568 réponses à ce sujet

[GMagnum]

dreman9999 wrote...

tomdrama wrote...

I don't mind multiplayer, I just don't like the idea that it affects what ending you get in singleplayer. That is retarded.

But it doesn't....GR effect your game ending. And you can get it from the sp or the mp. You can ignore the mp and get all the GR points in the spandget the same end as if you only got the GR points from the mp.

/thread idk y ppl keep posting just read dis post and move on

[Thompson family]

iakus wrote...
That is possible.  But other than some vague talk of side missions being "more tied in" to the main story, we know nothing of what any of this will entail.  And given how closemouthed the devs are being about the storyline in general, we aren't likely to learn much more than we already know.  This worries me.  Simply hearing "Trust me, this time it will be different" is not a reassurance.

OK. Don't trust BW at all. But reading the FAQ section of their multiplayer announcement, I have to say they've really climbed way far out on the limb here if they're going to cut it off behind them. Then look at the interview given most recently about this topic.

If they're lying, they've gone to completely absurd lengths to do it.

Still, there's no arguing with deep distrust.

In addition, the talk about being able to get an "optimal ending" strictly through sp strongly implied a completionist run will be pretty much mandatory.  Like I said before, I don't want to have to look under every rock in the galaxy searching for quests.  Finding stuff on your own is fun.  Searching gets tedious.  Especially when you're not sure what it is you're looking for.

The unintended irony here is that the biggest complaint on this forum since the game came out was theat the game was too streamlined and had become an "run and gun" shooter and not an RPG. Now we're on a thread where the big worry is we might have to spend most of our time questing.

Game developers simply cannot win on forums, and that's not intended to be ironic or cute. No game can be all things to all people.

Now if there were options like "Do you want to do this mission as Shepard or do you want to go multiplayer to complete it?" That would be an interesting alternative.  I have no idea if that's in the cards.  Doubtful though.

We can hope, anyway.

Modifié par Thompson family, 29 octobre 2011 - 04:00 .

[Thompson family]

Gatt9 wrote...

Your quote illustrates the problem though Thompson.

The quotes continually make reference to "Doing well",  without quanitfying it.  The original quote on single player readiness was

"If you do almost everything,  and you do really well,  you'll have more than enough resources to [bypass multiplayer]"

There's a clear advantage given to Multiplayer,  and significant ambiguity in exactly how single player will compensate.  The quotes consistently point to the strong possibility that we're talking spending hours hunting down randomized items/quests,  and that we must meet some pre-defined criteria when doing quests. 

Which the criteria could be unreasonable,  such as ultra-high kill counts,  or forcing players to alter the way they play the game to meet some criteria.  That quantifier,  "Do really well",  strongly indicates some form of scoring,  which could quite easily be tied to reflexes,  or Developer determined correct conversation paths.

Or not.

Looking at the FAQs on their multiplayer announcement, I simply don't see the ambiguity that worries you and others so much. I guess they could be lying, but if they're such irrationally extreme liars, what reassurance could they possibly give?

They say again and again in the FAQs that they have not compromised the single-player experience. They have said it to such a degree that, if they have, they are going to look seriously stupid. Why would they lie about this to such an extreme degree, when they know that the first day this game comes out this is going to be one of the first things people will rush to post about?

Notice how,  just like with the original multiplayer question,  they dance around actually defining what a single player must do to achieve the optimal ending?  They give vague reassurances "Oh,  it's completely optional",  but they consistently avoid saying "Single players can easily achieve the optimal ending". 

There's always quantifiers,  or always dodging the question,  just like when they were hiding the multiplayer,  they won't come straight out and give a solid answer.

See above. They did give a solid answer in the FAQs. You don't believe them. To wit:

Given their track record,  I'd venture it's safe to assume that avoiding multiplayer and getting the optimal ending won't be trivial.

Gatt9, when was getting an optimal ending in ME1 or ME2 ever a trivial matter?

Modifié par Thompson family, 29 octobre 2011 - 04:10 .

[slimgrin]

Here's what I don't like: "You can play solely in single player and still get the best ending."

