383 réponses à ce sujet

[Genshie]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Genshie wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

That's not what aspect they were referring to, but hey.

 He clearly stated that it wasn't an Rpg at all. What did I miss? He also said that Gears of War 3 has more variety than Mass Effect which is makes me go

There are many different things people consider as being part of RPGs, one of them being the ability to approach problems from different directions: fighting vs. hacking vs. persuasion vs. sneaking vs. bribing vs. etc. Even games that aren't RPGs occassionally offer diverging paths to accomplish the goals.

Seboist wasn't saying Mass Effect wasn't an RPG at all, he was criticizing that it's gameplay is pretty linear and shooting-fixated.

Wait a sec I think we are both misguided here I was refering to the user tetrisblock4x1 not Seboist at all. Sorry, for the confusion. I may or may not respond to your original post in a bit though.

[Last Vizard]

squee365 wrote...

That all the choices from the first two games all the sudden don't matter any more? Is it because of lack of information on the plot? I'm sorry but I don't think BW wants to spoil everyone on the plot... I really do want to know where people got this idea though that ME3 is a linear game with 1 ending and all the choices made don't matter at all? 

We shall see, I hope it isn't the Illusion of choice where you get railroaded down paths that end with practically the same resault either way you handle the choices.  ME 2 council situation is the same even if its a new council... start of ME3 will be the trial railroad start where one or two small choices/details are different plus some spam emails to tie up loose ends from ME1 so they don't isolate the sony players.

Not linear however the differences will most likely be very small apart from the ending, one paragon good, one renegade good, one paragon bad and one renegade bad.  Four ending will be very different however that will most likely be it, early to mid will be exactly the same otherwise bioware would need to make... what like sixty differenty games depending on who lives, who dies, Collector base, new or old council (they'll be killed off early so it doesn't matter I'm guessing thats why you wont have time to say "told you so"), Rachni queen alive or dead (if dead Reapers will have back up DNA or some crap) the list goes on.

It comes down to BW getting ahead of themselves with all these choices only to let down the fans when they realise they backed themselves into a corner because they can't deliver on their idea so when they made ME2 they had no choice but to ignore stuff from ME1 and just turn those choices into some text in an email or short conversation... yep loose ends tied up nicely, "I'm not angry, just dissapointed" lol anyway I'd love to be wrong and IF, IF ME3 is the most god like game over eight discs that are eight totally different versions of plot due to choices made in ME 1-2..... well I'll make a thread saying I was wrong.

[Dean_the_Young]

Il Divo wrote...

On the other hand, having not read the leaked script, I don't know how comprehensive it is, whether it includes every detail of plot, etc. 

It ranges. There are concept summaries for missions, but also dialogue trees. Some important characters weren't really introduced (no results if you search for Harbinger, for example), while some plotlines were gone into notable detail (we understand most of the genophage arc, including the choices and consequences).

There are parts that are vague enough to be changed in execution, but then there are also parts in which they wrote in enough detail that we can tell where they intend to go, even if the exact lines will shift.

The best analogy would be that the script is a mirror you hastely wiped after the shower. Some parts are cloudy. Other parts are clear. You can still tell the outline of yourself, however.

[Il Divo]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

It ranges. There are concept summaries for missions, but also dialogue trees. Some important characters weren't really introduced (no results if you search for Harbinger, for example), while some plotlines were gone into notable detail (we understand most of the genophage arc, including the choices and consequences).

There are parts that are vague enough to be changed in execution, but then there are also parts in which they wrote in enough detail that we can tell where they intend to go, even if the exact lines will shift.

The best analogy would be that the script is a mirror you hastely wiped after the shower. Some parts are cloudy. Other parts are clear. You can still tell the outline of yourself, however.

Much appreciated. It becomes kinda difficult to read between the lines with all the different posts referencing the plot leak without actually being able to refer to them. Based on that, I definitely think there's going to be parts where Bioware has very little wiggle room to change the storyline. Otoh, assuming the sequences with less detail hadn't been fully written at the time of the leak and simply excluded, they also have/had an opportunity to alter the tone of any particular scene.

[Cancer Puppet]

Hyrist wrote...

I've read the spoilers. I'm not upset in the slighest.

Inflated expectation is what usually causes people to scream. After I saw ME2 and DA to I realized how they were doing cross game consequences and I stopped expecting completely unique levels and conflicts due to it.

Honestly, there was way too many variables after the two games to merit the full range of consequences some people were expecting here. And a lot of the 'it doesn't matter' issues actually make sense.

