226 réponses à ce sujet

[CannonO]

DaJe wrote...

CannonLars wrote...

DaringMoosejaw wrote...

They won't. The planets were all just about randomized except for the pretty skyboxes and just about anything you 'discovered' was a retread. I guess there's potential in it, but I'm not going to miss it very much at all.

But for the 20 identical feeling planets there were, 5 of them are some of the most beautiful and beloved places in my gaming memory. There was absolutely massive potential and that was part of why I loved it. I thought, "By the third game, this is going to be mesmerizing and graphically beautiful and one of the best emotional feelings in gaming to walk on the surface of an uncharted moon and find creatures and artifacts and big spacecraft." It has so much it could offer if they put the tech to its task and add some uniqueness and variety to 15-20 planets for us to enjoy openly. I want to stand in a field and look up at a planet above me. I need to know if this will be linear or if I will get that feeling of being a speck of dust in a beautiful and sleek universe to see ever again.

I feel the same way. However, it requires effort and since the more immersive exploration you speak of is quite sciency and nerdy, I doubt it will ever make the cut.

I'm not a big science guy, so it was really just all about the creative scifi approach and I think I was only thinking of it in an evolution of ME1's version of exploration, not something ridiculous or impossible. I am only talking about the direction the feature would have already been going in had it remained. I can't really see why they left it out unless they just decided to rush and cut.

[Il Divo]

CannonLars wrote...

We know for a fact that we will be able to explore the Citadel again along with other hub cities that aren't being attacked, meaning we will be out to explore, find sidequests that don't relate to the war resources, and roam freely in the locations. You can't seriously think we won't have more Conrad Verner, meetups aliens in petty arguments, or credit hackers to track down? Its Mass Effect mister. It isn't all about the rush from point A to point B to benefit story struggles. A huge portion of ME1 and ME2 did nothing to benefit their urgent storylines, they ust enrich the universe.

Again, comparisons aren't equivalent. Side quests in  a war time setting are acceptable (see KotOR). Side quests occurring over the course of the main quest are alright. The problem isn't taking a bit of time to help someone in the general vicinity, to use your Conrad Verner example. If the Reapers are going to destroy the world in the time it takes for me to speak to Conrad Verner, we're screwed anyway.
 
On the other hand, planety exploration side quests require that I send Shepard out two, three, four weeks in the opposite direction to kill a band of mercs and occupies a whole separate level of time commitment. Exploring the Citadel is fine, because it's likely going to tie into the main quest; that's how I justified it to Shepard originally (he did not know anything about how the Citadel was laid out in ME1).  

If you have played Mass Effect and weren't looking to fight about this, you wouldn't have said that. The features outside of team strategizing and galactic war fighting are widely known. But if you insist, here is where you can find out just how much time you will spend outside of the urgent mindframe: social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/323/index/7649262

But I didn't ask for a link to the known features thread. I asked that you give me examples of all these moments in ME1 where it can be said that my Shepard spent a substantial amount of time ignoring the threat. Planetary travel requires more time than any other activity your character engages in within the ME universe, which is why it's substantially worse for a "Race against Time" plot.  

Modifié par Il Divo, 30 janvier 2012 - 10:20 .

[matt-bassist]

the fact that this question has been asked a million times by ME1 fans who want some form of exploration back, and that BioWare still hasn't come close to answering it leads us to only one conclusion: large explorable areas are out. short, small, linear *areas* from ME2 are back.

[elitecom]

G3rman wrote...It's galactic war, there isn't time to sightsee.

string3r wrote...Considering planets around the universe are being harvested by the reapers. I don't think exploring random planets is one of Shepard's top priorities.

I'm going to have to stop responding to these, I once had a thread about exploration for Mass Effect 3 going, and half of the replies in the thread were statements like those above. Well to you two I got this: Did it ever occur to you that you did the exact same thing in ME1&ME2, and that wasn't a problem at all?

Or that Mass Effect 3 is a game, and as a game it doesn't need to follow some kind of time schedule you've put up to make sense accoriding to what you deem as "making sense"? You can roleplay as you wish, if you want to have a very tense and time pressing atomsphere for your Shepard and not do any of the sidequests in order to satisfy what you consider to be a great roleplaying experience for you, then by all means do so. However please consider that there are other people who would like to have exploration in the game, and consider that an important part of their roleplaying experience. Furthermore since it would probably be optional, why should it be a problem? 

