2915 réponses à ce sujet

[Terror_K]

Filament wrote...

...So when does Shepard break away from Cerberus and the ME2 crew in those six months? Does he just sit on his hands in a cell the whole time as the reapers get ready to attack?

Actually, I believe Overlord, LotSB and Arrival are technically meant to be set after the ending of ME2, even though you can play them during it. Those events are canonically supposed to take place during those few months and bridge the gap somewhat.

[CDRSkyShepard]

ElitePinecone wrote...

izmirtheastarach wrote...

Anderson actually says "if you were any other soldier you would have been court-martialed'. This sort of sounds like there was never any trial at all.

Also this.

He makes it sound like his influence and the threat of the Reapers convinced the Admiralty to not hold a trial at all.

It would've been fascinating if the game used that as a springboard to explore the galactic reaction to Shepard being let off after killing 300,000 batarians. 

Or maybe some insight into the internal debate - we've seen precious little of the Alliance's commanders. Did some members of the Alliance brass want to make Shepard a scapegoat? Did some hate Cerberus enough to refuse to help the Commander? Did some feel the Reaper threat was too serious, and they couldn't afford to throw Shepard in jail?

It'd be a great way to show the compromises war forces on people and the limits of, say, ideas of international justice. 

None of that can be explored, because there wasn't a trial. 

Bold: I thought the same exact thing.

Everything else: I love all those ideas, Elite. Though I don't think we wanted to see all of that necessarily in-game...having people like Anderson and Shepard talk about it, though, would have been nice.

Again, I think this would have been fixed with a few lines of dialogue accounting for the past six months. I would have been perfectly happy with that. But no, we just got some rather vague allusions to past events. I guess with the range of choice in the game, it has to be at least a little vague, but I want to know what's been happening to Shepard since he/she arrived on Earth and the events leading up to being relieved of duty. I want to know what happened to my crew once I turned the Normandy over. Did they disperse or did the Alliance hold them for some reason? Anything to address any of that would've made me 10 times happier.

[Maj.Pain007]

Someone said it perfect in this thread that they felt like a bait and switch. Why advertise that there would be this trial in the beginning of ME 3. At the very least I feel like they misled their fans on what Arrival really was. Just shady marketing.

I'm hoping there is something that explains the gap. All the sudden there is a new character Vega, and people seem to believe Reapers. Like what the...

Modifié par Maj.Pain007, 13 février 2012 - 07:19 .

[CDRSkyShepard]

Terror_K wrote...

Filament wrote...

...So when does Shepard break away from Cerberus and the ME2 crew in those six months? Does he just sit on his hands in a cell the whole time as the reapers get ready to attack?

Actually, I believe Overlord, LotSB and Arrival are technically meant to be set after the ending of ME2, even though you can play them during it. Those events are canonically supposed to take place during those few months and bridge the gap somewhat.

Not Overlord. That's a Cerberus project. It wouldn't make any sense to go help Cerberus out with Project Overlord if you gave TIM the finger after the SM. Same with LotSB, because Cerberus gave you the intel...but not to the same extent.

[Gemini1179]

incinerator950 wrote...

This is why the Bioware community needs to learn what canon decision process actually means.  Shepard canonically surrenders himself.  Just like the Star Forge was destroyed even if you saved it, just like the Emperor stops Horus after being mortally wounded by watching <insert peon> get obliterated. 

Your Shepard is different because you were given limited freedom to choose outcomes, not everything is given to you, at some point something has to happen outside of your control.  If you can't deal with it, find another game.

Oh no, I get what canon decision process means. I'm not going to argue this. I'm saying it basically invalidates several play styles leading into it. It's a bad story decision.

They could have started the game out with Shepard A) coming to Earth to give him/herself up. B)attempting to covertly recover some data or tech and is betrayed by TIM and captured by the Alliance. C) coming to Earth as a Spectre to rally the Alliance's defenses and is again captured by the Alliance.