Uhmm...should there be a 'best' ending? <_<

Modifié par slimgrin, 29 octobre 2011 - 04:20 .

[Thompson family]

slimgrin wrote...

Here's what I don't like: "You can play solely in single player and still get the best ending."

Uhmm...should there be a 'best' ending? <_<

The best ending doesn't have to be good, either overall or for everyone involved.

[RamirezWolfen]

slimgrin wrote...

Here's what I don't like: "You can play solely in single player and still get the best ending."

Uhmm...should there be a 'best' ending? <_<

I think you're looking too deeply into that.

[CptBomBom00]

There won't be happy ending with ME3, and that's probably the "best ending", which is not happy at all.

[111987]

slimgrin wrote...

Here's what I don't like: "You can play solely in single player and still get the best ending."

Uhmm...should there be a 'best' ending? <_<

I think they mean, you can still have 100% galactic readiness without multiplayer. The choices you made though still have a more significant effect on the ending.

[slimgrin]

RamirezWolfen wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

Here's what I don't like: "You can play solely in single player and still get the best ending."

Uhmm...should there be a 'best' ending? <_<

I think you're looking too deeply into that.

Perhaps I am. But I wouldn't have worded it that way myself.

[RamirezWolfen]

slimgrin wrote...

RamirezWolfen wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

Here's what I don't like: "You can play solely in single player and still get the best ending."

Uhmm...should there be a 'best' ending? <_<

I think you're looking too deeply into that.

Perhaps I am. But I wouldn't have worded it that way myself.

Neither would I. I just think of it as a poor choice of words.

[Nerevar-as]

"Best" ending will still involve billions of dead and probably a shift in the political balance of the galaxy as Council races military will be very damaged. ME3 won´t really have a happy ending.

[DiebytheSword]

. . . and were back to bleak vs. peak.

[CptBomBom00]

What if the best ending is that one that we have never won the war.

[Someone With Mass]

slimgrin wrote...

Here's what I don't like: "You can play solely in single player and still get the best ending."

Uhmm...should there be a 'best' ending? <_<

Why not?

It's what most people want after going through the trilogy.

[GMagnum]

i think da best ending will be dat shepard and his friends live (by friends i mean squadmates from ME1 + ME2 + ME3) - but a crapload of other ppl die and they beat da reapers ofc

also anderson is prolly gonna die R.I.P /tear

[Iakus]

[quote]Thompson family wrote...

OK. Don't trust BW at all. But reading the FAQ section of their multiplayer announcement, I have to say they've really climbed way far out on the limb here if they're going to cut it off behind them. Then look at the interview given most recently about this topic.

If they're lying, they've gone to completely absurd lengths to do it.

Still, there's no arguing with deep distrust.[/quote]

What can I say?  Recent choices made by Bioware have damaged my trust with them.  Heck look how long it took them to finally admit they were putting multiplayer into ME3.  That by itself was absurd.

 Trust is a currency that's hard to earn and easily spent.



[quote
The unintended irony here is that the biggest complaint on this forum since the game came out was theat the game was too streamlined and had become an "run and gun" shooter and not an RPG. Now we're on a thread where the big worry is we might have to spend most of our time questing.

Game developers simply cannot win on forums, and that's not intended to be ironic or cute. No game can be all things to all people.[/quote]

You misunderstand.  I like quests.  I love quests.  Combat.  Diplomacy.  Exploration.  Puzzles.  I'm one who agrees that ME2 was way too combat-heavy.  

Now what I don't like is the idea that I will have to go out and actively search for quests to achieve some number of readiness.

 I don't like the idea of scouring conversation branches in every character in Illium to make sure I missed nothing

I don't like the idea of scanning every planet I come across, not out of curiosity of what's there, but because maybe I can score some War Assets.

I don't like the idea of wandering across random landscapes not "to see what's there" but because some bar isn't quite full and planets may die because I didn't look to see what's over that next hill.

Questing is fun.  Scouring the galaxy for quests to do is not.