Again, the transcript was very incomplete, with some consequences of the final choices blurry or simply not there at all.

Those who are complaining or are upset by this were probably never going to be happy no matter what was released. Some people chose to live miserable lives.

Mass Effect was, as a series, a very ambitious concept. The design team's ideas wound up being a bit too lofty in my opinion. I feel as though if more choices in ME1 had shown an impact, or had shown the promise of future impact in ME3, that the fanbase would have largely been happier. 

What really would have made a difference is if ME had only consisted of two games. I simply don't understand the fixation with trilogies, and I think ME would have worked just fine without Cerberus playing more of an auxiliary role in the main plot. I personnaly didn't find the collector story very compelling, and with the exception of the collector base I don't really see any consequence of the story of ME2 having a meaningful impact on ME3.

[Il Divo]

Cancer Puppet wrote...

Mass Effect was, as a series, a very ambitious concept. The design team's ideas wound up being a bit too lofty in my opinion. I feel as though if more choices in ME1 had shown an impact, or had shown the promise of future impact in ME3, that the fanbase would have largely been happier. 

Agreed. I've enjoyed the ME series so far, but it can be said that the idea of a trilogy with consequences throughout was far too ambitious.

[Someone With Mass]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
It ranges. There are concept summaries for missions, but also dialogue trees. Some important characters weren't really introduced (no results if you search for Harbinger, for example), while some plotlines were gone into notable detail (we understand most of the genophage arc, including the choices and consequences).

That's funny, because I got plenty of results when I searched for it.

[Dean_the_Young]

Il Divo wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

It ranges. There are concept summaries for missions, but also dialogue trees. Some important characters weren't really introduced (no results if you search for Harbinger, for example), while some plotlines were gone into notable detail (we understand most of the genophage arc, including the choices and consequences).

There are parts that are vague enough to be changed in execution, but then there are also parts in which they wrote in enough detail that we can tell where they intend to go, even if the exact lines will shift.

The best analogy would be that the script is a mirror you hastely wiped after the shower. Some parts are cloudy. Other parts are clear. You can still tell the outline of yourself, however.

Much appreciated. It becomes kinda difficult to read between the lines with all the different posts referencing the plot leak without actually being able to refer to them. Based on that, I definitely think there's going to be parts where Bioware has very little wiggle room to change the storyline. Otoh, assuming the sequences with less detail hadn't been fully written at the time of the leak and simply excluded, they also have/had an opportunity to alter the tone of any particular scene.

That's what I'm holding out hope for. Just from two of the key premises (Cerberus being a Reaper-ally, the means by which the Reapers are beaten), I'm going to view ME3 as undermined even no matter how well it carries those flaws. But that doesn't mean it can't be better than it stands: as someone I once knew said, a real showman can turn a limp into a swagger.


Though I'm often confused with other Renegade posters, I'm actually a bit more optimistic, or at least less fatalistic, than them. I have strong hopes that the genophage arc may be the best cross-game plotline in the entire series. I can easily see ways thata Bioware could improve upon the beta script via refinement and addition, especially for the Geth-Quarian plotline. Other parts of the game just sound fun to play.

My biggest concern just happens to be one of the more visible ones, which is Cerberus. I'll hold open the possiblity that some of the worse parts (the evil-for-evil's sake acts, of which there are many) will be revised and edited into something better. Bioware could also pull back from its reliance on indoctrination to explain antagonism. I might not agree that the choice to use Cerberus as an antagonist was a good one, but it could well be pulled off decently. If you watch the demo of the Salarian homeworld, you can see that at least the Cerberus incompetence reputation is being rejected in terms of their soldiers.

But that will depend on the addition of something that was nowhere in the script... and that's an actual basis for Cerberus to choose the role of villain.

[Dean_the_Young]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...
It ranges. There are concept summaries for missions, but also dialogue trees. Some important characters weren't really introduced (no results if you search for Harbinger, for example), while some plotlines were gone into notable detail (we understand most of the genophage arc, including the choices and consequences).

That's funny, because I got plenty of results when I searched for it.

As a role, as opposed to a mention?

Mind PM-ing me?

[Someone With Mass]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
As a role, as opposed to a mention?

Mind PM-ing me?

Just a few mentions.

I think the devs have confirmed that Harbinger will return, anyway. It'd be weird if he didn't.

[Dean_the_Young]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...
As a role, as opposed to a mention?

Mind PM-ing me?

Just a few mentions.

