2261 réponses à ce sujet

[dreman9999]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

That assumes we trust Bioware all that much after getting the runaround for months about MP, about the reasons for the release delay, etc, not to mention DA2...

It not like the ME and DA team are two different teams with two different leads. That ME3 story is compleatly different from ME1 and 2, like DA2compared to DA:O. Also, it's not like they didn't expand the dev time for ME3 unlike DA2 which had a much shorter dev time then DA:O or even ME2.  it's also not like ME3 will have drastic changes to the combat compared to ME2, ether

[shepskisaac]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

That assumes we trust Bioware all that much after getting the runaround for months about MP, about the reasons for the release delay, etc, not to mention DA2...

Yet somehow many people didn't feel like they've been lied to at all regarding MP.

[KBomb]

dreman9999 wrote...

For one, Casey Hudson stated as well as the FAQ stated that everything you get from the mp you can also get from the sp. Worrying about how the mp may effect the sp is unsounded because you don't need to play the mp to get the full sp experience.

He also said this:

“If you’re a completist”, says Casey Hudson, “and you do pretty much everything in the single-player really well, then your total War Assets will be so high that you actually don’t have to do anything in terms of fighting this ‘galactic war’. You do have to have a very complete play through, though"

My question was: Do you get RP based on decisions you make in-game. Do you have to complete every single mission during every single import to get high RP? If so, then it does affect single-player if you want to make certain decisions and still gain the points. If there are side missions that are mind numbingly boring, I don’t want to be punished for not doing them in all ten of my play throughs.

The mp only increased the galaxy readiness level, as bw word it, and you can do that with just the side missions in the main game, based on how bw stated it. The galactic readiness level, the thing you get for doing the mp and/or side missions, is only one part of what is need to get the full ending. In that you can increase the galactic readiness with sp side missions or the mp.

Yeah, that is kind of what I meant about the side missions. If I have to do every single side mission during every single play through, to get the same amount of points I would get in MP, then it does affect SP if you want enough RP. If I want the full ending, but don’t want to suffer through certain missions during ten or more play throughs, then guess what I would have to play to get it?

As for race on locking. That make sense based on the story. If you don't have a race on your side, why would someone from that race be on a mission to get more resources for the war.

So you’re saying that what you do in single-player will affect what happens in multiplayer? That if you want to play a Krogan for example, you’ll have to make the decision in single-player to gain them as an ally, therefore dictating your decision? Exactly my point, thanks for seeing it. lol

Modifié par KBomb, 17 octobre 2011 - 04:56 .

[Killjoy Cutter]

dreman9999 wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

That assumes we trust Bioware all that much after getting the runaround for months about MP, about the reasons for the release delay, etc, not to mention DA2...

It not like the ME and DA team are two different teams with two different leads. That ME3 story is compleatly different from ME1 and 2, like DA2compared to DA:O. Also, it's not like they didn't expand the dev time for ME3 unlike DA2 which had a much shorter dev time then DA:O or even ME2.  it's also not like ME3 will have drastic changes to the combat compared to ME2, ether

That's nice.  

[Killjoy Cutter]

KBomb wrote...

As for race on locking. That make sense based on the story. If you don't have a race on your side, why would someone from that race be on a mission to get more resources for the war.

So you’re saying that what you do in single-player will affect what happens in multiplayer? That if you want to play a Krogan for example, you’ll have to make the decision in single-player to gain them as an ally, therefore dictating your decision? Exactly my point, thanks for seeing it. lol

But... but... SP and MP are totally seperate! 

[/sarcasm]

Modifié par Killjoy Cutter, 17 octobre 2011 - 05:29 .

[dreman9999]

KBomb wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

For one, Casey Hudson stated as well as the FAQ stated that everything you get from the mp you can also get from the sp. Worrying about how the mp may effect the sp is unsounded because you don't need to play the mp to get the full sp experience.

He also said this:

“If you’re a completist”, says Casey Hudson, “and you do pretty much everything in the single-player really well, then your total War Assets will be so high that you actually don’t have to do anything in terms of fighting this ‘galactic war’. You do have to have a very complete play through, though"

My question was: Do you get RP based on decisions you make in-game. Do you have to complete every single mission during every single import to get high RP? If so, then it does affect single-player if you want to make certain decisions and still gain the points. If there are side missions that are mind numbingly boring, I don’t want to be punished for not doing them in all ten of my play throughs.

