235 réponses à ce sujet

[Iakus]

G3rman wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...

iakus wrote...

As you said, stuff gets cut due to story changes, limited resources, pacing,  It happens.  But ME1 and ME2 didn't get stuff cut to squeeze in multiplayer, effectively an entire second game.

Big deal.  Do you worry about all the people that will never exist every time you...  Nevermind.

Cheez you are escalating this by talking about mast..well you know.  I don't think there isn't anything left to prove, both camps are pretty settled in their thoughts of how the games should be made.

Don't worry, I've voiced unpopular opinions on BSN for a while now, I know better than to rise to the bait. 

And I'm inclined to agree.  I have no illusions that my complaints will change anything.  TIme will ultimately be the judge.  Like I said, I just hope SP doesn't get damaged too badly by this.

[Scowlyface]

Jog0907 wrote...

My experience was that ME1 was indeed longer then me2, but that extra length was because of poor design like wandering aimlessly in a mako in so called "exploration" and firefights that over extended because of immunity spam by enemies. I much prefer me2 length which is much more reasonable and well paced, planet scanning still takes time but its much less than that of me1 poorly made uncharted worlds which gave the game awful pacing IMO.

my thoughts exactly, its just like the whole "open world>linear" perspective alot of gamers have. I have played a couple open world games that gained nothing from being such.just a bunch of wasted play space that wasnt used other than to create the visually feel of freedom. what works for the story of one game doesnt work for all games, no matter how exceptionally well it was done.

RE: OP- doesnt belong in a game like this? speak for yourself homie. one thing I often found myself wanting in both ME and ME2 was a way to just get in there and enjoy the ME flavoured brand of combat-without creating a new game, or being interupted by cutscene- this exceeds my expectations with the inclusion of co-op and the way they have worked it into the main campaign as (an optional) way of prepping your shepard for the final battle. I m stoked for it. 

[AdmiralCheez]

iakus wrote...

So we agree that in Mass Effect's case, a longer narrative is probably a better thing?

I already said that ME3 should be long-ish but not too long due to pacing issues, and I hopefully implied that 30 hours is adequate.  The point here is that the entire epic adventure stretches across three whole games, which would make Mass Effect, as an experience, possibly over 100 hours.

50 hours of busting husks is just goddamn ridiculous.  If you want to spend ten hours putzing with your guns and armor, more power to you, but in a game with branching plots that players will want to revist over and over again, you do NOT want to drag them down just because "longer games are BETTER games!"

Lower your expectations a little and stop blaming everything on multiplayer.  You are needlessly setting yourself and anyone who has to deal with you up for pointless angst.

[Iakus]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

iakus wrote...

So we agree that in Mass Effect's case, a longer narrative is probably a better thing?

I already said that ME3 should be long-ish but not too long due to pacing issues, and I hopefully implied that 30 hours is adequate.  The point here is that the entire epic adventure stretches across three whole games, which would make Mass Effect, as an experience, possibly over 100 hours.

50 hours of busting husks is just goddamn ridiculous.  If you want to spend ten hours putzing with your guns and armor, more power to you, but in a game with branching plots that players will want to revist over and over again, you do NOT want to drag them down just because "longer games are BETTER games!"

Lower your expectations a little and stop blaming everything on multiplayer.  You are needlessly setting yourself and anyone who has to deal with you up for pointless angst.

Believe me, I have other concerns with ME3 that I'm not blaming on multiplayer.  Otherwise I would have mentioned them on this thread before now.

And again, the concern isn't so much length of the game.  If it's as long as ME2, I will be content.  The concern is the narrative will be damaged due to stuff getting cut to make room for MP.  Sure narrativescan get bogged down due to bad pacing.  But they can also be dragged down by disjointed storylines because stuff ends up on the cutting room floor..  

If my expectations were higher, I wouldn't be here.

[Hedera]

You do know it was a separate team that worked on the multiplayer aspect right?

[didymos1120]

Iakus: how would you know?

[G3rman]

cgrimm54 wrote...

You do know it was a separate team that worked on the multiplayer aspect right?

At this point I think everything has been mentioned at least twice.  These two are vicious.

[Iakus]

didymos1120 wrote...

Iakus: how would you know?

They could tell us.

Bioware's good at obfuscation and misdirection.  But if they came out and directly said "Nothing got left out due to multiplayer" I'd believe them.

[Maxfour]

I like the idea of multiplayer, Im glad Biowares actually giving it a shot and designing it for a portion of there fans who like to play multiplayer with there mates, yet people who dislike multiplayer and claim its for CoD fanboys is annoying because its not...its for YOU, for You to make your own choice if you want to play it or not.. :L and its more game time so hey, dont complain

[mkk316]

iakus wrote...

didymos1120 wrote...

Iakus: how would you know?

They could tell us.

Bioware's good at obfuscation and misdirection.  But if they came out and directly said "Nothing got left out due to multiplayer" I'd believe them.

Perhaps they arent aware they need to since MP isnt big enough to cut content.

[incinerator950]

iakus wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...

iakus wrote...

So we agree that in Mass Effect's case, a longer narrative is probably a better thing?

I already said that ME3 should be long-ish but not too long due to pacing issues, and I hopefully implied that 30 hours is adequate.  The point here is that the entire epic adventure stretches across three whole games, which would make Mass Effect, as an experience, possibly over 100 hours.

50 hours of busting husks is just goddamn ridiculous.  If you want to spend ten hours putzing with your guns and armor, more power to you, but in a game with branching plots that players will want to revist over and over again, you do NOT want to drag them down just because "longer games are BETTER games!"

Lower your expectations a little and stop blaming everything on multiplayer.  You are needlessly setting yourself and anyone who has to deal with you up for pointless angst.

