684 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvianus]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Ricinator wrote...

@111987
sure i understand you can't give every option. But you can't even tell your LI on horizon that you ARN"T WORKING WITH CERBERUS.

Wait.

All of your "ME2 SUCKS" rage... stems from Ash ditching you?

XD

[ME_Fan]

onelifecrisis wrote...

IEatWhatIPoo wrote...

Bioware haven't let us down with ME1 and ME2, why are people so willing to go ape**** over one quote in an IGN article?

Some would debate the bold bit. Besides, it's not just one article. Recently David Silverman said something like:
"Who can even remember what happened in ME1&2? I know I can't. It's not important."

I thought David Silverman was a producer for The Simpsons or something Lol, same name obviously. But if he really said something as stupid and moronic as this, I'm surprised he hasn't been fired, whoever he is. Stupid statements like this really frustrate me though!

[aridor1570]

Ricinator wrote...

@sgt stryker
might have had more 1 liners, but ME1 had much richer conversations and i would consider alot more Dialogue

You're still wrong.

[billy the squid]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Ricinator wrote...

@111987
sure i understand you can't give every option. But you can't even tell your LI on horizon that you ARN"T WORKING WITH CERBERUS.

Wait.

All of your "ME2 SUCKS" rage... stems from Ash ditching you?

I wonder if you could smooth things over if you could offer her a cup of tea?

[aridor1570]

ME_Fan wrote...

onelifecrisis wrote...

IEatWhatIPoo wrote...

Bioware haven't let us down with ME1 and ME2, why are people so willing to go ape**** over one quote in an IGN article?

Some would debate the bold bit. Besides, it's not just one article. Recently David Silverman said something like:
"Who can even remember what happened in ME1&2? I know I can't. It's not important."

I thought David Silverman was a producer for The Simpsons or something Lol, same name obviously. But if he really said something as stupid and moronic as this, I'm surprised he hasn't been fired, whoever he is. Stupid statements like this really frustrate me though!

I prefer him over the last one, less spoilers, wait, no, infact, no spoilers at all.

[Candidate 88766]

mineralica wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

Again, you kinda missed the point. Think of Mass Effect like the entire works about Middle Earth. ME1 and ME2 act a bit like the Hobbit - Sauron, like the Reapers, is generally a distant threat apart form a few instances. The story introduces many of the characters and key elements such as the Ring. ME3 is a bit like the entire Lord of the Rings. LotR is about the quest to destroy the Ring, and the war with Sauron. Likewise, ME3 is about a galactic war with the Reapers. While the Hobbit introduces the Ring and many characters, you don't need to read it to enjoy LotR. Likewise, despite characters and the universe being ste up in the previous installments, you don't need to play ME1 and ME2 to enjoy ME3's story of the galactic war.

With the example of Harry Potter, books 1-3 merely set up stuff. Book 4 onwards is about the battle against Voldemort, and in this regard ME3 is like books 4-7. It helps if you've read books 1-3, but they were all independant stories that aren't actually necessary to understand the story of the battle with Voldemort.

Hobbit had both different protagonist and antagonist from LotR. And different cast in addition to that. Comparing Hobbit to ME series it will be Mass Effect Galaxy.

First book of LotR will be ME1 - main enemy (Sovereign and, later, Reapers) shown rarely, main action concentrated on their lieutenants - Nazguls/Saren. Half of time heroes try to understand what exactly is going on, team builds fast, main players are established.

Two Towers will be ME2 - Saruman/Collectors which are related in strange way to main plot, but there they are.

And Return of the King wil be ME3, then - finishing loose ends and being largely about epic and action.

ME1 and ME2 have a different antagonist. The Reapers, like Sauron in the Hobbit, are very much a background threat (excluding the very end of ME1). In ME1 the real antagonist is Saren and the Geth, and in ME2 the antagonists are the Collectors (and arguabley TIM). In the Hobbit you keep hearing about the distant evil that is Sauron, and the presence of the Ring is akin to the presence of the Reapers in ME1 and ME2 - they're there, but they're very much a distant, future threat.

Its not a perfect analogy I admit, but the point I'm making is that the war story of ME3, much like the story that is LotR, doesn't require the stories building up to them. The Hobbit doesn't have enough hooks into LotR for it to be a perfect analogy, but it was the best I could think of at such short notice.

Modifié par Candidate 88766, 01 novembre 2011 - 11:12 .

[chris2365]

onelifecrisis wrote...

This thread is going in a dozen directions at once. Then again, there wasn't much actual article to discuss.

