222 réponses à ce sujet

[Xeranx]

Rogue Unit wrote...

I'm curious as to where he got this information. Even if there were complaints about the amount of dialogue, how would he know whether or not it was the "shooter fans" doing the complaining? It's not like they would have a big banter that says "SHOOTER FAN" in their signature.

Sounds like he just pulled that out of his ass to gather support from the RPG crowd.

Which RPG player do you think would bemoan dialogue?  

And the bold part is funny.  If not the RPG crowd getting up in arms over less dialogue, will the shooter crowd protest for more dialogue?  Why?  If they're not moving while dialogue is happening then they don't feel they're doing anything correct?  It becomes a drag at that point for them, no?

Honestly, this is not the first time I've heard it.  Actually, the first time I heard it I was prompted to ask my brother who is a shooter fan.  He said he tried to get into Mass Effect, but didn't because of dialogue.  Well my findings coincide with the idea put forth.  If there's one there's more, right?

[Xeranx]

KainrycKarr wrote...

Xeranx wrote...

Well, when you only have two years to develop the game versus 4 what can you expect? And ME3 was supposedly planned to ship either next month or the month after before they pushed the date back. So that's just a little more than a year.

ME gave us a few dialogue options that featured superfluous options to responses and they still cut content. That's after 4 years of development. You can't even think to expect real divergent dialogue paths or just divergent paths in general with half or barely half of that time.

Wrong. They were working on ME3 as of ME2's January 26 2010 release date. With ME3 coming out on March 6, 2012, that's a little over TWO years. Also note that they did not need to redo the engine and everything, as they did with ME2.

Because they moved the date from Fall 2011 to Spring 2012 it's effectively two years or a little over?  Mind you, they didn't push the date until around the middle of the year.  Late last year they were talking about how things were going.  Earlier this year (January I believe) the game was fully playable.  They had every intention of releasing it this year.  There's evidence of this all around.  You were on the boards during that period as well.  And you want to argue just because they pushed the date back?  That's ridiculous.

[The Spamming Troll]

Il Divo wrote...

The Spamming Troll wrote...

and i havent even brought up the dumbness of ME2s progresion of alignment. i have to help grammas cross the street in order to later on save a larger group of grammas. im pretty sure people will do what shepards says, regardless if its red or blue.

So wait, ME1's approach makes more sense where killing bad guys somehow allows my Shepard to be better at charm/intimidate? That doesn't strike me as very logical.

correct me if im wrong, but did i mention anything about ME1 here?

or maybe you just dont like hearing bad things about your preciouse ME2.

[The Spamming Troll]

sp0ck 06 wrote...

The Spamming Troll wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...

I just played the majority of ME2, including Miranda and Thane's missions, and I think you are full of crap, because there is plenty of dialogue choice, even in the DLC's. There is "slightly" less choice in Arrival, but even that is a hard argument.

Saying they should ditch the dialogue wheel is a moronic idea. Whether it has a major effect on the story, or not, I want to choose what my Shepard says. Period.

so your only into choosing "hello!" or "hi." or "hey?"

becasue its extremely rare when one dialogue choice leads to a different outcome. hell some renegade responses are EXACTLY like the paragon ones in ME1. ofcorse thers choices about saving wrex or destroying the collectors base, but those are ones that need a dialogue wheel. thers more times in the game where i dont need to choose any specific dialogue, the game would play out the same regardless. the choses made in the dialogue wheel is almost equally as linear is ME2s combat.

Troll, wtf are you talking about?  Almost every mission in ME2 can have a different outcome depending on your dialogue choices...
Does Mordin kill his student?  Keep the data?
Does Kasumi save the greybox or destroy it?  And why?
How does Thane find his son, by being brutal?  Or clever?
Does Garrus kill Sidonis?  
Is Tali exiled or cleared?  Does her father have his name stricken or not?
Does Jacob kill his father? Leave him to his crew?  Let him leave?

And on and on.  Having just played through ME1, I noticed there's actually more variety in ME2 conversations.  ME1 convos are longer and more in depth, but oftentimes end exactly the same no matter what dialogue you choose.  Missions end the same, except for a few "big" choices.  ME2 had the "big choices" as well (genophage data, geth heretics) but pretty much every single mission can end differently.  

