157 réponses à ce sujet

[TAJ4Life]

I was at the Eurogamer Expo and had a go on ME3 at first glance it just all looked brighter, and then the same usual static boring empty enivironments, same robotic moving characters and then alas Commander Shepard with his robot face emotionless look.

Since this is supposed to be the end in the trilogy the final attack etc I would have thought Bioware would have put more time and effort in making this game look epic and feel epic.

Why not give the characters a better feel and look? Why not make the characters seem important? Why not include things in the environment?

Also in ME1 it was all about being a Spectre however it did have some feeling of importance when you became one yet in 2 it means nothing and in 3? Well time will tell.


Again Mass Effect 1 is still the best, not only did it look great but it was an RPG it had loot and all sorts personally having tried ME3 its just ME 2.5 at best its a big shame I was seriously hoping given Biowares reputation on making some pretty awesome games that ME3 would have had a lot more to in it.

But I guess thats what happens when you go over to EA...You are forces to make games yearly...If only you guys has gone with Microsoft and kept it exclusive eh?

Modifié par TAJ4Life, 01 octobre 2011 - 05:19 .

[firefireblow]

so a DEMO that is a pre-product of the final product is not good? hmm?

[TAJ4Life]

firefireblow wrote...

so a DEMO that is a pre-product of the final product is not good? hmm?

From my own experience of having played betas and demos no matter what developers or publishers say those games are pretty much the final cut. I have yet to see any beta or demo be soo much different from that of a full title and trust me I have played MANY.

[AdmiralCheez]

YOU PLAYED A TEN-MINUTE DEMO.

[SNascimento]

Not sure if serious.

[pmac_tk421]

Oh god, STOP WHINING ABOUT ME2! GET OVER IT ALREADY!

[Shepard the Leper]

Which platform did you use to play the demo?

[firefireblow]

TAJ4Life wrote...

firefireblow wrote...

so a DEMO that is a pre-product of the final product is not good? hmm?

From my own experience of having played betas and demos no matter what developers or publishers say those games are pretty much the final cut. I have yet to see any beta or demo be soo much different from that of a full title and trust me I have played MANY.

really cause i played the reach beta and the main game turn out to be much better than the beta,
just one example i can come up with more.

Modifié par firefireblow, 01 octobre 2011 - 05:23 .

[Fiery Phoenix]

Shepard the Leper wrote...

Which platform did you use to play the demo?

Far as I know, we have yet to see any version other than the 360 version.

[Takio]

ME 1 looked better? OP be trolling.

[The-Person]

Mass Effect 1 was full of static boring empty environments and robotic moving characters. Why couldn't they put things in the environment and why not make characters seem important? Commander Shepard had a robotic face in Mass Effect 1. Not to mention the mountain of worthless loot or bad graphics. Explain how these things are not true for Mass Effect 1. Mass Effect is being made in two year, which is a typical time period for all games.

Modifié par The-Person, 01 octobre 2011 - 05:25 .

[WalkingBartie]

I'm rather pleased the game looks almost the same. They found a really good and unique design with ME2. But of course things such as textures will be improved.

[turian councilor Knockout]

Can't you tell that the armor and character textures are alot better if so you need glasses and besides i don't care a **** about the graphics.

[Captain Crash]

Righttttttt.....

[firefireblow]

The-Person wrote...

Mass Effect 1 was full of static boring empty environments and robotic moving characters. Why couldn't they put things in the environment and why not make characters seem important? Commander Shepard had a robotic face in Mass Effect 1. Not to mention the mountain of worthless loot or bad graphics. Explain how these things are not true for Mass Effect 1. Mass Effect is being made in two year, which is a typical time period for all games.

yes ME2 had no repeat environment it was all different. Not copy of old places being used ever again.

[Someone With Mass]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

YOU PLAYED A TEN-MINUTE DEMO.

THIS!

CAPS LOCK RAGE!

Also, I'd guess that the demo never gave anyone full access to the game's functions and such, so it's a little stupid to judge a whole game based on one demo, which probably wasn't up to date.

[JimiShep]

The graphics are fine... why do people constantly have to complain about things that are not broken!!!!