The mp only increased the galaxy readiness level, as bw word it, and you can do that with just the side missions in the main game, based on how bw stated it. The galactic readiness level, the thing you get for doing the mp and/or side missions, is only one part of what is need to get the full ending. In that you can increase the galactic readiness with sp side missions or the mp.

Yeah, that is kind of what I meant about the side missions. If I have to do every single side mission during every single play through, to get the same amount of points I would get in MP, then it does affect SP if you want enough RP. If I want the full ending, but don’t want to suffer through certain missions during ten or more play throughs, then guess what I would have to play to get it?

As for race on locking. That make sense based on the story. If you don't have a race on your side, why would someone from that race be on a mission to get more resources for the war.

So you’re saying that what you do in single-player will affect what happens in multiplayer? That if you want to play a Krogan for example, you’ll have to make the decision in single-player to gain them as an ally, therefore dictating your decision? Exactly my point, thanks for seeing it. lol

Ok, then. Then that's your problem if your a completist. In the end, you still don'thave to play it. As for the sp rp, ask yourself this. Did you have to play every submission in ME1 and ME2 to get the best mission? DidBW ever made a game where you have to doeverything to get the best ending?

And no the mp does not dictate our choice. It's the case of the sp effecting the mp.  The sp also have thechoice of choosing once race over another.(AKA salarian or krogan.) I don't see how that is a problem with the nature of rpgs.

[dreman9999]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

That assumes we trust Bioware all that much after getting the runaround for months about MP, about the reasons for the release delay, etc, not to mention DA2...

It not like the ME and DA team are two different teams with two different leads. That ME3 story is compleatly different from ME1 and 2, like DA2compared to DA:O. Also, it's not like they didn't expand the dev time for ME3 unlike DA2 which had a much shorter dev time then DA:O or even ME2.  it's also not like ME3 will have drastic changes to the combat compared to ME2, ether

That's nice.  

....What?

[Garrison2009]

The only real concern I have is whether or not, if you can gain Readiness points through MP, decisions will have all that much real impact in the SP Campaign. If you can gain points by MP, that means you wont be as worried about losing points in the SP and thus the tension and stress will be gone, which, in my opinion, is an integral part of the Mass Effect storyline, that sense that your next decision could shape the fate of the galaxy.

I'm sure Bioware will figure this out however, if they havent already. I know it's a bit of a leap of faith for many to believe in them after Dragon Age 2 and, for many, Mass Effect 2 as well, but I think ME3 will be the best in the series. In fact, I think ME2, as much as I love it, will end up being my least favorite in the ME franchise, not by any real short-comings it has but simply story-wise.

Modifié par Garrison2009, 17 octobre 2011 - 05:27 .

[KBomb]

dreman9999 wrote...

Ok, then. Then that's your problem if your a completist.

It is a problem if you don’t want to be a completist on every.single.play.through. If you have ten or more imports, you may not want to be a completist on them all, so if you want to gain those RP, you’ll have to scoot on over to MP, or settle for a lackluster ending even if you do all the important missions.
 

In the end, you still don'thave to play it. As for the sp rp, ask yourself this. Did you have to play every submission in ME1 and ME2 to get the best mission? DidBW ever made a game where you have to doeverything to get the best ending?

Well, ME1 and ME2 didn’t have MP, did they? They didn’t have galactic assets or readiness points, did they? So doing every submission did not effect the endings whatsoever, unless you count LM as submissions, which I do not and if you do, then you could still not complete them and some still live.

And no the mp does not dictate our choice. It's the case of the sp effecting the mp.  The sp also have thechoice of choosing once race over another.(AKA salarian or krogan.) I don't see how that is a problem with the nature of rpgs.

Source, please.

[Sharrack]

As i understood it the MP will make it easier to achieve a golden ending but doesn't add to SP and as it's done by ist's own team there weren't any resources cut from creating the main game. And with the news about the amount of spoken dialog in ME3 it in the end sounds to me like this: "Buy this game from store and as a present you get an nice little something for free."

[CAPSLOCK FURY]

My only real question about MP so far, is when people start with the "OMG <insert class that I don't play> is Overpowered and needs nerfed". Will it lead to people getting their favorite class destroyed, or will Bioware take the new Gearbox approach and leave it?