I think the devs have confirmed that Harbinger will return, anyway. It'd be weird if he didn't.

Yeah, that's what I meant. We know to expect more of it, but it's virtually absent from the beta script. One of those things they likely hadn't added yet.

Harbinger's not the only one. I don't think they'd decided on a real consequence for the ME2 end-game decision yet (the beta had just a vague mission past the Omega-4 Relay that had a superficial difference), but we've also been told it would be one of the more significant choices.


The beta is an incomplete framework. Things will be added, and parts that are there will be changed. But it's still an established framework, and what is established won't be radically changed.

[Someone With Mass]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
The beta is an incomplete framework. Things will be added, and parts that are there will be changed. But it's still an established framework, and what is established won't be radically changed.

I think that depends on how old the script really is.

I mean, they scrapped a lot of the script for ME2 and came up with other things.

[Dean_the_Young]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...
The beta is an incomplete framework. Things will be added, and parts that are there will be changed. But it's still an established framework, and what is established won't be radically changed.

I think that depends on how old the script really is.

I mean, they scrapped a lot of the script for ME2 and came up with other things.

'A lot' is relatively subjective at this point. The underlying premise of the character-centric game leading to the suicide mission, with Collector abductions and working with Cerberus, those were established. What they weren't sure was how they wanted to execute that intent, such as the musing of starting with Legion.

In this case, the beta script is extensive enough and coherently linked that it's a stable design document. It isn't a case of throwing out ideas of how to do things, bar a few things like the VS and Kai Leng, but more of a 'work within this.' They've gone into too much detail, and too much dialogue, to warrant the 'oh, we'll toss this away.'

[Il Divo]

Dean_the_Young wrote...


That's what I'm holding out hope for. Just from two of the key premises (Cerberus being a Reaper-ally, the means by which the Reapers are beaten), I'm going to view ME3 as undermined even no matter how well it carries those flaws. But that doesn't mean it can't be better than it stands: as someone I once knew said, a real showman can turn a limp into a swagger.


Though I'm often confused with other Renegade posters, I'm actually a bit more optimistic, or at least less fatalistic, than them. I have strong hopes that the genophage arc may be the best cross-game plotline in the entire series. I can easily see ways thata Bioware could improve upon the beta script via refinement and addition, especially for the Geth-Quarian plotline. Other parts of the game just sound fun to play.

My biggest concern just happens to be one of the more visible ones, which is Cerberus. I'll hold open the possiblity that some of the worse parts (the evil-for-evil's sake acts, of which there are many) will be revised and edited into something better. Bioware could also pull back from its reliance on indoctrination to explain antagonism. I might not agree that the choice to use Cerberus as an antagonist was a good one, but it could well be pulled off decently. If you watch the demo of the Salarian homeworld, you can see that at least the Cerberus incompetence reputation is being rejected in terms of their soldiers.

But that will depend on the addition of something that was nowhere in the script... and that's an actual basis for Cerberus to choose the role of villain.

Agreed on all counts. And based on your post on the last page, I'm even more disappointed with what they're doing/done with the Batarian plot-line. ME1's Bringing Down the Sky and ME2's Arrival set up this great dichotomy between the two situations, and I was really holding out hope for Bioware to capitalize that.

Likewise with the Cerberus scenario. I enjoy the Renegade/Cerberus Style, how TIM is constantly playing across the good/bad line. There's still room to get a great reason for Cerberus as the lackey villains, but I think it overall leads to less tension and a less interesting story in terms of Shepard having to balance out the Council/Terrorist group interests in combatting the machine gods.

[xSTONEYx187x]

Without delving into spoilerville,why are people unhappy about the leaked script? Is there a lack of choice? i.e whether you can see the results of your choices regarding Legions loyalty mission, Mordin's one, keeping or destroying the base, the Rachni etc, can anyone confirm whether they will have some impact whatsoever with a simple yes or no?

[Dean_the_Young]

Il Divo wrote...

Agreed on all counts. And based on your post on the last page, I'm even more disappointed with what they're doing/done with the Batarian plot-line. ME1's Bringing Down the Sky and ME2's Arrival set up this great dichotomy between the two situations, and I was really holding out hope for Bioware to capitalize that.

Well, there's always story-irrelevant DLC.

Likewise with the Cerberus scenario. I enjoy the Renegade/Cerberus Style, how TIM is constantly playing across the good/bad line. There's still room to get a great reason for Cerberus as the lackey villains, but I think it overall leads to less tension and a less interesting story in terms of Shepard having to balance out the Council/Terrorist group interests in combatting the machine gods.