It is also very probable based on what developers from Bioware have said about the story, that the story itself will include exploration as you search for a way to defeat the Reapers or at least try to unite the forces of the galaxy against them.

Lord Jaric wrote...I for one kind of don't want it, after a while, expressly after several playthroughs it gets tiresome.

For you I have this: Exploration is optional. If you do not like to do it, you do not have to do it.

Modifié par elitecom, 30 janvier 2012 - 10:32 .

[spirosz]

I'm assuming it will be the same quality as Overlord, which I enjoyed way more than the ME1 exploration. Sure, it was a DLC and they had time to polish and get more out of it compared to side quests in the game, but i'd rather it be quality over quantity.

[pmac_tk421]

elitecom wrote...

G3rman wrote...It's galactic war, there isn't time to sightsee.

string3r wrote...Considering planets around the universe are being harvested by the reapers. I don't think exploring random planets is one of Shepard's top priorities.

I'm going to have to stop responding to these, I once had a thread about exploration for Mass Effect 3 going, and half of the replies in the thread were statements like those above. Well to you two I got this: Did it ever occur to you that you did the exact same thing in ME1&ME2, and that wasn't a problem at all?

 

For you I have this: Exploration is optional. If you do not like to do it, you do not have to do it.

I think the point they're trying to make is that the threat is a lot more immediate than the threats in 1 and 2.

[Mr. MannlyMan]

Wouldn't the story purposes of exploration dictate how much sense they make within a time-sensitive plotline?

In ME1, there were sidemissions that made sense in this context, and others that didn't. Compare the post-Noveria rachni missions with the mission for Kahoku, where he had you find his missing squad. In the first, you were trying to stop the rachni from spreading uncontrollably; the second had you carry out a random rescue attempt for a desperate Alliance admiral. If you were in a rationalizing mood, you could imagine that stopping those rachni samples from being mishandled or set loose was in the galaxy's best interest, and, depending on where you were in the main plot, might have even made sense. Finding Kahoku's team wasn't very relevant to Shepard's role as a Spectre, tbh.

[Il Divo]

Mr. MannlyMan wrote...

Wouldn't the story purposes of exploration dictate how much sense they make within a time-sensitive plotline?

In ME1, there were sidemissions that made sense in this context, and others that didn't. Compare the post-Noveria rachni missions with the mission for Kahoku, where he had you find his missing squad. In the first, you were trying to stop the rachni from spreading uncontrollably; the second had you carry out a random rescue attempt for a desperate Alliance admiral. If you were in a rationalizing mood, you could imagine that stopping those rachni samples from being mishandled or set loose was in the galaxy's best interest, and, depending on where you were in the main plot, might have even made sense. Finding Kahoku's team wasn't very relevant to Shepard's role as a Spectre, tbh.

To be clear, not all side quests are made equal in terms of how ridiculous it would be for Shepard to complete them. Consider (for example) Geth Incursions, an ME1 side quest. On its face, the basis for Shepard completing this mission is no worse than Feros or Noveria, where our only knowledge is that Geth have been sighted. On that alone, Saren could just as easily have gone to those respective clusters as to Feros or Noveria.

It's definitely more of a problem with missions like Major Kyle, the Earth's Luna VI, etc, where the only justification is that Shepard is trying to be a super hero by being everywhere at once.

[Aimi]

elitecom wrote...

I'm going to have to stop responding to these, I once had a thread about exploration for Mass Effect 3 going, and half of the replies in the thread were statements like those above. Well to you two I got this: Did it ever occur to you that you did the exact same thing in ME1&ME2, and that wasn't a problem at all?

The fact that it wasn't a problem at all in the two previous games has been an issue of serious complaint in this thread. See e.g. AlanC9's posts.

[CannonO]

Il Divo wrote...

CannonLars wrote...

/snip

Again, comparisons aren't equivalent. Side quests in  a war time setting are acceptable (see KotOR). Side quests occurring over the course of the main quest are alright. The problem isn't taking a bit of time to help someone in the general vicinity, to use your Conrad Verner example. If the Reapers are going to destroy the world in the time it takes for me to speak to Conrad Verner, we're screwed anyway.
 
On the other hand, planety exploration side quests require that I send Shepard out two, three, four weeks in the opposite direction to kill a band of mercs and occupies a whole separate level of time commitment. Exploring the Citadel is fine, because it's likely going to tie into the main quest; that's how I justified it to Shepard originally (he did not know anything about how the Citadel was laid out in ME1).  