Then I would have no problem with the idea of a trial. They could have done a slick opening, have Shepard now on Earth and then skip 6 months ahead. But they didn't and instead I, as a player of the previous two games, end up feeling cheated, railroaded and generally disrespected for my previous decision making.

Anyway, what's done is done. No sense worrying about it any more. I will post a review being as constructive as I can about what I liked and didn't like about ME3 after it comes out.

[Revan312]

Terror_K wrote...

Filament wrote...

...So when does Shepard break away from Cerberus and the ME2 crew in those six months? Does he just sit on his hands in a cell the whole time as the reapers get ready to attack?

Actually, I believe Overlord, LotSB and Arrival are technically meant to be set after the ending of ME2, even though you can play them during it. Those events are canonically supposed to take place during those few months and bridge the gap somewhat.

I know I had Kelly dance a few times in my cabin, but months worth between missions.. I don't seem to remember it being that many times  

[Terror_K]

Halo Quea wrote...

No, don't set yourself up for that disappointment.   The trial won't be in the full game, Bioware wouldn't have needed to keep THAT part of the game a secret.  It was one of the first things we learned about ME3.  It was talked about as if it were an integral part of the beginning of ME3.

Now we understand that is no longer the case. 

I'm even sure I remember at least one dev making some comment about you being able to make some dialogue choices during the inquiry about your actions that would impact upon how it generally progressed, despite the fact that The Reapers end up attacking and it doesn't matter in the end. I can't remember who or where, but I'm damn sure I recall a comment to that effect.

[Xarathox]

CDRSkyShepard wrote...

Hunter of Legends wrote...

It's explained Anderson and Hackett take bullets for you.

So again not bad writing. It's been set up why Shepard isn't executed at this point.

No no no no...never is it EVER explicitly stated either of them have taken bullets for you. Anderson says it's because of your past actions saving the galaxy and his good word. I don't even think there's a blurb in there abou Hackett's support for you at all. And even then, it's just a good word being put in for you, not anyone taking falls.

Also, Anderson said, "tried, court-martialled, and discharged." I have no idea where you got executions from.

I'm a bit slow tonight...so forgive me if I'm missing something. It just sunk in what Anderson said to Shepard. "Any other soldier would've been tried, court-martialed and discharged". Discharged? for nuking 300k batarians? Whoo the Alliance is lenient on mass murder.

[Comsky159]

Since the beginning of the series we've never had questions about Shepard which he wouldn't have himself. It's been a symbiosis of player and main character. Never before have we needed to ask where he is, what he's doing there or who and why this "buddy" of his is present. It's always been proximate and consistent role-playing until now suddenly, there's this significant gap in time in which many obscure and unclarified events have occurred around him/her without player knowledge. Player and character are suddenly divided and (excuse the dramatic term) betrayed. The player, if only for a moment, is rendered helpless for the first time. For me that's why the opening feels so very disjointed. I was doubtful that this character bearing Shepard's name is the same one I had honed intensely for over 100 hours of prior play.

Not a game-breaking hitch but a slap in the face for the serious, immersed role-player. For those who play more abstractedly (or are new to the series) I empathise this wouldn't seem such an issue, but for the rest of us the line "That **** you done Shepard" isn't really satisfactory.

Modifié par Comsky159, 13 février 2012 - 07:22 .

[izmirtheastarach]

The difference between this and ME2 is that in ME2, missing out on two years worth of galactic events is okay, because the player-character is not present.

But here in ME3, my Shepard has been doing things for months that I have had no control over. It really breaks immersion. And now I get introduced to him again, and I have to try and piece together what happened in the interim. Seems like a very odd choice by Bioware, to create this disconnect right at the beginning of the game.

[HiroVoid]

Hopefully, one of the first convos will be this...
James: Shepard, I need to...
Shepard: That's commander.
James: But you said....
Shepard: Forget what I said. That was my evil twin.