[KBomb]

Garrison2009 wrote...

The only real concern I have is whether or not, if you can gain Readiness points through MP, decisions will have all that much real impact in the SP Campaign. If you can gain points by MP, that means you wont be as worried about losing points in the SP and thus the tension and stress will be gone, which, in my opinion, is an integral part of the Mass Effect storyline, that sense that your next decision could shape the fate of the galaxy.

I'm sure Bioware will figure this out however, if they havent already. I know it's a bit of a leap of faith for many to believe in them after Dragon Age 2 and, for many, Mass Effect 2 as well, but I think ME3 will be the best in the series. In fact, I think ME2, as much as I love it, will end up being my least favorite in the ME franchise, not by any real short-comings it has but simply story-wise.

Yes! Someone gets it! Finally! This is my main concern.

[Killjoy Cutter]

dreman9999 wrote...

KBomb wrote...

So you’re saying that what you do in single-player will affect what happens in multiplayer? That if you want to play a Krogan for example, you’ll have to make the decision in single-player to gain them as an ally, therefore dictating your decision? Exactly my point, thanks for seeing it. lol

And no the mp does not dictate our choice. It's the case of the sp effecting the mp.  The sp also have thechoice of choosing once race over another.(AKA salarian or krogan.) I don't see how that is a problem with the nature of rpgs.

OK, one attempt at clarifying this:  if the availability of species in MP is dictated by your choices in SP, then your choices in SP are necessitated by which species you would like to have available in MP. 

Not a hard concept to grasp if you stop and think about it.

[dreman9999]

KBomb wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Ok, then. Then that's your problem if your a completist.

It is a problem if you don’t want to be a completist on every.single.play.through. If you have ten or more imports, you may not want to be a completist on them all, so if you want to gain those RP, you’ll have to scoot on over to MP, or settle for a lackluster ending even if you do all the important missions.
 

In the end, you still don'thave to play it. As for the sp rp, ask yourself this. Did you have to play every submission in ME1 and ME2 to get the best mission? DidBW ever made a game where you have to doeverything to get the best ending?

Well, ME1 and ME2 didn’t have MP, did they? They didn’t have galactic assets or readiness points, did they? So doing every submission did not effect the endings whatsoever, unless you count LM as submissions, which I do not and if you do, then you could still not complete them and some still live.

And no the mp does not dictate our choice. It's the case of the sp effecting the mp.  The sp also have thechoice of choosing once race over another.(AKA salarian or krogan.) I don't see how that is a problem with the nature of rpgs.

Source, please.

What? Where did youget that notion from? No where did they say you have to do everything the get the best ending. You Just need to get you readiness level to the right level. This is not an issue with the mp but with the glactic readiness systemif you have that consern. The GR system is just the larger version of thenormandy upgrade system. You don't have todo everything , you just need to get it to the right level. Worrying about how much you have to do to do in the sp to the right GR lave is grasping straws at this point. It's making a mountain out of a mole hill.

As for your second ponit. ME1 did not have anything like the. ME2 had loyalies and the nomandy upgrade system. Even if you had everyone loyal, if the normandy was not upgrade right, people will die. You had to go out of your way to upgrade the ship. This is what the GR system is, a more advace version of theNormady upgrade system.

As for the last comment you made. Any preview comferms this. It's  who you have alive and what you did in ME1 and 2  that tallies the out come. You can have both on your side by the end or based on your past choices, it also may force you to pick between the two.

[dreman9999]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

KBomb wrote...

As for race on locking. That make sense based on the story. If you don't have a race on your side, why would someone from that race be on a mission to get more resources for the war.

So you’re saying that what you do in single-player will affect what happens in multiplayer? That if you want to play a Krogan for example, you’ll have to make the decision in single-player to gain them as an ally, therefore dictating your decision? Exactly my point, thanks for seeing it. lol

But... but... SP and MP are totally seperate! 

[/sarcasm]

They are. It just something effect one another. What race you can play is effect by the sp and you gain resources from the mp. You don't needto play the mp to get resourse but you need the sp to beable to gain allies and pick different races. '
It makes the mp more dependent on the sp.
In the end, you don't have to play the mp. But you have no choice but to play the sp.