/snip

But I didn't ask for a link to the known features thread. I asked that you give me examples of all these moments in ME1 where it can be said that my Shepard spent a substantial amount of time ignoring the threat. Planetary travel requires more time than any other activity your character engages in within the ME universe, which is why it's substantially worse for a "Race against Time" plot.  

But nobody said they wanted the same generic issues that ME1 had. It was agreed several months back that the sidequests that bring you to the planets could/should benefit the Galactic resources measurement that you will fill throughout ME3 and various features. Being on those planets would not be for random causes. It would be to restore power to a fleet of ships that were docked there, or restore a satellite base on a moon that is trying to track Reapers, save the colonists that manage a war resources facility. I can't see how that sort of stuff is less relevant to the main story than the random little rescue missions that are linear and placed on the planets.

It sounds like you are saying it is fine to waste a ton of time outside the urgent quest as long as the place you do it in is there for some sort of main plot event that you will handle down the line. So in that case, if the Citadel is an acceptable place for random time exploring and handling non-story encounters, then the open planets should easily be fitting if they put relevant N7 Mission-like quests, as many of us have suggested. Why not take the uniqueness of an N7 mission and put it on the suface of an open planet with some other great discoveries within driving range to experience?

All three games have had a rage against time with Shepard having serious interest in quickly reaching his goal or making the reach possible. ME1 planetary exploration is not the problem here, as ME2 had the player travel many times as well. The problem was that they were generic and unnecessary most of the time, but there were several great ones to love and the same goes for ME2. Some of the travel is a waste of time, some isn't. All they have to do in ME3 is give us a good reason (besides the great reason of how fantastic a feature like this could be) like having the quests on those planets hold some weight, moreso than the N7 missions, and certainly moreso than ME1 sidequests. I'd accept the feature if it were like the N7 quests in an open environment, but the more important the sidequests, the better.

[Il Divo]

elitecom wrote...


I'm going to have to stop responding to these, I once had a thread about exploration for Mass Effect 3 going, and half of the replies in the thread were statements like those above. Well to you two I got this: Did it ever occur to you that you did the exact same thing in ME1&ME2, and that wasn't a problem at all?

As daqs pointed out, it actually was a problem in ME1. Not so much in ME2, where the main narrative can't move forward until TIM contacts Shepard, which means we have all the time in the world for exploration.

Or that Mass Effect 3 is a game, and as a game it doesn't need to follow some kind of time schedule you've put up to make sense accoriding to what you deem as "making sense"? You can roleplay as you wish, if you want to have a very tense and time pressing atomsphere for your Shepard and not do any of the sidequests in order to satisfy what you consider to be a great roleplaying experience for you, then by all means do so. However please consider that there are other people who would like to have exploration in the game, and consider that an important part of their roleplaying experience. Furthermore since it would probably be optional, why should it be a problem? 

While side quests may be optional, it's also important to consider that for players such as myself that's either content we a) dislike or don't see, in either case giving us less value for our dollar. Ultimately, every player is entitled to argue for what will make their gaming experience the most enjoyable, that includes all the players who desire exploration. However, I don't see the need to argue for what other players will enjoy; ultimately, I'm out to have my own personal ME3 journey.

[elitecom]

pmac_tk421 wrote...
I think the point they're trying to make is that the threat is a lot more immediate than the threats in 1 and 2.

I do not want to put absolute definitions on which threats were more immediate or not. In ME1 we dealt with the possibility of a Reaper invasion through the Citadel, something which would've been totally devastating.

While in ME2 we were dealing with the Collectors who were working as an intermediary of the Reaper Harbinger, to produce a new Reaper, with a possible strike on Earth by the Collectors being entirely possible.

In ME3 the Reapers are here. It's difficult to ethically rank these, yet in the end some will and have already found the Reaper invasion as an excuse to not have any exploration, I don't agree.

daqs wrote...

elitecom wrote...

I'm going to have to stop responding to these, I once had a thread about exploration for Mass Effect 3 going, and half of the replies in the thread were statements like those above. Well to you two I got this: Did it ever occur to you that you did the exact same thing in ME1&ME2, and that wasn't a problem at all?

The fact that it wasn't a problem at all in the two previous games has been an issue of serious complaint in this thread. See e.g. AlanC9's posts.