Heck, I'm not opposed to Cerberus in an antagonistic role, but rather the way Cerberus is an antagonist.

Heck, if TIM were dangling assets before our noses and holding out on sharing plot devices, holding the survival of the galaxy hostage to wrestling concessions from the Council, I'd applaud the role. 'Amoral Opportunist' would have been an excellent role for Cerberus to fill, being neither sympathetic or villainously antagonistic.

Cerberus grabs Prothean plot device to beat the Reapers. Shepard needs Prothean plot device. Illusive Man offers to trade Prothean plot device and Cerberus war assets to Council in exchange for, oh, making TIM a Spectre... and de facto legalizing Cerberus and making its opportunism and end-of-days crime spree Spectre-legalized.

Shepard could convince the Council to accept the deal (Renegade), or refuse the deal and get the Prothean plot device some other way (Paragon).



Later, after the battle of Earth, TIM betrays the anti-Reaper alliance in some gambit to seize ultimate victory. If Cerberus was on your side, they betray you from within. If you didn't ally with Cerberus, they sweep in after the battle has weakened the winners. Renegades get their war assets when it matters, but then are taken advantage of. Paragons don't get the assets, but are vindicated in their belief that Cerberus would betray them.

[Dean_the_Young]

xSTONEYx187x wrote...

Without delving into spoilerville,why are people unhappy about the leaked script? Is there a lack of choice? i.e whether you can see the results of your choices regarding Legions loyalty mission, Mordin's one, keeping or destroying the base, the Rachni etc, can anyone confirm whether they will have some impact whatsoever with a simple yes or no?

Some yes. Some no. Some depends on how you define 'impact.' Taken from magazines already out, Rachni exist regardless of what you do in ME1, for example.

[DiebytheSword]

xSTONEYx187x wrote...

Without delving into spoilerville,why are people unhappy about the leaked script? Is there a lack of choice? i.e whether you can see the results of your choices regarding Legions loyalty mission, Mordin's one, keeping or destroying the base, the Rachni etc, can anyone confirm whether they will have some impact whatsoever with a simple yes or no?

That's the problem, things are vague enough that you will get six answers for your question that only has two possibilities.

There are people who are satisfied that there will be differences in what you see depending on what you chose, and people who believe that changing npc x with npc y and changing the parameters of the same mission does not count as change.

Mind you these are the same people who complain that the Renegade side looses content, so now they are getting something eqivalent, when what they really wanted was an entire game path dedicated to their line of thinking.  I'm not actually faulting them on that though, just understand where they come from and why they are jaded about it when talking about ME3.

[DiebytheSword]

Il Divo wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...


That's what I'm holding out hope for. Just from two of the key premises (Cerberus being a Reaper-ally, the means by which the Reapers are beaten), I'm going to view ME3 as undermined even no matter how well it carries those flaws. But that doesn't mean it can't be better than it stands: as someone I once knew said, a real showman can turn a limp into a swagger.


Though I'm often confused with other Renegade posters, I'm actually a bit more optimistic, or at least less fatalistic, than them. I have strong hopes that the genophage arc may be the best cross-game plotline in the entire series. I can easily see ways thata Bioware could improve upon the beta script via refinement and addition, especially for the Geth-Quarian plotline. Other parts of the game just sound fun to play.

My biggest concern just happens to be one of the more visible ones, which is Cerberus. I'll hold open the possiblity that some of the worse parts (the evil-for-evil's sake acts, of which there are many) will be revised and edited into something better. Bioware could also pull back from its reliance on indoctrination to explain antagonism. I might not agree that the choice to use Cerberus as an antagonist was a good one, but it could well be pulled off decently. If you watch the demo of the Salarian homeworld, you can see that at least the Cerberus incompetence reputation is being rejected in terms of their soldiers.

But that will depend on the addition of something that was nowhere in the script... and that's an actual basis for Cerberus to choose the role of villain.

Agreed on all counts. And based on your post on the last page, I'm even more disappointed with what they're doing/done with the Batarian plot-line. ME1's Bringing Down the Sky and ME2's Arrival set up this great dichotomy between the two situations, and I was really holding out hope for Bioware to capitalize that.

Likewise with the Cerberus scenario. I enjoy the Renegade/Cerberus Style, how TIM is constantly playing across the good/bad line. There's still room to get a great reason for Cerberus as the lackey villains, but I think it overall leads to less tension and a less interesting story in terms of Shepard having to balance out the Council/Terrorist group interests in combatting the machine gods.