[Garrison2009]

dreman9999 wrote...

KBomb wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Ok, then. Then that's your problem if your a completist.

It is a problem if you don’t want to be a completist on every.single.play.through. If you have ten or more imports, you may not want to be a completist on them all, so if you want to gain those RP, you’ll have to scoot on over to MP, or settle for a lackluster ending even if you do all the important missions.
 

In the end, you still don'thave to play it. As for the sp rp, ask yourself this. Did you have to play every submission in ME1 and ME2 to get the best mission? DidBW ever made a game where you have to doeverything to get the best ending?

Well, ME1 and ME2 didn’t have MP, did they? They didn’t have galactic assets or readiness points, did they? So doing every submission did not effect the endings whatsoever, unless you count LM as submissions, which I do not and if you do, then you could still not complete them and some still live.

And no the mp does not dictate our choice. It's the case of the sp effecting the mp.  The sp also have thechoice of choosing once race over another.(AKA salarian or krogan.) I don't see how that is a problem with the nature of rpgs.

Source, please.

What? Where did youget that notion from? No where did they say you have to do everything the get the best ending. You Just need to get you readiness level to the right level. This is not an issue with the mp but with the glactic readiness systemif you have that consern. The GR system is just the larger version of thenormandy upgrade system. You don't have todo everything , you just need to get it to the right level. Worrying about how much you have to do to do in the sp to the right GR lave is grasping straws at this point. It's making a mountain out of a mole hill.

As for your second ponit. ME1 did not have anything like the. ME2 had loyalies and the nomandy upgrade system. Even if you had everyone loyal, if the normandy was not upgrade right, people will die. You had to go out of your way to upgrade the ship. This is what the GR system is, a more advace version of theNormady upgrade system.

As for the last comment you made. Any preview comferms this. It's  who you have alive and what you did in ME1 and 2  that tallies the out come. You can have both on your side by the end or based on your past choices, it also may force you to pick between the two.

Actually, it is logical to assume that your decisions in the first and second game will of course effect your Galactic Readiness level, however, this has not been actually stated by the game developers anywhere and as such it can not be put forward as fact. It's ultimately pointless to argue about this stuff as of now, as we do not have all the data required to come to an actual working agreement on how it works.

[dreman9999]

Garrison2009 wrote...

The only real concern I have is whether or not, if you can gain Readiness points through MP, decisions will have all that much real impact in the SP Campaign. If you can gain points by MP, that means you wont be as worried about losing points in the SP and thus the tension and stress will be gone, which, in my opinion, is an integral part of the Mass Effect storyline, that sense that your next decision could shape the fate of the galaxy.

I'm sure Bioware will figure this out however, if they havent already. I know it's a bit of a leap of faith for many to believe in them after Dragon Age 2 and, for many, Mass Effect 2 as well, but I think ME3 will be the best in the series. In fact, I think ME2, as much as I love it, will end up being my least favorite in the ME franchise, not by any real short-comings it has but simply story-wise.

But the GR point don't effect or override choices you make in the game. If you make bad choice in the sp that leads you to your doom, you GR points are not going to change it to a victory. As Casey state, GR is just one factor to getting the full ending. On top of that you don't need to play the sp to get GR point, you can get it from the sp side missions. So the point of worrying abotu GR point from the mp is mute because it not just the mp you get it from. Add onthe fact that if you have that consernabout the mp, you can just not play the mp.

Think of it like the loyalty and noramdy upgrade system in ME2. You can upgrade the normady to max but people can still die, even shepard , if you make bad disisions in the final mission. The normady upgradesystem is only one part of the tallie that averges the out come of thelast mission like the GR is only one part of the tallie that averges the out come of thelast mission.

Modifié par dreman9999, 17 octobre 2011 - 06:18 .

[dreman9999]

Garrison2009 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

KBomb wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Ok, then. Then that's your problem if your a completist.

It is a problem if you don’t want to be a completist on every.single.play.through. If you have ten or more imports, you may not want to be a completist on them all, so if you want to gain those RP, you’ll have to scoot on over to MP, or settle for a lackluster ending even if you do all the important missions.
 

In the end, you still don'thave to play it. As for the sp rp, ask yourself this. Did you have to play every submission in ME1 and ME2 to get the best mission? DidBW ever made a game where you have to doeverything to get the best ending?