[Kronner]

Hmm I was looking forward to the trial - a chance to defend my choices and enjoy some renegade interrupts. Well, I guess this gives me the incentive to start ME3 with a level 1 character at least once.
Odd choice by BioWare in any case.

[Terror_K]

izmirtheastarach wrote...

The difference between this and ME2 is that in ME2, missing out on two years worth of galactic events is okay, because the player-character is not present.

But here in ME3, my Shepard has been doing things for months that I have had no control over. It really breaks immersion. And now I get introduced to him again, and I have to try and piece together what happened in the interim. Seems like a very odd choice by Bioware, to create this disconnect right at the beginning of the game.

It's another classic side-effect of them both A) caring more about snagging potential new players from the CoD set than pleasing existing ones, and concentrating too much on making each part stand on its own instead of actually developing a properly trilogy that coherently fits together and truly depends on the prior titles.

Simply put: BioWare's pandering to the potential new fan has pretty much ruined this trilogy and IP as a whole.

Now the game isn't even out yet and I can already see where wasting time and resources on crap like multiplayer, Kinect support, babying the new players, etc. instead of developing a proper introduction. Instead we get an unsatisfying rush-job with almost no dialogue choices, no moments that really help define your Shepard beyond whichever Virmire Survivor shows up, no real connections to the prior games and clumsy pacing just so the action isn't too far off in case ADD-riddled shooter fanboys get antsy and throw the controller away in dusgust.

Modifié par Terror_K, 13 février 2012 - 07:29 .

[incinerator950]

Gemini1179 wrote...

incinerator950 wrote...

This is why the Bioware community needs to learn what canon decision process actually means.  Shepard canonically surrenders himself.  Just like the Star Forge was destroyed even if you saved it, just like the Emperor stops Horus after being mortally wounded by watching <insert peon> get obliterated. 

Your Shepard is different because you were given limited freedom to choose outcomes, not everything is given to you, at some point something has to happen outside of your control.  If you can't deal with it, find another game.

Oh no, I get what canon decision process means. I'm not going to argue this. I'm saying it basically invalidates several play styles leading into it. It's a bad story decision.

They could have started the game out with Shepard A) coming to Earth to give him/herself up. B)attempting to covertly recover some data or tech and is betrayed by TIM and captured by the Alliance. C) coming to Earth as a Spectre to rally the Alliance's defenses and is again captured by the Alliance.

Then I would have no problem with the idea of a trial. They could have done a slick opening, have Shepard now on Earth and then skip 6 months ahead. But they didn't and instead I, as a player of the previous two games, end up feeling cheated, railroaded and generally disrespected for my previous decision making.

Anyway, what's done is done. No sense worrying about it any more. I will post a review being as constructive as I can about what I liked and didn't like about ME3 after it comes out.

Thats the best we can all do.

[Gemini1179]

It is still confusing. Has Shepard been sitting on his/her ass for 6 months while the brass has been deliberating his/her fate? If the brass believes in the Reaper threat, was it like a day before the invasion? Or earlier? If it was earlier, why wouldn't they have the only asset at their disposal who has acutal experience in these things doing something about it? They can't have Shep put to work without the Batarians knowing? Even if the Batarians know, does the Alliance brass care if they believe in the Reaper threat?

*sigh*

I'm getting to old for this sh...

[vader da slayer]

Comsky159 wrote...

Since the beginning of the series we've never had questions about Shepard which he wouldn't have himself. It's been a symbiosis of player and main character. Never before have we needed to ask where he is, what he's doing there or who and why this "buddy" of his is present. It's always been proximate and consistent role-playing until now suddenly, there's this significant gap in time in which many obscure and unclarified events have occurred around him/her without player knowledge. Player and character are suddenly divided and (excuse the dramatic term) betrayed. The player, if only for a moment, is rendered helpless for the first time. For me that's why the opening feels so very disjointed. I was doubtful that this character bearing Shepard's name is the same one I had honed intensely for over 100 hours of prior play.