And that is what? One person, maybe two more or three. Not to claim his or your opinion as invalid but such complaints drown in the vast sea of others, and I believe most doesn't even find it as something negative and enjoy the exploration Bioware has created. Me being one of them. I would go into further detail, but I posted a lot of other arguments in the previous post about why exploration should be included.

[King Minos]

Watch Apollo 18 then go on Luna in ME1. Never trust a rock again.

[CannonO]

pmac_tk421 wrote...

elitecom wrote...


G3rman wrote...It's galactic war, there isn't time to sightsee.




string3r wrote...Considering planets around the universe are being harvested by the reapers. I don't think exploring random planets is one of Shepard's top priorities.

I'm going to have to stop responding to these, I once had a thread about exploration for Mass Effect 3 going, and half of the replies in the thread were statements like those above. Well to you two I got this: Did it ever occur to you that you did the exact same thing in ME1&ME2, and that wasn't a problem at all?


For you I have this: Exploration is optional. If you do not like to do it, you do not have to do it.

I think the point they're trying to make is that the threat is a lot more immediate than the threats in 1 and 2.

But it isn't more immediate. That statement assumes that Shepard weighed all the lives at threat in the previous two games as relatively low compared to his future fears of a Reaper attack, and thus gave himself more time to explore. This is why those arguments are ridonculous.

daqs wrote...

elitecom wrote...

I'm going to have to stop responding to these, I once had a thread about exploration for Mass Effect 3 going, and half of the replies in the thread were statements like those above. Well to you two I got this: Did it ever occur to you that you did the exact same thing in ME1&ME2, and that wasn't a problem at all?

The fact that it wasn't a problem at all in the two previous games has been an issue of serious complaint in this thread. See e.g. AlanC9's posts.

Then he is playing the wrong genre.

Modifié par CannonLars, 30 janvier 2012 - 10:53 .

[Il Divo]

CannonLars wrote...

But nobody said they wanted the same generic issues that ME1 had. It was agreed several months back that the sidequests that bring you to the planets could/should benefit the Galactic resources measurement that you will fill throughout ME3 and various features. Being on those planets would not be for random causes. It would be to restore power to a fleet of ships that were docked there, or restore a satellite base on a moon that is trying to track Reapers, save the colonists that manage a war resources facility. I can't see how that sort of stuff is less relevant to the main story than the random little rescue missions that are linear and placed on the planets.

That's acceptable. ME2 did much the same with the basic idea behind resource gathering to improve the Normandy. I wasn't a huge fan of planet scanning, but the idea in motivating the main quest through exploration was more acceptable.

All three games have had a rage against time with Shepard having serious interest in quickly reaching his goal or making the reach possible. ME1 planetary exploration is not the problem here, as ME2 had the player travel many times as well. The problem was that they were generic and unnecessary most of the time, but there were several great ones to love and the same goes for ME2. Some of the travel is a waste of time, some isn't. All they have to do in ME3 is give us a good reason (besides the great reason of how fantastic a feature like this could be) like having the quests on those planets hold some weight, moreso than the N7 missions, and certainly moreso than ME1 sidequests. I'd accept the feature if it were like the N7 quests in an open environment, but the more important the sidequests, the better.

Well, not quite. While I didn't really like either ME game's side quests (ignoring the awesome loyalty missions and a few others), one advantage which ME2's main quest had was that it's on hold until TIM contacts Shepard. We have no knowledge of when, where, or why we're going. Under those circumstances, exploration is more acceptable, since it's not really occurring against the flow of the main story, which is sit and wait for TIM to link you Horizon, Collector Ship, etc. Comparatively speaking, ME1's main quest is much more pro-active, where it's clear that Shepard is responsible for tracking Saren's activities himself.

Modifié par Il Divo, 30 janvier 2012 - 10:54 .

[Mr. MannlyMan]

Il Divo wrote...

Mr. MannlyMan wrote...

Wouldn't the story purposes of exploration dictate how much sense they make within a time-sensitive plotline?

In ME1, there were sidemissions that made sense in this context, and others that didn't. Compare the post-Noveria rachni missions with the mission for Kahoku, where he had you find his missing squad. In the first, you were trying to stop the rachni from spreading uncontrollably; the second had you carry out a random rescue attempt for a desperate Alliance admiral. If you were in a rationalizing mood, you could imagine that stopping those rachni samples from being mishandled or set loose was in the galaxy's best interest, and, depending on where you were in the main plot, might have even made sense. Finding Kahoku's team wasn't very relevant to Shepard's role as a Spectre, tbh.