Well, ME1 and ME2 didn’t have MP, did they? They didn’t have galactic assets or readiness points, did they? So doing every submission did not effect the endings whatsoever, unless you count LM as submissions, which I do not and if you do, then you could still not complete them and some still live.

And no the mp does not dictate our choice. It's the case of the sp effecting the mp.  The sp also have thechoice of choosing once race over another.(AKA salarian or krogan.) I don't see how that is a problem with the nature of rpgs.

Source, please.

What? Where did youget that notion from? No where did they say you have to do everything the get the best ending. You Just need to get you readiness level to the right level. This is not an issue with the mp but with the glactic readiness systemif you have that consern. The GR system is just the larger version of thenormandy upgrade system. You don't have todo everything , you just need to get it to the right level. Worrying about how much you have to do to do in the sp to the right GR lave is grasping straws at this point. It's making a mountain out of a mole hill.

As for your second ponit. ME1 did not have anything like the. ME2 had loyalies and the nomandy upgrade system. Even if you had everyone loyal, if the normandy was not upgrade right, people will die. You had to go out of your way to upgrade the ship. This is what the GR system is, a more advace version of theNormady upgrade system.

As for the last comment you made. Any preview comferms this. It's  who you have alive and what you did in ME1 and 2  that tallies the out come. You can have both on your side by the end or based on your past choices, it also may force you to pick between the two.

Actually, it is logical to assume that your decisions in the first and second game will of course effect your Galactic Readiness level, however, this has not been actually stated by the game developers anywhere and as such it can not be put forward as fact. It's ultimately pointless to argue about this stuff as of now, as we do not have all the data required to come to an actual working agreement on how it works.

And that's my point. Every one hating the mp or how it will effect the sp is jumping the gun way too early. Say that the mp with destroy or worsen the sp is a groundless concern.

[dreman9999]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

KBomb wrote...

So you’re saying that what you do in single-player will affect what happens in multiplayer? That if you want to play a Krogan for example, you’ll have to make the decision in single-player to gain them as an ally, therefore dictating your decision? Exactly my point, thanks for seeing it. lol

And no the mp does not dictate our choice. It's the case of the sp effecting the mp.  The sp also have thechoice of choosing once race over another.(AKA salarian or krogan.) I don't see how that is a problem with the nature of rpgs.

OK, one attempt at clarifying this:  if the availability of species in MP is dictated by your choices in SP, then your choices in SP are necessitated by which species you would like to have available in MP. 

Not a hard concept to grasp if you stop and think about it.

I understand this. But the factors in the sp will be more of a grounds of your dission then the the factors ofthe mp. In the sp, you will have to choose which race you want  based on their strenghts and how they will help in the  war.

[KBomb]

dreman9999 wrote...

What? Where did youget that notion from? No where did they say you have to do everything the get the best ending. You Just need to get you readiness level to the right level. This is not an issue with the mp but with the glactic readiness systemif you have that consern. The GR system is just the larger version of thenormandy upgrade system. You don't have todo everything , you just need to get it to the right level. Worrying about how much you have to do to do in the sp to the right GR lave is grasping straws at this point. It's making a mountain out of a mole hill.

I never said "best ending", I said "maximum ending and I got that notion from an interview Casey Hudson did for oxm in which he states: (emphasis on the first paragraph)


“If you’re a completist”, says Casey Hudson, “and you do pretty much everything in the single-player really well, then your total War Assets will be so high that you actually don’t have to do anything in terms of fighting this ‘galactic war’. You do have to have a very complete play through, though.”
 
Hudson warns that, “if you’re getting your butt kicked all over the galaxy, your readiness rating is going to be really low. However, if you have lots of assets in the beginning of single-player, then you can get the ‘maximum ending’. Galaxy at War is an alternate way to get a [maximum ending in ME].”
 

As for your second ponit. ME1 did not have anything like the. ME2 had loyalies and the nomandy upgrade system. Even if you had everyone loyal, if the normandy was not upgrade right, people will die. You had to go out of your way to upgrade the ship. This is what the GR system is, a more advace version of theNormady upgrade system.

