359 réponses à ce sujet

[Candidate 88766]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

Wait, there was a second leak?

When did this happen?

Shortly after  the first script was released, another more recent version was found and that's what most people refer to as the "script". The old one refers to situations which are changed and no longer present in the "new" script, such as possible companion deaths being removed. Overall, much of it remained the same.

Oh, but it was still from the leaked beta. I see.

I imagine most of the plot is the same regardless of how old the scrpit is - I imagine the main plot of ME3 and how you go about stopping the Reapers has been set in stone for years. Things like Cerberus' involvement have clearly evolved througout development - they were meant to have a much larger role in ME1 - but something as big as how the Reapers can be stopped or what the Reapers' motives are were probably decided years ago, albeit in rough form.

I'm sure some parts of the script may change, but anything big is most likely there to stay. Thankfully, I've managed to avoid spoiling most of the big plot points. Apart from how the Reapers are stopped - I've seen a few snippets about how they are stopped and I quite like what I saw.

[crimzontearz]

aridor1570 wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

aridor1570 wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

aridor1570 wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...
no but I would just like an official word from bioware but we know that will not happen

We already had an official word from BioWare, sadly it's buried under a massive amount of "I WANT THE GAME TO BE LIKE SKYRIM" threads.

no....I mean that the official word is a very vague "it's an old script...it was not finalized" ...notice how they are NOT saying how accurate it or INaccurate it was? What does that tell you?

Again, by doing that they'll just spoil the whole game, they're not going to just tell you what's right and what's wrong and it'll be stupid of you to expect something like that.

they would ONLY if the script is very accurate....if it was a far cry from the final product it would be in their interest to say so....yet they do not soooo I can only assume 55 days from now a ton of people will be here posting stuff like "unfinalized my ***"

Again, you're deluding yourself, they've already said alot of things will stay the same but many other things have changed since the script's creation, they will not in any way just tell you how wrong or right the leaked script is.

again....vague damage control is vague. Guess we will know in 2 months....especially about the endings and how the post campaign play is being handled

[aridor1570]

King Minos wrote...

I only remember the first script being leaked, when was the second script leaked? I just know that a script was found on the beta.

There was only one leak, my guess? there'll be another leak when the demo is released, unless BioWare wont include the script in it.

[aridor1570]

Why should the endings change? the plot device has been hinted before hand in both games.

[Dave of Canada]

aridor1570 wrote...

Why should the endings change? the plot device has been hinted before hand in both games.

Did you read the same script as I?

[Candidate 88766]

Rojahar wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

The script is absolutely dreadful, my preorder was cancelled soon after the second leak which basically confirmed much of the first leak.

Yet you hang around on the forum devoted to ME3. 



No offense intended, but if you've made your mind up that you won't like this game then surely there are better uses of your time than coming here.

Why is someone suddenly not a fan of series, not allowed to discuss the lore or setting at all, just because there's one installment they aren't foaming at the mouth to purchase? Not all discussion MUST be positive. I wouldn't call this a place for discussion at all if any dissenting opinion isn't allowed at all.

As for better uses of time, there are better uses of time than scouring a forum for a game not even released yet even if you know you'll buy it. Especially if you know you'll buy it no matter what, like yourself - since no pre-release info seems like it will change that fact anyway.

Never said he wasn't allowed to be here.

Its just that if someone has decided they're not going to buy ME3, it seems rather a waste of their time to discuss ME3.

Many people who are going to buy ME3 are worried about it. I, like many others, am excited for it. That difference of opinion lends itself to discussion, along with the discussion of new information.

I just don't see how it can be interesting to discuss something if you have no intention of buying it.

Modifié par Candidate 88766, 08 janvier 2012 - 11:34 .

[nAbaddon]

OP, as you can see in this thread there are only 2, 2 glaring negative opinions.

But it seemed like all the thread was full of negative opinions due the insistence of the same, there's your answer.

[aridor1570]

Dave of Canada wrote...

aridor1570 wrote...

Why should the endings change? the plot device has been hinted before hand in both games.

Did you read the same script as I?

Not entirely, just some of it.

[crimzontearz]

aridor1570 wrote...
Why should the endings change? the plot device has been hinted before hand in both games.

because no ending allows room for post completion gameplay...which Casey said it was in....also a LOT of people were pissed at them....a lot

Modifié par crimzontearz, 08 janvier 2012 - 11:35 .

[Chuvvy]

It has more holes than ME2. (I just found a rather massive one recently.) Your choices don't really matter. But who cares about that? they've only been hyping it since ME1. And all the endings are dreadful. And with the endings presented, I can't see how they can make another ME game with out establishing some form of canon. I'm sure ME3 will alienate more of biowares core fanbase in exchange for a more casual player base. And that's what bioware seems to want, I'll just find a new company, probably CD Projekt.

[best_eva]

Dave of Canada wrote...

aridor1570 wrote...

Why should the endings change? the plot device has been hinted before hand in both games.

Did you read the same script as I?

see this is the problem, you get contradicting statements like this, and than you get people (like this guy)^ who obviously hate the game and they can get away with stating their opinion as fact.  Fact is majority of people haven't read the leak so they can't dispute it, but you can state you negative opinions as fact and try to preach your negativity to try to get us to convert to your way of thinking.  I've read way more posts from people who say they like it, but people like you repeatedly post and state that you hate it so it looks like more people don't like it. 

[RAF1940]

crimzontearz wrote...

aridor1570 wrote...


Why should the endings change? the plot device has been hinted before hand in both games.

because no ending allos s room for post completion gameplay...which Casey said it was in....also a LOT of people were pissed at them....a lot

What does it say in terms of ending (not plot related, just like "there are 3 endings" etc)?