[The-Person]

firefireblow wrote...

The-Person wrote...

Mass Effect 1 was full of static boring empty environments and robotic moving characters. Why couldn't they put things in the environment and why not make characters seem important? Commander Shepard had a robotic face in Mass Effect 1. Not to mention the mountain of worthless loot or bad graphics. Explain how these things are not true for Mass Effect 1. Mass Effect is being made in two year, which is a typical time period for all games.

yes ME2 had no repeat environment it was all different. Not copy of old places being used ever again.

I didn't say it didn't say it wasn't, but he is pretending these things are not in ME1.

[pmac_tk421]

I think ME3 looks awesome. The graphics are really good and you can't say that ME1 looked better. ME3 has some cool looking enviornments, art design and just graphics overall. And your constant arguments about RPG elements. Does a few more trees to click X on really make a game live or die for you?

[AdmiralCheez]

Captain Crash wrote...

Righttttttt.....

Holy sh*t the graphics *are* better.

Seriously, I didn't even notice until I watched some ME3 stuff right after playing ME2.

The lighting!  THE LIGHTING!

[TAJ4Life]

I know that many of you lack common sense and brain cells and without reading what I have said you come out with the usual nerd rage attacks but ME1 played and felt better, ME2 look better visually but a lot of the things that made it an RPG was taken out.

ME3 is NOT far better looking than ME2 I know I was there and played the 360 version, I have played ME2 on the Xbox 360 also.

And a 10min demo? Lol err ok you lot got more excuses? This is why I hate posting on sites sometimes, people that have an actual thing to say about a game get torn to shreds yet most of you will post complaining about the most dumbest things ever.

I stand by what I said originally, ME3 is not a huge improvement over ME2, yes ME1 had static environements but in this gen there is no reason for static boring environments and that is why I also say ME3 doesnt look any better than ME2 just more smokes and mirrors with lighting.

And if ME3 turns out to have multiplayer then it will make even more sense to why ME3 is gimped.

[firefireblow]

TAJ4Life wrote...

I know that many of you lack common sense and brain cells and without reading what I have said you come out with the usual nerd rage attacks but ME1 played and felt better, ME2 look better visually but a lot of the things that made it an RPG was taken out.

ME3 is NOT far better looking than ME2 I know I was there and played the 360 version, I have played ME2 on the Xbox 360 also.

And a 10min demo? Lol err ok you lot got more excuses? This is why I hate posting on sites sometimes, people that have an actual thing to say about a game get torn to shreds yet most of you will post complaining about the most dumbest things ever.

I stand by what I said originally, ME3 is not a huge improvement over ME2, yes ME1 had static environements but in this gen there is no reason for static boring environments and that is why I also say ME3 doesnt look any better than ME2 just more smokes and mirrors with lighting.

And if ME3 turns out to have multiplayer then it will make even more sense to why ME3 is gimped.

yes that is right tell us off we don't know anything you are so smart why cant i be as smarts as you i wish i was smarts as you then i would writes smarts things too.

[TAJ4Life]

firefireblow wrote...

TAJ4Life wrote...

I know that many of you lack common sense and brain cells and without reading what I have said you come out with the usual nerd rage attacks but ME1 played and felt better, ME2 look better visually but a lot of the things that made it an RPG was taken out.

ME3 is NOT far better looking than ME2 I know I was there and played the 360 version, I have played ME2 on the Xbox 360 also.

And a 10min demo? Lol err ok you lot got more excuses? This is why I hate posting on sites sometimes, people that have an actual thing to say about a game get torn to shreds yet most of you will post complaining about the most dumbest things ever.

I stand by what I said originally, ME3 is not a huge improvement over ME2, yes ME1 had static environements but in this gen there is no reason for static boring environments and that is why I also say ME3 doesnt look any better than ME2 just more smokes and mirrors with lighting.

And if ME3 turns out to have multiplayer then it will make even more sense to why ME3 is gimped.

yes that is right tell us off we don't know anything you are so smart why cant i be as smarts as you i wish i was smarts as you then i would writes smarts things too.

Your response made no sense but that is expected.