Not a game-breaking hitch but a slap in the face for the serious, immersed role-player. For those who play more abstractedly (or are new to the series) I empathise this wouldn't seem such an issue, but for the rest of us the line "That **** you done Shepard" isn't really satisfactory.

how are there questions? he turns himself in, Vega is assigned to gaurd him, he is convictd of w/e you get charged with when taking out an entire system and discharged and now the committee wants to speak to you.

I didn't find a single point in the intro where I had a question as to what happened between the end of arrival and begining of ME3.

[incinerator950]

Terror_K wrote...

izmirtheastarach wrote...

The difference between this and ME2 is that in ME2, missing out on two years worth of galactic events is okay, because the player-character is not present.

But here in ME3, my Shepard has been doing things for months that I have had no control over. It really breaks immersion. And now I get introduced to him again, and I have to try and piece together what happened in the interim. Seems like a very odd choice by Bioware, to create this disconnect right at the beginning of the game.

It's another classic side-effect of them both A) caring more about snagging potential new players from the CoD set than pleasing existing ones, and concentrating too much on making each part stand on its own instead of actually developing a properly trilogy that coherently fits together and truly depends on the prior titles.

Simply put: BioWare's pandering to the potential new fan has pretty much ruined this trilogy and IP as a whole.

You're not giving the newer players any credit.  Most of them either like ME for various reasons, or dislike it and ignore it.  

What you really want to say, is that it's no longer a niche market and now you feel neglected because of somewhat practical, or ironic business choices that are still working.

[Gemini1179]

izmirtheastarach wrote...

The difference between this and ME2 is that in ME2, missing out on two years worth of galactic events is okay, because the player-character is not present.

But here in ME3, my Shepard has been doing things for months that I have had no control over. It really breaks immersion. And now I get introduced to him again, and I have to try and piece together what happened in the interim. Seems like a very odd choice by Bioware, to create this disconnect right at the beginning of the game.

^This. Ok, I'm out. Need my sleep and gotta get my TOR toons out Scavening, Underworld Trading and Investigating.

PS- Elara Dorne's voice is hot. That VA could talk me into anything.

[ElitePinecone]

izmirtheastarach wrote...
But here in ME3, my Shepard has been doing things for months that I have had no control over. It really breaks immersion. And now I get introduced to him again, and I have to try and piece together what happened in the interim. Seems like a very odd choice by Bioware, to create this disconnect right at the beginning of the game.

A clean break was needed, narrative-wise, to set up for new players. I'm presuming.

As horribly uninspired as 'Earth invaded by evil aliens' is, it's a storyline that's easy to grasp even when people aren't familiar with Mass Effect. 

[Nashiktal]

Terror_K wrote...

izmirtheastarach wrote...

The difference between this and ME2 is that in ME2, missing out on two years worth of galactic events is okay, because the player-character is not present.

But here in ME3, my Shepard has been doing things for months that I have had no control over. It really breaks immersion. And now I get introduced to him again, and I have to try and piece together what happened in the interim. Seems like a very odd choice by Bioware, to create this disconnect right at the beginning of the game.

It's another classic side-effect of them both A) caring more about snagging potential new players from the CoD set than pleasing existing ones, and concentrating too much on making each part stand on its own instead of actually developing a properly trilogy that coherently fits together and truly depends on the prior titles.

Simply put: BioWare's pandering to the potential new fan has pretty much ruined this trilogy and IP as a whole.

If the demo really is the opening for ME3, then B doesn't make any sense to me. I barely understood what was going on, even as a veteran of the Mass Effect series. I know who vega is... Barely. I know anderson stepped down from the council... from the wiki. (I don't know how he kept his job after what he did though). I know who the VS is, but thats a bare bones intro.

That'sjust covering what I do know. I don't know anything about this defence council, I don't know why shep's been in that room for so long, I don't know... Well a lot. Its jarring, it feels rushed, and so far this is the worse opening for the Mass Effect series so far.

