (much was removed)
Mass Effect 3 based on what we know and is hinted at & promised/announced = vanilla ice cream with tons of cholocate back

If vanilla ice cream gets tons of chocolate back, it cannot logically feel even more like pure-vanilla ice = if ME3 gets tons of ME1 elements back, it cannot logically feel even more like pure-shooter like you said it will be.

Modifié par IsaacShep, 05 octobre 2011 - 12:53 .

[shep82]

whywhywhywhy wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

You should proud you made me smirk.[smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/wink.png[/smilie]

Someone With Mass wrote...
You should tell me how it can't be more than a shooter when all we've seen of the gameplay is fragments of three levels with little to no context and what the developers earn on spoiling the story and the characters
instead of keep on telling how they're improving the power and level
system, since the combat apparently has nothing to do with ME3 being an
RPG.

Entertain me instead. I really want to know.

I could but I'm not going to do that.  Instead I'll direct you back to the original post in which I said the combat is growing more like shooters.  You've said about that "You should tell me how it can't be more than a shooter" which implies that you consider it at least in part a shooter which validates my point. 

I then said they went on and on about combat, that undisputable.

After that I said and I quote "It's moving closer and closer to being a shooter first and everything
else second..." this is an obvious comment towards gameplay.  So far they've shown the combat in two forms the first is shooter gameplay mechanics.  The second was the onrails shooting segments which is also in shooter games in a similiar nature.  They ususally involves you getting to a point with big gun and firing it at enemies. That's a element of shooter gameplay that wasn't present in ME2.  What gameplay have you seen or is hinted at that makes it anything else ?

This is my position and your trying to argue it so your the one with the burden of proof, not me.

NEXT!

Mass effect always was an RPG/Shooter so tell me how the fact that it has shooter mechanics is new to you and why all of a sudden it bothers you?