Anyway, my guess is that they're repeated ME2 i.e. make a self-contained game, then at the end of development if they have some spare time and money they spend it throwing in cheap and cheerful references to the previous games (emails, fetch quests from characters you previously met, glitchy crap like the council scene with it's spazzy animations and graphical corruption, and the occasional extra line of dialogue thrown in at random places).

I'm surprised how fast this thread went off topic. Just a simple statement from Bioware causes rage all over BSN.

Well, that's the internet for you.

[Ricinator]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Ricinator wrote...

@111987
sure i understand you can't give every option. But you can't even tell your LI on horizon that you ARN"T WORKING WITH CERBERUS.

Wait.

All of your "ME2 SUCKS" rage... stems from Ash ditching you?

It may have opened my eyes and showed how hollow ME2 really is

[Candidate 88766]

Ricinator wrote...

ok you have obviously not played ME1... because they had set it up not to be self contained from the start

Are you sure we played the same game?

ME1 is the self-contained story of how Shepard defeats Saren and Sovereign. It has lots of hooks linking into the overall plot, but it is self-contained.

[Sgt Stryker]

aridor1570 wrote...

Ricinator wrote...

@sgt stryker
might have had more 1 liners, but ME1 had much richer conversations and i would consider alot more Dialogue

You're still wrong.

Whether or not the story dialogue was "richer" is debatable. However, it's clear that ME2 had a higher total number of lines.

Speaking of which, am I the only one who wants more Schwarzenegger-esque one-liners?

[Candidate 88766]

Sgt Stryker wrote...

aridor1570 wrote...

Ricinator wrote...

@sgt stryker
might have had more 1 liners, but ME1 had much richer conversations and i would consider alot more Dialogue

You're still wrong.

Whether or not the story dialogue was "richer" is debatable. However, it's clear that ME2 had a higher total number of lines.

Speaking of which, am I the only one who wants more Schwarzenegger-esque one-liners?

You can never have enough. No sci-fi or war story is complete without them.

[JamieCOTC]

There are lots of articles, interviews and tweets that discuss ME3 as the end of a trilogy, how consequences of past actions may effect the game and that they plan to tie up a lot of loose ends. 

The PR Marketing machine, understandably geared for new players, is best ignored by the hardcore fans, IMHO.

[111987]

Ricinator wrote...

@sgt stryker
might have had more 1 liners, but ME1 had much richer conversations and i would consider alot more Dialogue

You can argue ME1 had richer conversations (i'd disagree though, the conversations with the squad members on the Normandy in ME2 were just fantastic, iMO), but not that it had more dialogue. That is just wrong.

[nutshell43]

Thompson family wrote...
Nice analogy, but allow me to point out that ME2 sold approximately 500,000 more copies than ME1.

Which is actually pretty weak considering:

1. The 360's installed base was much larger for ME2.
2. Simultaneous PC release and a PS3 release.
3. Gamers are sequel hos; a major franchise generally doesn't peak with the first game.

4. They made the game oh so much more accessible by dropping all that unsexy RPG mechanics for GoW.
5. ****** and Asses.

[Ricinator]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

Ricinator wrote...

ok you have obviously not played ME1... because they had set it up not to be self contained from the start

Are you sure we played the same game?

ME1 is the self-contained story of how Shepard defeats Saren and Sovereign. It has lots of hooks linking into the overall plot, but it is self-contained.

yea, but is suppose to open up into ME2, instead bioware plowed through what ME1 was, and replanted some garbage (me2) and with EA's powerful indoctrination techniques they decided it would make more money doing the same each time and bring in more newbs each time

[BatmanPWNS]

ME1. Oh you mean that game where you have an awful inventory where the limit is 150, have slow and glitched combat, hardly ever autosave's and if you forget to save manually then you're pretty much gonna have to do it again, has repeated dialogue for paragon and regenade, seems to have a main story of 5-8 hours top and has some damn awful driving with that horrid thing known as a Mako (lets not forget to mention you can't even shoot properly with it sometime). Ah yeah ME1, that's pretty much all I remembered about it. The only good things were the dozens of side-missions.

Modifié par BatmanPWNS, 01 novembre 2011 - 11:21 .

[Candidate 88766]

Ricinator wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

Ricinator wrote...

ok you have obviously not played ME1... because they had set it up not to be self contained from the start

Are you sure we played the same game?

ME1 is the self-contained story of how Shepard defeats Saren and Sovereign. It has lots of hooks linking into the overall plot, but it is self-contained.

yea, but is suppose to open up into ME2, instead bioware plowed through what ME1 was, and replanted some garbage (me2) and with EA's powerful indoctrination techniques they decided it would make more money doing the same each time and bring in more newbs each time

It does open up into ME2. What games have you been playing?