Modifié par RAF1940, 08 janvier 2012 - 11:35 .

[crimzontearz]

aridor1570 wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

aridor1570 wrote...
Why should the endings change? the plot device has been hinted before hand in both games.

Did you read the same script as I?

Not entirely, just some of it.

then why the hell are you talking?

[Drunken_Soviet]

King Minos wrote...

, implementing a tacked on multiplayer,

Actually multiplayer has been in development of ME3 since it was in alpha development, and also it has been stated that Bioware have wanted to inplement multiplayer in the Mass Effect series for quite a while, so I wouldn't call it "Tacked on".



And to all the people who hate multiplayer for being..... multiplayer then

[aridor1570]

crimzontearz wrote...

aridor1570 wrote...
Why should the endings change? the plot device has been hinted before hand in both games.

because no ending allows room for post completion gameplay...which Casey said it was in....also a LOT of people were pissed at them....a lot

You see, this is where the "First draft" thing comes into play.

Modifié par aridor1570, 08 janvier 2012 - 11:38 .

[aridor1570]

crimzontearz wrote...

aridor1570 wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

aridor1570 wrote...
Why should the endings change? the plot device has been hinted before hand in both games.

Did you read the same script as I?

Not entirely, just some of it.

then why the hell are you talking?

Why shouldn't I be talking?

I'm talking about things I've read and raising my opinion on the matter.

And it's not even "Alot", it's the same people raising their voice over and over.

Modifié par aridor1570, 08 janvier 2012 - 11:38 .

[King Minos]

Besteva, I would assume those involved in black Market deals would be owned by powerful crime families. And just because it's a Black Market does not mean that powerful people can not purchase from them. An example for me would be London or New York, if iconic cities like these fell, morale would be dramatically reduced and with high populations, just imagine an army of husks and a nice big pile of resources ready to be processed with little to no resistance? The Reapers can save power and use the big guns when destroying planets. If the Reapers want to continue their little extinction cycle for the next species that appear afte us, they would need to stay alive incase they eventually find out about the extinction cycle and attempt to fight back, as long as possible and avoid direct conflict. Husks in big hordes can easily swarm towns.

[crimzontearz]

RAF1940 wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

aridor1570 wrote...
Why should the endings change? the plot device has been hinted before hand in both games.

because no ending allos s room for post completion gameplay...which Casey said it was in....also a LOT of people were pissed at them....a lot

What does it say in terms of ending (not plot related, just like "there are 3 endings" etc)?

three general endings plus variables....

[crimzontearz]

aridor1570 wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

aridor1570 wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

aridor1570 wrote...
Why should the endings change? the plot device has been hinted before hand in both games.

Did you read the same script as I?

Not entirely, just some of it.

then why the hell are you talking?

Why shouldn't I be talking?
I'm talking about things I've read and raising my opinion on the matter.
And it's not even "Alot", it's the same people raising their voice over and over.

then you can NOT know why or how much the people who read it all could want concrete answers on how accurate the script is

[King Minos]

Drunkensoviet - a simple horde mode that adds nothing and is exactly the same as other horde modes from different games is not tacked on? Atleast Kane and Lynch expanded on the simple tdm and created Fragile Alliance! Which is more unique and difficult than this horde due to unpredictable Human behaviour.

[RAF1940]

King Minos wrote...

Drunkensoviet - a simple horde mode that adds nothing and is exactly the same as other horde modes from different games is not tacked on? Atleast Kane and Lynch expanded on the simple tdm and created Fragile Alliance! Which is more unique and difficult than this horde due to unpredictable Human behaviour.

I think it has potential to be unique, but I'm not sure if it will be.

[Dave of Canada]

aridor1570 wrote...

Not entirely, just some of it.

Ah, the plot device is mentioned in ME3 and it was never mentioned previously. You first hear about it on the planet after Earth.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 08 janvier 2012 - 11:42 .

[slimgrin]

Slidell505 wrote...
 And that's what bioware seems to want, I'll just find a new company, probably CD Projekt.

Rumor has it their next IP is SciFi. 

[best_eva]

King Minos wrote...

Besteva, I would assume those involved in black Market deals would be owned by powerful crime families. And just because it's a Black Market does not mean that powerful people can not purchase from them. An example for me would be London or New York, if iconic cities like these fell, morale would be dramatically reduced and with high populations, just imagine an army of husks and a nice big pile of resources ready to be processed with little to no resistance? The Reapers can save power and use the big guns when destroying planets. If the Reapers want to continue their little extinction cycle for the next species that appear afte us, they would need to stay alive incase they eventually find out about the extinction cycle and attempt to fight back, as long as possible and avoid direct conflict. Husks in big hordes can easily swarm towns.

Sure but powerful people are gonna want to try to avoid that stuff as it's bad for their image, also seeing as it's advanced collector tech why would that individual keep it?  Wouldn't they want to experiment with it?  They would send it to some scientists those scientists would then get indoctrinated and what would they do then?  They're just scientists they're not in a position of power.  As for the big army of husks the reapers already use those when they're here there not goning to save resources just because they give the collectors some more husk creating tech. 

[aridor1570]

crimzontearz wrote...

aridor1570 wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

aridor1570 wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

aridor1570 wrote...
Why should the endings change? the plot device has been hinted before hand in both games.

Did you read the same script as I?

Not entirely, just some of it.

then why the hell are you talking?

Why shouldn't I be talking?
I'm talking about things I've read and raising my opinion on the matter.
And it's not even "Alot", it's the same people raising their voice over and over.

then you can NOT know why or how much the people who read it all could want concrete answers on how accurate the script is

Bad endings, no real choice consiquances, scripted deaths, bad treatment to the VS, I think I've covered most of it.