[b09boy]

vader da slayer wrote...

how are there questions? he turns himself in, Vega is assigned to gaurd him, he is convictd of w/e you get charged with when taking out an entire system and discharged and now the committee wants to speak to you.

And how do we know this info?  Because the devs have told us, or a comic or novel has.  It's not in the game's story.  If you haven't been keeping up with ALL of the side material including dev commentary then you are going to be lost.

[TheJiveDJ]

Chris Priestly wrote...

Gemini1179 wrote...

Then
you're the kind of customer EA wants. No sense bogging players down
with plot and character development when there are things to kill!

(Sorry I couldn't help it, I'm disappoineted at the opening- it's another bit of railroading and cut corners)

Ok, I know I'm a tool of the Man and all, but how so?

If
you are a new player (haven't played ME1 or ME2) you learn who Shepard
is, why he's on earth, what the Reaper threat is, and then the story
begins.

If you are a continuing player (have played either or
both of the previous games) you already know the plot and character
development because you helped form it with your previous play throughs
and the story picks up after ME2.

I'm sorry you're disappointed, but I'm not completely sure why?



[smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/devil.png[/smilie]

My. Priestly, to relieve some confusion may I suggest that you just come out and say that there is no actual trial? Or that the trial is actually just the intro comic for new players?  This is becoming a farce; a farce quite honestly that you started when you mentioned that there would be a trial in another topic.  If you weren't allowed to say anything specific about it, which obviously you weren't, than why did you?  Curious.

Might I also suggest not doing this in the future because, as you know, the BSN is a fickle place and members will hold you to your every word. Also, being coy and playing this off as if you dodging questions is somehow a figment of our imaginations is just childish and should be above a man in your position. To put it simply, I'm a little shocked at the lack of professionalism that goes on here sometimes, and I'm not only referring to you.  You may not care about this, and ultimately it's not that big of a deal to me either, but it is to some people.  You're the community coordinator...so coordinate.  Just my two cents.

Edit: To avoid any unforseen selective amnesia, I'll refer you to the post I'm talking about:

http://social.biowar...index/9078802/1

Modifié par TheJiveDJ, 13 février 2012 - 07:46 .

[Mr. Gogeta34]

To be fair... Arrival didn't really have any choices to have consequences for...

[incinerator950]

Nashiktal wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

izmirtheastarach wrote...

The difference between this and ME2 is that in ME2, missing out on two years worth of galactic events is okay, because the player-character is not present.

But here in ME3, my Shepard has been doing things for months that I have had no control over. It really breaks immersion. And now I get introduced to him again, and I have to try and piece together what happened in the interim. Seems like a very odd choice by Bioware, to create this disconnect right at the beginning of the game.

It's another classic side-effect of them both A) caring more about snagging potential new players from the CoD set than pleasing existing ones, and concentrating too much on making each part stand on its own instead of actually developing a properly trilogy that coherently fits together and truly depends on the prior titles.

Simply put: BioWare's pandering to the potential new fan has pretty much ruined this trilogy and IP as a whole.

If the demo really is the opening for ME3, then B doesn't make any sense to me. I barely understood what was going on, even as a veteran of the Mass Effect series. I know who vega is... Barely. I know anderson stepped down from the council... from the wiki. (I don't know how he kept his job after what he did though). I know who the VS is, but thats a bare bones intro.

That'sjust covering what I do know. I don't know anything about this defence council, I don't know why shep's been in that room for so long, I don't know... Well a lot. Its jarring, it feels rushed, and so far this is the worse opening for the Mass Effect series so far.

I find the other two intros to be good in their own ways, ME 1 for getting the Relay music stuck in my head, and ME 2 for hearing Titanic miniature piano sequence when Shepard dies and somehow didn't disintigrate into Planetfall. 

Personally, I understand everything that has happened, I also accept a few reasons why they did it, and I like it.  This may be because I have a different immersion into RPGs then most players, or maybe because I'm more open about accepting things and not demanding the slightest amount of nit-picking.  I have my moments though.