So you're just wrong.

On a sidenote, I don't see how ME2's combat is "linear" compared to ME1's, either.  What does that even mean?

sure the last line of dialogue matters. but whats the point of dialogue before that exact point?

i thought THATS what this topic is about, not the simple fact that you can do A or B when A or B present themselves.

[Jaron Oberyn]

@rogue unit - well whatever lets you sleep at night buddy. I'm guessing you're one of those rpg purists because I haven't indicated anywhere in my op that im against me being a shooter. It is what it is. Here's a tip though: there are more communities discussing me3 other than the BSN. You might want to check them out, see what they're saying before you start dismissing something as false.

-Polite

[Ricinator]

polite i agree. I can play ME1 over and over and yet when i get to ME2 i cant play more than a mission or 2 without getting bored of using the same 2 responses to every situation

[Jaron Oberyn]

Amen Ricinator...now they either need to go back to me1's style of allowing you to choose everything you said, minus the few instances where all dialogue comes to one outcome, or they need to just go from 80% predefined Shepard to 100% predefined Shepard. No point in middle ground.


-Polite

[Jaron Oberyn]

To further prove my point, here's Muzyka saying that Shepard is a predefined character in a third person narrative, while the warden in da:o is a first person narrative.

http://www.eurogamer...exual-by-choice

So how can you argue against my point now? Bioware's already admitted it.

[Hopefire]

Reaper Kitten of Doom wrote...

I like the dialog wheel, but I would like it to be more rewarding to play a balanced/neutral character.

This pretty much sums it up for me. I'd really like to play a Shepard that takes the Renegade options that are practical with regards to enemies, while taking Paragon options for team mate interaction, and neutral options for the people who come to Shepard with problems. 

But if I do that, it's pretty much impossible to get the good endings. So...

[KainrycKarr]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

@kainryckarr - I agree with you, although I know you're being sarcastic. ME is a shooter to the bone, there's no shame in admitting that. There's nothing wrong with shooters, I play them as well as RPGs that's why I'm playing mass effect. Because its clearly not due to the illusion of choice. Shepard is canon. Mac Walters can say tell himself and others that there's no canon Shepard all he wants, but the truth is in the facts. My only issue is why lie about it? The only answer I can come up wi is that they don't want to drive away the rpg portion of their fan are by telling them that they have no control over Shepard, so they lie to them in order to try to appease both sides.


-Polite

This whole post is so baseless I can't help but think you're trolling.

[KainrycKarr]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

To further prove my point, here's Muzyka saying that Shepard is a predefined character in a third person narrative, while the warden in da:o is a first person narrative.

http://www.eurogamer...exual-by-choice

So how can you argue against my point now? Bioware's already admitted it.

I can argue against that point by saying that Shepard can actually be gay now.

So...yeah. You're pretty much blowing smoke.

[KainrycKarr]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

sp0ck 06 wrote...

The Spamming Troll wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...

I just played the majority of ME2, including Miranda and Thane's missions, and I think you are full of crap, because there is plenty of dialogue choice, even in the DLC's. There is "slightly" less choice in Arrival, but even that is a hard argument.

Saying they should ditch the dialogue wheel is a moronic idea. Whether it has a major effect on the story, or not, I want to choose what my Shepard says. Period.

so your only into choosing "hello!" or "hi." or "hey?"

becasue its extremely rare when one dialogue choice leads to a different outcome. hell some renegade responses are EXACTLY like the paragon ones in ME1. ofcorse thers choices about saving wrex or destroying the collectors base, but those are ones that need a dialogue wheel. thers more times in the game where i dont need to choose any specific dialogue, the game would play out the same regardless. the choses made in the dialogue wheel is almost equally as linear is ME2s combat.

Troll, wtf are you talking about?  Almost every mission in ME2 can have a different outcome depending on your dialogue choices...
Does Mordin kill his student?  Keep the data?
Does Kasumi save the greybox or destroy it?  And why?
How does Thane find his son, by being brutal?  Or clever?
Does Garrus kill Sidonis?  
Is Tali exiled or cleared?  Does her father have his name stricken or not?
Does Jacob kill his father? Leave him to his crew?  Let him leave?