To be clear, not all side quests are made equal in terms of how ridiculous it would be for Shepard to complete them. Consider (for example) Geth Incursions, an ME1 side quest. On its face, the basis for Shepard completing this mission is no worse than Feros or Noveria, where our only knowledge is that Geth have been sighted. On that alone, Saren could just as easily have gone to those respective clusters as to Feros or Noveria.

It's definitely more of a problem with missions like Major Kyle, the Earth's Luna VI, etc, where the only justification is that Shepard is trying to be a super hero by being everywhere at once.

So you agree? 

I mean, if there was a mission that involved looking for an archaeological team that had gone dark after breaking into a cache of Prothean tech on some backwater moon, there'd be a reason to go there. The possibility of finding some valuable tech there would be too good to pass up, even considering the dire circumstances of the war.

What about a mission to rescue a Krogan diplomat from a pirate camp? Negotiate the release of an STG unit being held by batarian cultists? Raid and investigate a Cerberus science base that's experimenting on civilians captured from a nearby colony?

If the writers can make open-exploration missions work, then there's be nothing more to discuss. The fact that people are discussing this means that they've been doing something wrong, not that the feature is entirely without merit.

[elitecom]

Il Divo wrote...
As daqs pointed out, it actually was a problem in ME1. Not so much in ME2, where the main narrative can't move forward until TIM contacts Shepard, which means we have all the time in the world for exploration.

In that case ME1 did indeed have a similar situation, you cannot continue until you have completed at least two "Main quest" worlds and the council contacs you making Virmire available. Until then as in ME2, you can just roam around space and explore.

[Il Divo]

Mr. MannlyMan wrote...

So you agree? 

I mean, if there was a mission that involved looking for an archaeological team that had gone dark after breaking into a cache of Prothean tech on some backwater moon, there'd be a reason to go there. The possibility of finding some valuable tech there would be too good to pass up, even considering the dire circumstances of the war.

What about a mission to rescue a Krogan diplomat from a pirate camp? Negotiate the release of an STG unit being held by batarian cultists? Raid and investigate a Cerberus science base that's experimenting on civilians captured from a nearby colony?

If the writers can make open-exploration missions work, then there's be nothing more to discuss. The fact that people are discussing this means that they've been doing something wrong, not that the feature is entirely without merit.

That's all perfectly fine, in my book.

[CannonO]

Il Divo wrote...

CannonLars wrote...

/snip

That's acceptable. ME2 did much the same with the basic idea behind resource gathering to improve the Normandy. I wasn't a huge fan of planet scanning, but the idea in motivating the main quest through exploration was more acceptable.

All three games have had a rage against time

Well, not quite. While I didn't really like either ME game's side quests (ignoring the awesome loyalty missions and a few others), one advantage which ME2's main quest had was that it's on hold until TIM contacts Shepard. We have no knowledge of when, where, or why we're going. Under those circumstances, exploration is more acceptable, since it's not really occurring against the flow of the main story, which is sit and wait for TIM to link you Horizon, Collector Ship, etc. Comparatively speaking, ME1's main quest is much more pro-active, where it's clear that Shepard is responsible for tracking Saren's activities himself.

But it isn't more immediate. That statement assumes that Shepard weighed all the lives at threat in the previous two games as relatively low compared to his future fears of a Reaper attack, and thus gave himself more time to explore. This is why those arguments are ridonculous. While the TIM situation does offer a logical break, that is not the designated time where sidequests can be performed and then never visited after that break. The game, still, continues on the timing of a game. It does not wish for you to pretend you really are on the clock and can't follow features as they work and present themselves just to pursue the urgency of the story. Conrad should not be ignored on some side planet in ME3 just because it wouldn't work out in real life.

If you choose to ignore that stuff because you feel it doesn't make sense in a real time interpretation, fine. That does not mean it make more sense now to leave it out for everyone.

Modifié par CannonLars, 30 janvier 2012 - 11:02 .

[Il Divo]

elitecom wrote...

In that case ME1 did indeed have a similar situation, you cannot continue until you have completed at least two "Main quest" worlds and the council contacs you making Virmire available. Until then as in ME2, you can just roam around space and explore.