I don't see Cerberus doing evil for evils sake with what I read from the data mine.  Cerberus always has ulterior motives that relate to their end game, stoping the Reapers is obviously a must for their end game, however they look at Reaper technology as a key aquisition for their end game. 

You can see this in ME2, no spoilers neccesary:

TIM even says it, the Collector base will provide strength for humanity (read: Cerberus) against the Reapers and beyond.

TIM was already looking at the end game as he wants it.  To have the vision Cerberus has, and to make that vision achievable, TIM has to look past the now and plan for opening opportunities in the future.  Once the Reapers are "taken care of" TIM will go back to business as usual.

If TIM wants the Reaper tech to dominate the other council races, he's going to need to make sure Shepard and his allies don't destroy them in the process of saving the Galaxy from them.

[Seboist]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Genshie wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

That's not what aspect they were referring to, but hey.

 He clearly stated that it wasn't an Rpg at all. What did I miss? He also said that Gears of War 3 has more variety than Mass Effect which is makes me go

There are many different things people consider as being part of RPGs, one of them being the ability to approach problems from different directions: fighting vs. hacking vs. persuasion vs. sneaking vs. bribing vs. etc. Even games that aren't RPGs occassionally offer diverging paths to accomplish the goals.

Seboist wasn't saying Mass Effect wasn't an RPG at all, he was criticizing that it's gameplay is pretty linear and shooting-fixated. While his rhetoric is as straight as a corkscrew, he does bring up a valid point in one respect: ME2 is effectively one linear shooting gallery after another. There's only one way to go, and that's straight through the enemies. No matter your choices, it's the same route: the closest you get to a different experience is a very few Renegade interrupts to knock off some enemies.

Even games without RPG story elements have provided more gameplay variation than Mass Effect has offered. Diverging paths, multiple routes, etc.. House of the Dead, for example, is a rail shooter where you don't even get to choose to move forward... but has an entire tree of possible routes based on how you play it. An utterly non-RPG from the arcade generation has more variability in execution than Mass Effect.

Bioware doesn't make choose-your-own-path RPGs like Fallout, where you usually get at least three ways to solve any problem (fighting, speach, or finding scavenge). Mass Effect, for all its claims to choices and consequences, has precious little differentiation in output in the first two games, and many parts of the ME3 script show less-than-ideal differentiation later.

Blazblue(a fighting game) has more divering paths and C&C in it's story mode than ME too.

[Dean_the_Young]

Seboist wrote...

Blazblue(a fighting game) has more divering paths and C&C in it's story mode than ME too.

The thing is that 'choices and consequences' mean something significantly different in that context.

You might as well compare, oh, a sports game and a shooter game and then say one is more exciting then the other. Action and sports genres look at 'exciting' in different lights.

[Dean_the_Young]

DiebytheSword wrote...

I don't see Cerberus doing evil for evils sake with what I read from the data mine.  Cerberus always has ulterior motives that relate to their end game, stoping the Reapers is obviously a must for their end game, however they look at Reaper technology as a key aquisition for their end game. 

You can see this in ME2, no spoilers neccesary:

TIM even says it, the Collector base will provide strength for humanity (read: Cerberus) against the Reapers and beyond.

TIM was already looking at the end game as he wants it.  To have the vision Cerberus has, and to make that vision achievable, TIM has to look past the now and plan for opening opportunities in the future.  Once the Reapers are "taken care of" TIM will go back to business as usual.

If TIM wants the Reaper tech to dominate the other council races, he's going to need to make sure Shepard and his allies don't destroy them in the process of saving the Galaxy from them.

Well, beside that the conclusion is only half-true (you don't need the Reapers themselves to have Reaper tech), Cerberus's goal in the spoilers isn't to protect the Reapers from Shepard... and their goal could just as reasonably (from a writing perspective) work by them being on the same organic side of the war.

[Seboist]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Seboist wrote...

Blazblue(a fighting game) has more divering paths and C&C in it's story mode than ME too.

The thing is that 'choices and consequences' mean something significantly different in that context.

You might as well compare, oh, a sports game and a shooter game and then say one is more exciting then the other. Action and sports genres look at 'exciting' in different lights.

EA Sports makes better RPGs than Bioware

[Dean_the_Young]

Ah, but they don't have romances and PG-13 fade-to-black scenes. So they don't count.

Plus, that nasty bit about stories.

[squee365]

Does the script tell us how immersive the game will be?