And on and on.  Having just played through ME1, I noticed there's actually more variety in ME2 conversations.  ME1 convos are longer and more in depth, but oftentimes end exactly the same no matter what dialogue you choose.  Missions end the same, except for a few "big" choices.  ME2 had the "big choices" as well (genophage data, geth heretics) but pretty much every single mission can end differently.  

So you're just wrong.

On a sidenote, I don't see how ME2's combat is "linear" compared to ME1's, either.  What does that even mean?

sure the last line of dialogue matters. but whats the point of dialogue before that exact point?

i thought THATS what this topic is about, not the simple fact that you can do A or B when A or B present themselves.

The point is choosing how you, as Shepard, respond to the situations you find yourself in.

I don't care how trivial it is. I like being able to choose if my Shepard is a racist, or pro cerberus, a nice guy, or an ****. Does it have a HUGE effect on the rest of the game? not necessarily.

But on a role-playing level, having that trivial choice of dialogue is extremely important to me.

[Jaron Oberyn]

KainrycKarr wrote...


I can argue against that point by saying that Shepard can actually be gay now.

So...yeah. You're pretty much blowing smoke.

One word: Retcon. Shepard being homosexual now doesn't change the fact that it's a third person narrative where you choose how the character approaches situations, not alter the beliefs/personality of the character. The head of bioware admitted that, so why are you still suggesting that Shepard isnt predefined? Shepard is who he/she is. The player cannot change that. We can make some choices, but they don't affect Shepard or the game in any significant way. This is the staple of all third person shooters. Im sure you're feeling angry, or possibly betrayed by this shocking revelation given the fact that the first game was marketed with the line that "you are commander shepard", but bioware has changed the direction of the trilogy, and undeniably for the best. And in response to your post above, no I'm not trolling. I'm just wondering why I'm wasting time selecting dialogue options in a game with a predefined character which the dialogue choices don't affect. I used to hate the auto dialogue, but I realize that bioware is taking the game into a new direction rather than the me1 model. Shepard has to be canon, especially for the movies.


-Polite

[DTKT]

Totally serious, why do you feel the need to stamp your post with your name?

[KainrycKarr]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...


I can argue against that point by saying that Shepard can actually be gay now.

So...yeah. You're pretty much blowing smoke.

One word: Retcon. Shepard being homosexual now doesn't change the fact that it's a third person narrative where you choose how the character approaches situations, not alter the beliefs/personality of the character. The head of bioware admitted that, so why are you still suggesting that Shepard isnt predefined? Shepard is who he/she is. The player cannot change that. We can make some choices, but they don't affect Shepard or the game in any significant way. This is the staple of all third person shooters. Im sure you're feeling angry, or possibly betrayed by this shocking revelation given the fact that the first game was marketed with the line that "you are commander shepard", but bioware has changed the direction of the trilogy, and undeniably for the best. And in response to your post above, no I'm not trolling. I'm just wondering why I'm wasting time selecting dialogue options in a game with a predefined character which the dialogue choices don't affect. I used to hate the auto dialogue, but I realize that bioware is taking the game into a new direction rather than the me1 model. Shepard has to be canon, especially for the movies.


-Polite

Why would I feel betrayed? ME2 satisfied me completely, dialogue and choice-wise. 

If Shepard "is who he/she is", then how can we dictate whether they are gay or straight?

You contradict yourself in your own post.

[KainrycKarr]

Xeranx wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...

Xeranx wrote...

Well, when you only have two years to develop the game versus 4 what can you expect? And ME3 was supposedly planned to ship either next month or the month after before they pushed the date back. So that's just a little more than a year.

ME gave us a few dialogue options that featured superfluous options to responses and they still cut content. That's after 4 years of development. You can't even think to expect real divergent dialogue paths or just divergent paths in general with half or barely half of that time.

Wrong. They were working on ME3 as of ME2's January 26 2010 release date. With ME3 coming out on March 6, 2012, that's a little over TWO years. Also note that they did not need to redo the engine and everything, as they did with ME2.