You had to go out of your way to upgrade the ship? I didn’t. It was three upgrades and if you planet scanned, then it was as simple as upgrading. You really didn’t even need to do a mission to do so. And you got the same ending regardless, you just had some teammates die. I wasn’t aware there was a maximum or multiple endings. You kept the base, or you didn’t.

As for the last comment you made. Any preview comferms this. It's  who you have alive and what you did in ME1 and 2  that tallies the out come. You can have both on your side by the end or based on your past choices, it also may force you to pick between the two.

Link to the interview that confirms you have to choose between salarians or krogans in SP. Geth or quarians. Link to where it states having a certain person alive will affect the outcome of who you have to sacrifice in order to get the maximum ending in SP. I must have overlooked it, so I would like to see the actual confirmation of this made by a dev. It would certainly allay some of my concerns. So yeah, link please.

Modifié par KBomb, 17 octobre 2011 - 06:56 .

[dreman9999]

KBomb wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

What? Where did youget that notion from? No where did they say you have to do everything the get the best ending. You Just need to get you readiness level to the right level. This is not an issue with the mp but with the glactic readiness systemif you have that consern. The GR system is just the larger version of thenormandy upgrade system. You don't have todo everything , you just need to get it to the right level. Worrying about how much you have to do to do in the sp to the right GR lave is grasping straws at this point. It's making a mountain out of a mole hill.

I never said "best ending", I said "maximum ending and I got that notion from an interview Casey Hudson did for oxm in which he states: (emphasis on the first paragraph)


“If you’re a completist”, says Casey Hudson, “and you do pretty much everything in the single-player really well, then your total War Assets will be so high that you actually don’t have to do anything in terms of fighting this ‘galactic war’. You do have to have a very complete play through, though.”
 
Hudson warns that, “if you’re getting your butt kicked all over the galaxy, your readiness rating is going to be really low. However, if you have lots of assets in the beginning of single-player, then you can get the ‘maximum ending’. Galaxy at War is an alternate way to get a [maximum ending in ME].”
 

As for your second ponit. ME1 did not have anything like the. ME2 had loyalies and the nomandy upgrade system. Even if you had everyone loyal, if the normandy was not upgrade right, people will die. You had to go out of your way to upgrade the ship. This is what the GR system is, a more advace version of theNormady upgrade system.

You had to go out of your way to upgrade the ship? I didn’t. It was three upgrades and if you planet scanned, then it was as simple as upgrading. You really didn’t even need to do a mission to do so. And you got the same ending regardless, you just had some teammates die. I wasn’t aware there was a maximum or multiple endings. You kept the base, or you didn’t.

As for the last comment you made. Any preview comferms this. It's  who you have alive and what you did in ME1 and 2  that tallies the out come. You can have both on your side by the end or based on your past choices, it also may force you to pick between the two.

Link to the interview that confirms you have to choose between salarians or krogans in SP. Geth or quarians. Link to where it states having a certain person alive will affect the outcome of who you have to sacrifice in order to get the maximum ending in SP. I must have overlooked it, so I would like to see the actual confirmation of this made by a dev. It would certainly allay some of my concerns. So yeah, link please.

1. The same point stands. You don't need to do everything to get the maximume ending.
2.Planet scaning is going out of your way to upgrade the normandy. You had to take time from missions to scan planets to get the resources for your ship. Also, who lived or die is partof the different endings as well as you dieing at the end of the mission.
3.Again anypreveiw. You can just go to the ME3 know info topic for that.

Modifié par dreman9999, 17 octobre 2011 - 07:04 .

[KBomb]

dreman9999 wrote...

1. The same point stands. You don't need to do everything to get the maximume ending.

So, you're saying that when Casey Hudson says :


“If you’re a completist”, says Casey Hudson, “and you do pretty much everything in the single-player really well”


He is speaking out of turn? That he doesn’t know what the term completist means, or that his definition of “you do pretty much everything in the single-player really well” is meant to be taken as something else? By all means, please tell me what he means by those words because that is all I have been asking for from the get go. So please, since you know what CH’s definitions of these things are, tell me.

2.Planet scaning is going out of your way to upgrade the normandy. You had to take time from missions to scan planets to get the resources for your ship. Also, who lived or die is partof the different endings as well as you dieing at the end of the mission.