But you were never empty on narrative worlds. Remember, if we complete Feros and Noveria first, we still have Therum sitting there, at which point Virmire pops up. There's never a point in Mass Effect 1 where the player is sitting on empty quest leads. There's always something more for Shepard to follow in tracking Saren.  

Comparatively speaking, ME2, almost literally, says "the plot won't move until TIM moves it". Even the recruitment missions are in Shepard's hands, to focus on or ignore (it's his team to build).

[Il Divo]

CannonLars wrote...

But it isn't more immediate. That statement assumes that Shepard weighed all the lives at threat in the previous two games as relatively low compared to his future fears of a Reaper attack, and thus gave himself more time to explore.

Primarily because they are relatively low compared to the Reaper attack, which means everyone dies. ME1 presents Saren as actively looking for the Conduit, at which point Shepard has very little idea what's going on, emphasizing the need to track Saren down. That's absolutely critical, as the information is presented to us. I cannot believe the main narrative's premise (race against time), while traveling across the galaxy on a regular basis which monopolizes a good amount of Shepard's time.

This is why those arguments are ridonculous. While the TIM situation does offer a logical break, that is not the designated time where sidequests can be performed and then never visited after that break. The game, still, continues on the timing of a game. It does not wish for you to pretend you really are on the clock and can't follow features as they work and present themselves just to pursue the urgency of the story. Conrad should not be ignored on some side planet in ME3 just because it wouldn't work out in real life.

 
There may not be an official designated time, but as someone looking to avoid the metagame, I'm going to minimize that input as much as possible. As I said, past Bioware games avoided this to a great extent (KotOR, Jade Empire, etc), because the player is not traveling halfway across the galaxy to complete each individual side quest. ME1 however does present us with that scenario. As Shepard is concerned with stopping Sovereign, I have a difficult time justifying that course of action. A game doesn't need to be similar to real life in every respect, however I would prefer the main narrative to have a serious premise.

Modifié par Il Divo, 30 janvier 2012 - 11:11 .

[CannonO]

Il Divo wrote...

CannonLars wrote...

But it isn't more immediate. That statement assumes that Shepard weighed all the lives at threat in the previous two games as relatively low compared to his future fears of a Reaper attack, and thus gave himself more time to explore.

Primarily because they are relatively low compared to the Reaper attack, which means everyone dies. ME1 presents Saren as actively looking for the Conduit, at which point Shepard has very little idea what's going on, emphasizing the need to track Saren down. That's absolutely critical, as the information is presented to us. I cannot believe the main narrative's premise (race against time), while traveling across the galaxy on a regular basis which monopolizes a good amount of Shepard's time.

/snip

 
There may not be an official designated time, but as someone looking to avoid the metagame, I'm going to minimize that input as much as possible. As I said, past Bioware games avoided this to a great extent (KotOR, Jade Empire, etc), because the player is not traveling halfway across the galaxy to complete each individual side quest. ME1 however does present us with that scenario. As Shepard is concerned with stopping Sovereign, I have a difficult time justifying that course of action. A game doesn't need to be similar to real life in every respect, however I would prefer the main narrative to have a serious premise.

Shepard wouldn't consider the loss of lives due to Geth and Saren in ME1, or the loss of humans to Collectors in ME2 as relatively low threats because that would be metagaming. That would assume he is aware that in just a few months he'll have something so big he will never get the chance to do smaller tasks, so he decides to let the ME1 and ME2 victims suffer while he goes and explores.

Shepard, as we know him in these plots, would almost never stop to do anything not directly related to the main plot because it would put hundreds and thousands at risk. He was 100% out to stop the threat in ME1 (and had time to explore). He was 100% out to stop the threat in ME2 (and had time to explore). He is, once again, putting his all into the mission in ME3. Because this is yet again Mass Effect and a game with time issues that put it beyond this argument that the ME3 threat is so newly urgent to Shepard that exploration is no longer a realistic option (which it never was but it is embedded into Mass Effect and meant to be experienced without regard for such timing), and thus should not be available.

The threat is as big as always to Shepard. Therefore, the exploration should be available as always.

And again, for those of us who want it, this understanding of game time and worlds allows us to experience the whole game without serious concern based on real time urgency logic. For players like you who take issue with these sorts of exploration options, you can skip them and get point-A to point-B as fast as you really think the urgency calls for, no matter how against gaming I may find such an answer for avoiding features.