Because they moved the date from Fall 2011 to Spring 2012 it's effectively two years or a little over?  Mind you, they didn't push the date until around the middle of the year.  Late last year they were talking about how things were going.  Earlier this year (January I believe) the game was fully playable.  They had every intention of releasing it this year.  There's evidence of this all around.  You were on the boards during that period as well.  And you want to argue just because they pushed the date back?  That's ridiculous.

fully playable =/= completely finished, all dialogue recorded, etc. If you followed the devs twitters, as well as those of the various voice actors, you'd realize that much of the dialogue wasn't even recorded when they said the game was "fully playable".

Basically, it doesn't mean what you think it means.

[JeffZero]

KainrycKarr wrote...

Xeranx wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...

Xeranx wrote...

Well, when you only have two years to develop the game versus 4 what can you expect? And ME3 was supposedly planned to ship either next month or the month after before they pushed the date back. So that's just a little more than a year.

ME gave us a few dialogue options that featured superfluous options to responses and they still cut content. That's after 4 years of development. You can't even think to expect real divergent dialogue paths or just divergent paths in general with half or barely half of that time.

Wrong. They were working on ME3 as of ME2's January 26 2010 release date. With ME3 coming out on March 6, 2012, that's a little over TWO years. Also note that they did not need to redo the engine and everything, as they did with ME2.

Because they moved the date from Fall 2011 to Spring 2012 it's effectively two years or a little over?  Mind you, they didn't push the date until around the middle of the year.  Late last year they were talking about how things were going.  Earlier this year (January I believe) the game was fully playable.  They had every intention of releasing it this year.  There's evidence of this all around.  You were on the boards during that period as well.  And you want to argue just because they pushed the date back?  That's ridiculous.

fully playable =/= completely finished, all dialogue recorded, etc. If you followed the devs twitters, as well as those of the various voice actors, you'd realize that much of the dialogue wasn't even recorded when they said the game was "fully playable".

Basically, it doesn't mean what you think it means.

Just chiming in to back this up.

[Xeranx]

KainrycKarr wrote...

fully playable =/= completely finished, all dialogue recorded, etc. If you followed the devs twitters, as well as those of the various voice actors, you'd realize that much of the dialogue wasn't even recorded when they said the game was "fully playable".

Basically, it doesn't mean what you think it means.

What's etc?  Multiplayer?  

As I said, their intention was to release it this year.  That was clearly stated.  I didn't know that all the dialogue wasn't recorded, but everything they said hinted at them meeting their goal of a 2011 release.  Ignore that if you want to.

ETA: "but"

Modifié par Xeranx, 20 octobre 2011 - 02:55 .

[KainrycKarr]

Xeranx wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...

fully playable =/= completely finished, all dialogue recorded, etc. If you followed the devs twitters, as well as those of the various voice actors, you'd realize that much of the dialogue wasn't even recorded when they said the game was "fully playable".

Basically, it doesn't mean what you think it means.

What's etc?  Multiplayer?  

As I said, their intention was to release it this year.  That was clearly stated.  I didn't know that all the dialogue wasn't recorded, but everything they said hinted at them meeting their goal of a 2011 release.  Ignore that if you want to.

ETA: "but"

Of course it was their intention. For a company, it's always the intention to release a product to start making them money as soon as possible.

They decided the game wasn't ready. Maybe it was for multiplayer, maybe it really was because they there was enough improvement to made to push the date back, we don't know.

All I said was that it was two years of development time, which it is. It seems as thought you're trying to say that the actual time of development is less important than the time of development they were aiming for(original release date).

Regardless....it's irrelevant.

As far as etc....you must not know much game development. 

An example of "fully playable" not equating to being done/being ready for release is Vampire The Masquerade:Bloodlines.

While it is a fantastic game, there is so much broken quests, bugs, various glitches(both graphical and gameplay), balance issues, and yet, they released the game and it is "fully playable".

Chances are, the actual gameplay is laid out and done, and they are simply refining and polishing everything to be as smooth, bug-free, and ready for release as possible.

[Xeranx]

I don't know much about game development. I will learn. I already acquiesced to the fully playable statement so I don't know why you, jeff, and jreezy are piling on. *shrug* Whatever.

You know, I'm looking at my post and wondering what exactly had you reply to me. You put a piece of my statement in bold and seemed to ignore what came before it. Why that happened I don't know, but this back and forth was really a waste of time and shouldn't have happened to begin with. And I asked myself about before, but responded anyway. Again, all I can do is shrug my shoulders.