Planet scanning isn’t going out of your way. It was a faucet of the game considering it’s where you got the bulk of your elements to upgrade weapons and your ships and I even got the bulk of my missions that way--so it didn’t take away from my other missions to do so. Speak for yourself. Also, Shepard dying at the end of ME2 does not give a different ending other than a cutscene. It has no bearing on what will happen in ME3 since you can’t even import that ending. It probably doesn’t matter who else died either, given the fact that they could die. They’ll just be replaced much like Wrex was if he died in ME1. So, ultimately, the only ending that should matter is whether or not you kept the base or destroyed it and even that may not matter.

3.Again anypreveiw. You can just go to the ME3 know info topic for that.

I have looked and see no dev comment confirming that you will have to choose between krogan and salarian. I have seen no dev comment confirming that you will have to choose to between any other races. I have seen no dev comment confirming that sacrifices you have to make in the game(I.e. Earth or Turchunka, Thane or Jack, etc.) have any bearings on who survives in ME1 and ME2. Perhaps I have missed it. I am willing to concede that. So once again, where are the links to a specific comment or statement that a dev has made that confirms the above? Because saying "Oh, who knows, you may have to choose!" isn't the same as saying, "You're going to have to choose between the two, no doubt."

Modifié par KBomb, 17 octobre 2011 - 07:32 .

[dreman9999]

KBomb wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

1. The same point stands. You don't need to do everything to get the maximume ending.

So, you're saying that when Casey Hudson says :


“If you’re a completist”, says Casey Hudson, “and you do pretty much everything in the single-player really well”


He is speaking out of turn? That he doesn’t know what the term completist means, or that his definition of “you do pretty much everything in the single-player really well” is meant to be taken as something else? By all means, please tell me what he means by those words because that is all I have been asking for from the get go. So please, since you know what CH’s definitions of these things are, tell me.

2.Planet scaning is going out of your way to upgrade the normandy. You had to take time from missions to scan planets to get the resources for your ship. Also, who lived or die is partof the different endings as well as you dieing at the end of the mission.

Planet scanning isn’t going out of your way. It was a faucet of the game considering it’s where you got the bulk of your elements to upgrade weapons and your ships and I even got the bulk of my missions that way--so it didn’t take away from my other missions to do so. Speak for yourself. Also, Shepard dying at the end of ME2 does not give a different ending other than a cutscene. It has no bearing on what will happen in ME3 since you can’t even import that ending. It probably doesn’t matter who else died either, given the fact that they could die. They’ll just be replaced much like Wrex was if he died in ME1. So, ultimately, the only ending that should matter is whether or not you kept the base or destroyed it and even that may not matter.

3.Again anypreveiw. You can just go to the ME3 know info topic for that.

I have looked and see no dev comment confirming that you will have to choose between krogan and salarian. I have seen no dev comment confirming that you will have to choose to between any other races. I have seen no dev comment confirming that sacrifices you have to make in the game(I.e. Earth or Turchunka, Thane or Jack, etc.) have any bearings on who survives in ME1 and ME2. Perhaps I have missed it. I am willing to concede that. So once again, where are the links to a specific comment or statement that a dev has made that confirms the above? Because saying "Oh, who knows, you may have to choose!" isn't the same as saying, "You're going to have to choose between the two, no doubt."

1. No, I'm saying that you don't need to be a completionest to get the maximium output ofthe game. It about getting the best out of the gemt their is no problem, you can do that and get everything you want out of the game. Ifyour a completionist, you have more things to do. But really ask your self this, do you really have to do everything to getthe mostout of agame?

2.Yes, it is. That is going out of your way. You don't have to do it to get resourses, you can get that on missions. You do the mining to help you get extra resources. You are going out of you way when you mine.

3.It been comment that you actions and choices effect which race will be on your side. It's a general statement, not a spacific one. Theirnot going to say you have to choose salarias or krogan. It logical to see that how you play the games effect what race is on your side at the end. Which is why they have the unlock race system in ME3's MP.

[Garrison2009]

dreman9999 wrote...

Garrison2009 wrote...

The only real concern I have is whether or not, if you can gain Readiness points through MP, decisions will have all that much real impact in the SP Campaign. If you can gain points by MP, that means you wont be as worried about losing points in the SP and thus the tension and stress will be gone, which, in my opinion, is an integral part of the Mass Effect storyline, that sense that your next decision could shape the fate of the galaxy.