[Il Divo]

Chris Priestly wrote...


Ok, I'm going to call you on this.

Please say where Aaryn says this, I have read the article and reread the article. NO WHERE does he say your accomplishements are invalid or that no one cares about ME1 or ME2.

Explain.

Quote: "We want to make sure that if someone is new to the franchise they feel very comfortable playing Mass Effect 3," he told Eurogamer. "Certainly it's a very polished experience. In the story it starts at a time with a very singular focus and purpose in the galaxy. You could say the previous games were just a preamble to this moment. Everything has been building to this. It's like the Superbowl. Who cares what happened in the regular season? Now's the one that matters."

Assuming he is referring to Mass Effects 1 and 2 as the "regular season" and considering that's the only sensible interpretation of his analogy, he pretty much just did. "Who cares what happened in the regular season?" is equivalent to "Who cares what happened in Mass Effect 1 and 2?"

Given that interpretation, which is nowhere near as far-fetched as you are attempting to present it, why should I think my accomplishments in the first two games will matter, considering the games themselves are irrelevant, by that statement?

I would also go so far as to say that good narrative technique is not typically based on superbowl analogies.

Modifié par Il Divo, 01 novembre 2011 - 11:25 .

[111987]

nutshell43 wrote...

Thompson family wrote...
Nice analogy, but allow me to point out that ME2 sold approximately 500,000 more copies than ME1.

Which is actually pretty weak considering:

1. The 360's installed base was much larger for ME2.
2. Simultaneous PC release and a PS3 release.
3. Gamers are sequel hos; a major franchise generally doesn't peak with the first game.

4. They made the game oh so much more accessible by dropping all that unsexy RPG mechanics for GoW.
5. ****** and Asses.

2. PS3 was released like a year after the Xbox/PC versions.
4. Which made the gameplay better. And in ME3 they're bringing back many RPG mechanics, so everyone wins.
5. ME1 actually was more explict in thsi department. Side boobs and asses for everyone.

[Ricinator]

111987 wrote...

Ricinator wrote...

@sgt stryker
might have had more 1 liners, but ME1 had much richer conversations and i would consider alot more Dialogue

You can argue ME1 had richer conversations (i'd disagree though, the conversations with the squad members on the Normandy in ME2 were just fantastic, iMO), but not that it had more dialogue. That is just wrong.

i very much disagree that conversations with squad where much more indepth. Maybe because there were more squadmates you feel that, but iMHO ME2 lost so much story RPG that me1 had, its hard to look forward to what ME3 is going to be and these articles don't help either

[shep82]

JamieCOTC wrote...

There are lots of articles, interviews and tweets that discuss ME3 as the end of a trilogy, how consequences of past actions may effect the game and that they plan to tie up a lot of loose ends. 

The PR Marketing machine, understandably geared for new players, is best ignored by the hardcore fans, IMHO.

Agreed. There is plenty to suggest that past actions and events will be used.

[Ophir147]

Did I just read that ME3 will be the end of the franchise? What?

[Ricinator]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

Ricinator wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

Ricinator wrote...

ok you have obviously not played ME1... because they had set it up not to be self contained from the start

Are you sure we played the same game?

ME1 is the self-contained story of how Shepard defeats Saren and Sovereign. It has lots of hooks linking into the overall plot, but it is self-contained.

yea, but is suppose to open up into ME2, instead bioware plowed through what ME1 was, and replanted some garbage (me2) and with EA's powerful indoctrination techniques they decided it would make more money doing the same each time and bring in more newbs each time

It does open up into ME2. What games have you been playing?

i have played alot of both. ME1 takes the cake over ME2 everytime.
mako>hammerhead
ME3 story telling (hopefully) > ME1 story telling > ME2 story telling

im not defending the invetory because its was a mess unless you had sunk enough time into it to figure it out.

[AdmiralCheez]

Ricinator wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Wait.

All of your "ME2 SUCKS" rage... stems from Ash ditching you?

It may have opened my eyes and showed how hollow ME2 really is

Yep, theory confirmed.

[Iakus]

 Well, just read the article.

I knew this would happen.

The exact same thing happened when ME2 came out.  ME1 was suddenly unimportant.  A prequel.  Inconsiquential.  It's time was past.  Time for new and shiny!

Now that ME3 is on the horizon, history repeats itself.  Only this time it's for both ME1 and ME2.

Sometimes I hate being right.