[111987]

@iakus

You have no idea how the sidequests that yield war assets will be done though. Will they be found by, as you say, scanning every random planet in the galaxy, and talking to every single character on each hub world?

Or will they be more like the loyalty missions? Marked on the map, important missions, but entirely optional?

[Iakus]

111987 wrote...

@iakus

You have no idea how the sidequests that yield war assets will be done though. Will they be found by, as you say, scanning every random planet in the galaxy, and talking to every single character on each hub world?

Or will they be more like the loyalty missions? Marked on the map, important missions, but entirely optional?

Unknown.  But I know how sidequests were uncovered in ME1 and ME2. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume the same will apply to ME3, unless Bioware specifically states otherwise.

And again, loyalty missions were not sidequests.  They were listed under the main story missions.  The only difference being they were skippable.

[111987]

iakus wrote...

111987 wrote...

@iakus

You have no idea how the sidequests that yield war assets will be done though. Will they be found by, as you say, scanning every random planet in the galaxy, and talking to every single character on each hub world?

Or will they be more like the loyalty missions? Marked on the map, important missions, but entirely optional?

Unknown.  But I know how sidequests were uncovered in ME1 and ME2. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume the same will apply to ME3, unless Bioware specifically states otherwise.

And again, loyalty missions were not sidequests.  They were listed under the main story missions.  The only difference being they were skippable.

Sidequests that yield war assets will likely be different than the sidequests you get by talking to random people, like 'Fish on the Presidium' or 'Packages for Ish' or something. There will likely be both.

You're missing the point. I'm saying what BioWare has labelled as sidequests could be optional missions, like the loyalty missions.

Besides, there were some stuff that carried over to ME2 from ME1 that were sidequests found by talking to random people. I actually re-did a playthrough of ME1 because I missed out on finding the Prothean artifact on Eletania, which is apparently significant. So this has happened before, and it wouldn't be the end of the world for most people if they had to talk to everyone to find all the sidequests.You can always just use a strategy guide.

There really is no pleasing you, is there?

[Fiery Phoenix]

I wouldn't hold your breathe on the Eletania vision, 111987.

[Iakus]

111987 wrote...

Sidequests that yield war assets will likely be different than the sidequests you get by talking to random people, like 'Fish on the Presidium' or 'Packages for Ish' or something. There will likely be both.

You're missing the point. I'm saying what BioWare has labelled as sidequests could be optional missions, like the loyalty missions.

"Likely" and "could be" are not "is"  Like I said, until Bioware goes into more detail, I will continue to be concerned.

Besides, there were some stuff that carried over to ME2 from ME1 that were sidequests found by talking to random people. I actually re-did a playthrough of ME1 because I missed out on finding the Prothean artifact on Eletania, which is apparently significant. So this has happened before, and it wouldn't be the end of the world for most people if they had to talk to everyone to find all the sidequests.You can always just use a strategy guide.

It's not the end of the world to miss a sidequest or three normally.  Missing the Prothean artifact in ME1 is not the end of the world.  But, with the War Assets thing in ME3, missing a few sidequests could very well be the end of several worlds 

There really is no pleasing you, is there?

Given current information no.  Bioware will have to release a lot more information before I'm anywhere near pleased

[111987]

Fiery Phoenix wrote...

I wouldn't hold your breathe on the Eletania vision, 111987.

True, it might not end up being important, but it was one of the flagged events that was transferred over to ME2, and since it didn't have an effect in ME2, it makes me think it will do SOMETHING in ME3.

[Fiery Phoenix]

I certainly hope so. Chekhov's guns are always welcome.

[Jog0907]

111987 wrote...

Fiery Phoenix wrote...

I wouldn't hold your breathe on the Eletania vision, 111987.

True, it might not end up being important, but it was one of the flagged events that was transferred over to ME2, and since it didn't have an effect in ME2, it makes me think it will do SOMETHING in ME3.

imo all that will do is change the dialogue when shepard finds more info on the relationship between protheans and humans, cant have something so secondary be vital for the final game, though I agree i certainly hope it still does something at least noticeable in me3