I'm sure Bioware will figure this out however, if they havent already. I know it's a bit of a leap of faith for many to believe in them after Dragon Age 2 and, for many, Mass Effect 2 as well, but I think ME3 will be the best in the series. In fact, I think ME2, as much as I love it, will end up being my least favorite in the ME franchise, not by any real short-comings it has but simply story-wise.

But the GR point don't effect or override choices you make in the game. If you make bad choice in the sp that leads you to your doom, you GR points are not going to change it to a victory. As Casey state, GR is just one factor to getting the full ending. On top of that you don't need to play the sp to get GR point, you can get it from the sp side missions. So the point of worrying abotu GR point from the mp is mute because it not just the mp you get it from. Add onthe fact that if you have that consernabout the mp, you can just not play the mp.

Think of it like the loyalty and noramdy upgrade system in ME2. You can upgrade the normady to max but people can still die, even shepard , if you make bad disisions in the final mission. The normady upgradesystem is only one part of the tallie that averges the out come of thelast mission like the GR is only one part of the tallie that averges the out come of thelast mission.

I'm not saying I dont like and/or dont want the MP in Mass Effect 3. Quite the contrary. I think it's an interesting step for Bioware to take, I guess I'm just curious about the mechanics. Dont mistake my curiosity for condemnation. I actually am really looking forward to blasting Reaper Hordes away as much as the next guy with actual live people at my flank, as I said, I'm simply interested in learning the mechanics that will be involved.

Also, you dont KNOW 100% that it will be like the Normandy upgrade system. You keep equating it to that, but not once have I heard ANY of the devs mention the MP as being 'like the normandy upgrade system.' Please stop assuming things when we, as of yet, do not have enough data to do so.

Modifié par Garrison2009, 17 octobre 2011 - 08:29 .

[KBomb]

dreman9999 wrote...

1. No, I'm saying that you don't need to be a completionest to get the maximium output ofthe game. It about getting the best out of the gemt their is no problem, you can do that and get everything you want out of the game. Ifyour a completionist, you have more things to do. But really ask your self this, do you really have to do everything to getthe mostout of agame?

Jesus Christ, do you even read my replies? Lol The bolded is exactly what I don’t want to do, which is why I wanted to know if I was going to have to do everything in order to get the maximum ending, or do I have to supplement the RP from MP to get it. Because according to the CH interview (and I could be wrong about this, which is why I was asking the question in the first place for a dev to answer, not so that a user can say “I guess so or it‘s implied) you have to basically be a completist and do pretty much everything well enough so that you don’t have to do MP. However, if you choose not to be a completist what will that mean for your RP in SP. You don't know the answer to this, you can only guess as no dev has made a comment in regards to that question.

2.Yes, it is. That is going out of your way. You don't have to do it to get resourses, you can get that on missions. You do the mining to help you get extra resources. You are going out of you way when you mine.

Again, I have to wonder if you even read my replies. I stated many times that I complete every assignment, but not for every play through. So for instance on my eighth play through if I don’t want to do missions A, B, C or D because I find them boring, then I won’t get those elements, will I? I will have to supplement them by planet scanning which isn’t going out of my way as that’s how I get to a bulk of the missions I do complete. And if you upgrade everything, I am not sure you get enough by assignments only, if there are no bonuses. Either way, planet scanning doesn’t affect the outcome of the game and saying it's going out of the way is your opinion.

3.It been comment that you actions and choices effect which race will be on your side. It's a general statement, not a spacific one. Theirnot going to say you have to choose salarias or krogan. It logical to see that how you play the games effect what race is on your side at the end. Which is why they have the unlock race system in ME3's MP.

So it’s all your presumptions? There is no dev conformation. I thought so. And the bolded: That still is your assumptions. No where is it said you’ll have to choose between races. It very well could be that we have to, but that was the question, wasn’t it? If you want to play as a krogan in MP, will you be punished because you didn’t gain the krogan ally because you chose not to. So, if you want to play as a krogan in MP, you’re going to have to make the decision in SP to gain him as an ally, even if you don’t want to for whatever reason. You will feel you have to in order to have him unlocked in MP, which is influencing your decision in SP. My question is: Will this be the case? It is a valid question.

Modifié par KBomb, 17 octobre 2011 - 08:40 .