Believe me, I have other concerns with ME3 that I'm not blaming on multiplayer.  Otherwise I would have mentioned them on this thread before now.

And again, the concern isn't so much length of the game.  If it's as long as ME2, I will be content.  The concern is the narrative will be damaged due to stuff getting cut to make room for MP.  Sure narrativescan get bogged down due to bad pacing.  But they can also be dragged down by disjointed storylines because stuff ends up on the cutting room floor..  

If my expectations were higher, I wouldn't be here.

I can't comment on cut content, they've had the game finished for half a year now.  I'm already expecting a day one patch though.

[WizenSlinky0]

iakus wrote...

didymos1120 wrote...

Iakus: how would you know?

They could tell us.

Bioware's good at obfuscation and misdirection.  But if they came out and directly said "Nothing got left out due to multiplayer" I'd believe them.

Really? If they came out and said it, I'd start doubting them instead.

Weird.

[Iakus]

mkk316 wrote...

Perhaps they arent aware they need to since MP isnt big enough to cut content.

The question's out there.  Whether they're aware or not who can say.

And how do you know iMP isn't big enough to cut content?

[G3rman]

iakus wrote...

didymos1120 wrote...

Iakus: how would you know?

They could tell us.

Bioware's good at obfuscation and misdirection.  But if they came out and directly said "Nothing got left out due to multiplayer" I'd believe them.

Why should they have to?  What company does that?

Its something you should just accept, Developers don't release games they aren't satisfied with 99% of the time.  They either delay or they cancel it, they love their games just as much if not more than the fans.

[didymos1120]

incinerator950 wrote...
I can't comment on cut content, they've had the game finished for half a year now. 

Um, no they haven't.  They only recently finished VO recording.  Then that all had to be added into the actual game.  And that's just one example.

[WizenSlinky0]

G3rman wrote...

Why should they have to?  What company does that?

Its something you should just accept, Developers don't release games they aren't satisfied with 99% of the time.  They either delay or they cancel it, they love their games just as much if not more than the fans.

Haha. Dietz was satisfied with his book too.

[Iakus]

WizenSlinky0 wrote...

Really? If they came out and said it, I'd start doubting them instead.

Weird.

They don't outright lie.  Bioware's  very careful about that.  Doublespeak, deflection, nonanswers, sure tehy've used that stuff in the past.  But if they outright say something's true, they mean it.

[ArkkAngel007]

Incinerator, f you had followed dev commentary in the past 6 months, you'd realize how false that statement is.

The narrative will be just fine, the reasons of which I and Cheez have already gone over regarding cut content.

Modifié par ArkkAngel007, 06 février 2012 - 02:48 .

[mkk316]

Because there's nothing about it that is really that extensive. It's maybe a handful of levels with increasingly difficult enemies coming at you. There's no team deathmatch, capture the flag, matchmaking or any of that jazz. Just coop. All the powers at the player's command is already in singleplayer.

Modifié par mkk316, 06 février 2012 - 02:49 .

[WizenSlinky0]

iakus wrote...

WizenSlinky0 wrote...

Really? If they came out and said it, I'd start doubting them instead.

Weird.

They don't outright lie.  Bioware's  very careful about that.  Doublespeak, deflection, nonanswers, sure tehy've used that stuff in the past.  But if they outright say something's true, they mean it.

That's like saying your friend doesn't outright steal from you, he just borrows your credit cards.

I still love Bioware and all, but really, they're still a business. And businesses have to make sales.

[Iakus]

G3rman wrote...

Why should they have to?  What company does that?

Its something you should just accept, Developers don't release games they aren't satisfied with 99% of the time.  They either delay or they cancel it, they love their games just as much if not more than the fans.

Because MP has proven to be a very controversial choice and a lot of people aren't sold on the idea.  And they seem to listen to their fans.  

[G3rman]

WizenSlinky0 wrote...

Haha. Dietz was satisfied with his book too.

Was he?  Then that is what matters, everyone has a fluke when others actually read it.

But writing a book and making a game are similar but still different beasts so I wouldn't say that's a good comparison.  Unless you are implying BioWare makes sh*tty games.

@iakus

It was controversial to some at first, but now its quite accepted.  You are in the minority, BioWare has already stated their reasons for adding it and aren't backing down on its existence nor saying their quality has gone down.  They have no reason to address something that has already been addressed, whether they used the words you were looking for doesn't matter.

Modifié par G3rman, 06 février 2012 - 02:52 .

[incinerator950]

Edit: Waste of a conversation.

Modifié par incinerator950, 06 février 2012 - 02:52 .

[AdmiralCheez]

iakus wrote...

Believe me, I have other concerns with ME3 that I'm not blaming on multiplayer.  Otherwise I would have mentioned them on this thread before now.

And again, the concern isn't so much length of the game.  If it's as long as ME2, I will be content.  The concern is the narrative will be damaged due to stuff getting cut to make room for MP.  Sure narrativescan get bogged down due to bad pacing.  But they can also be dragged down by disjointed storylines because stuff ends up on the cutting room floor..  

If my expectations were higher, I wouldn't be here.

Look.  Bioware prides itself on telling good stories.  They're not gonna cut the meaty parts.  Sidequests?  Sure.  Dialogue?  With little more than a regretful sigh.  Levels?  Yeah, definitely (lol lol DA2).  But the narrative?  No, that will always be intact.  Even if it's modular and character-centric (ME2) or cliché and hokey (ME1), it will at least be whole.  The fact that they chose to work on it for a few more months instead of chucking it out the door a la DA2, the fact that the writers are so excited and passionate about their work, the fact that the actors were crying in the booth and so and so on should be enough proof that, yeah, they care about delivering here.

Plus, you know, I read the script.  Even in its incomplete state, it looked like one helluva game.  And there were entire levels missing from that damn thing.