Modifié par CannonLars, 30 janvier 2012 - 11:48 .

[Il Divo]

CannonLars wrote...

Shepard wouldn't consider the loss of lives due to Geth and Saren in ME1, or the loss of humans to Collectors in ME2 as relatively low threats because that would be metagaming. That would assume he is aware that in just a few months he'll have something so big he will never get the chance to do smaller tasks, so he decides to let the ME1 and ME2 victims suffer while he goes and explores.

What are you talking about? The assumption is simple. Shepard is responsible for stopping Saren. Saren is currently involved in a time gambit to release the Reapers, in effect killing us all. All he needs to be aware of is that Saren is attempting to find the Conduit as quickly as possible, which he knows to be true.

Shepard, as we know him in these plots, would almost never stop to do anything not directly related to the main plot because it would put hundreds and thousands at risk. He was 100% out to stop the threat in ME1 (and had time to explore). He was 100% out to stop the threat in ME2 (and had time to explore). He is, once again, putting his all into the mission in ME3. Because this is yet again Mass Effect and a game with time issues that put it beyond this argument that the ME3 threat is so newly urgent to Shepard that exploration is no longer a realistic option (which it never was but it is embedded into Mass Effect and meant to be experienced without regard for such timing), and thus should not be available.

And if you want to metagame it, that's your decision. I don't, so I'm going to appeal for content that meets my desires.

And again, for those of us who want it, this understanding of game time and worlds allows us to experience the whole game without serious concern based on real time urgency logic. For players like you who take issue with these sorts of exploration options, you can skip them and get point-A to point-B as fast as you really think the urgency calls for, no matter how against gaming I may find such an answer for avoiding features.

How about no? I'm not playing Mass Effect for your enjoyment. That's resources which either makes my game experience worse or I don't see. Instead, those resources could be devoted to a longer main quest, more dialogue, gameplay, or whatever. For a player like me, I'm going to argue for what will maximize my enjoyment. No one is buying ME3 so someone else can have a good time.

[CannonO]

Il Divo wrote...

CannonLars wrote...

Shepard wouldn't consider the loss of lives due to Geth and Saren in ME1, or the loss of humans to Collectors in ME2 as relatively low threats because that would be metagaming. That would assume he is aware that in just a few months he'll have something so big he will never get the chance to do smaller tasks, so he decides to let the ME1 and ME2 victims suffer while he goes and explores.

What are you talking about? The assumption is simple. Shepard is responsible for stopping Saren. Saren is currently involved in a time gambit to release the Reapers, in effect killing us all. All he needs to be aware of is that Saren is attempting to find the Conduit as quickly as possible, which he knows to be true.

/snip

And if you want to metagame it, that's your decision. I don't, so I'm going to appeal for content that meets my desires.

And again, for those of us who want it, this understanding of game time and worlds allows us to experience the whole game without serious concern based on real time urgency logic. For players like you who take issue with these sorts of exploration options, you can skip them and get point-A to point-B as fast as you really think the urgency calls for, no matter how against gaming I may find such an answer for avoiding features.

 

You skipped the other half of my comment. I was pointing out that despite having such information, he would not use it to justify a lack of efficiency at the cost of Saren, Geth, and Collectors' victims.

I don't even understand how you can play this and not metagame. You said it yourself that you'd do things on the Citadel that aren't related, simply because you are there. That itself assumes he will put the urgent war matters on the shelf for more trivial experiences. If there is some value put into missions on uncharted or random worlds, I want that experience. Are you not going to do any of those Rescue missions because they require the player to acknowledge that Shepard is going to step away from war duties for more minor matters that will take days or weeks, which is irresponsible if this is treated like real time?

You sound on the one hand like you don't want to spend any time outside the logical main story timing treated like a real war, but on the other hand it sounds like you see the value in things like Conrad Verner or side missions, even when they are on other planets far from the main path. I am a little lost as to whether you are saying exploration doesn't make sense here so you want it gone or its resources applied to your wants, or if you are saying that you are okay with most of it like Conrad and such and even on other planets as long as it has some point for having you go that far out of the way?

Maybe you could explain how you would go about approaching the story, side encounters, exploration of locations, and side travels.

Modifié par CannonLars, 31 janvier 2012 - 01:32 .

[jcolt]

if you were searchin for clues to build a super weapon or somethin it would make sense for planet exploration.