2915 réponses à ce sujet

[Il Divo]

Thompson family wrote...

Re: OP

"Cmdr. Shepard, do you have anyone to testify in your defense?"

Reapers arrive.

"Yes sir."

And /thread, ladies and gentlemen. That would be absolutely hilarious.

[Icinix]

Alex Arterius wrote...

stpaul wrote...

Are we told what happened to the crew at the trial?

Well there is no trial :/

No mention of the crew at all in fact. It's as if they just disappeared...

Yep.

It seems that instead of immediately after ME2 you go to trial and ME3 starts - its now - 6 months later - BANG - Reapers.

I can understand for new players who wouldn't have those connections with characters, so they force the connection with Anderson, VS, Vega etc - but for existing players its very much a case of - "Well hang on a tic, whats been happening? - where is my bad arse crew? Anderson - why are you here and not on the council? Who is Vega - and why do I speak to him all buddy buddy? Hey - I killed 300,000 Batarians! I liked it! Don't you care??

[DJBare]

Thompson family wrote...

Re: OP

"Cmdr. Shepard, do you have anyone to testify in your defense?"

Reapers arrive.

"Yes sir."

Sweet!, now I just gotta wipe the coffee splatter off my monitor.

[Alex Arterius]

DJBare wrote...

Thompson family wrote...

Re: OP

"Cmdr. Shepard, do you have anyone to testify in your defense?"

Reapers arrive.

"Yes sir."

Sweet!, now I just gotta wipe the coffee splatter off my monitor.

And the first witness I call to the stand is Harbringer

Harbringer, do you here by swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truh?

Habringer: Ye boi!



That would be a great opening

[anlk92]

Icinix wrote...

Alex Arterius wrote...

stpaul wrote...

Are we told what happened to the crew at the trial?

Well there is no trial :/

No mention of the crew at all in fact. It's as if they just disappeared...

Yep.

It seems that instead of immediately after ME2 you go to trial and ME3 starts - its now - 6 months later - BANG - Reapers.

I can understand for new players who wouldn't have those connections with characters, so they force the connection with Anderson, VS, Vega etc - but for existing players its very much a case of - "Well hang on a tic, whats been happening? - where is my bad arse crew? Anderson - why are you here and not on the council? Who is Vega - and why do I speak to him all buddy buddy? Hey - I killed 300,000 Batarians! I liked it! Don't you care??

I'm fairly sure we'll get most of these cleared up once we're onboard the Normandy. Not everything has to be perfectly clear right off the beginning. But of course if Shepard acts like there's nothing weird about his whole crew being missing until we start meeting them in person, then we'd have a problem.

With that said I still can't understand why they cut out the trial. It was something most of us were looking forward to, it would be a great opportunity to recap the past events and justify our actions and for new players I'm sure it would save them a lot of confusion if done correctly.

Modifié par anlk92, 13 février 2012 - 02:02 .

[Iakus]

Il Divo wrote...

I'm more annoyed because it makes Arrival absolutely irrelevant. As a closer to ME2, the dlc already had some minor issues with Shepard being able to escape so easily, the relays suddenly being vulnerable to destruction, etc, but when I heard about the potential for a trial at the end, I at least saw what they were going for.

The intro seems to take all that and toss it out the window. I'm absolutely looking forward to the Reaper invasion. It's just that I think it should have had more time to establish the tone of the current situation. I was looking forward to defending myself against the Alliance similar to the Manaan trials in KotOR, the Saren trial in ME1, and the Tali trial in ME2.

Now you begin to understand how I felt about ME2'?  

[Icinix]

anlk92 wrote...

Icinix wrote...

Alex Arterius wrote...

stpaul wrote...

Are we told what happened to the crew at the trial?

Well there is no trial :/

No mention of the crew at all in fact. It's as if they just disappeared...

Yep.

It seems that instead of immediately after ME2 you go to trial and ME3 starts - its now - 6 months later - BANG - Reapers.

I can understand for new players who wouldn't have those connections with characters, so they force the connection with Anderson, VS, Vega etc - but for existing players its very much a case of - "Well hang on a tic, whats been happening? - where is my bad arse crew? Anderson - why are you here and not on the council? Who is Vega - and why do I speak to him all buddy buddy? Hey - I killed 300,000 Batarians! I liked it! Don't you care??

I'm fairly sure we'll get most of these cleared up once we're onboard the Normandy. Not everything has to be perfectly clear right off the beginning. But of course if Shepard acts like there's nothing weird about his whole crew being missing until we start meeting them in person, then we'd have a problem.

With that said I still can't understand why they cut out the trial. It was something most of us were looking forward to, it would be a great opportunity to recap the past events and justify our actions and for new players I'm sure it would save them a lot of confusion if done correctly.

For sure - the start just feels very - hollow and disconnected, and I think thats a missed opportunity for a recap, state of the universe etc.

Ultimately it won't be the lasting impression on the game - but it is a damn shame.

[Il Divo]

iakus wrote...

Now you begin to understand how I felt about ME2'?  

Haha, I always understood, I just disagree.

The primary distinction between the two (as I see it) was that ME1 didn't really establish anything about how ME2 was going to begin. We're given an off-hand comment about how Shepard is going to find a way to stop the Reapers. I finished ME1 and my final impression was "Okay, where is this going?" I finished ME2's Arrival and my final impression was "Okay, Shepard has to go back to Earth and answer for his actions (blowing up a relay, Cerberus, etc)." At which point, we were also given a good amount of build up between Gameinformer and Bioware about said trial. It's the bait and switch, as others have said.

Modifié par Il Divo, 13 février 2012 - 02:17 .

[CaptainZaysh]

anlk92 wrote...

With that said I still can't understand why they cut out the trial. It was something most of us were looking forward to, it would be a great opportunity to recap the past events and justify our actions and for new players I'm sure it would save them a lot of confusion if done correctly.

Pacing.  The old players don't need a lengthy recap - we played the prequels, we know what happened - and the new guys don't need to be bothered with the back story now the Reapers are here.  So adding a trial scene would have just added a lot of unnecessary bloat to the top of the story.

It's already a seven minute cutscene before you get control of the character.  There is simply not enough time for these guys to be musing unnecessarily about past events.  

[Wulfram]

I don't want more cutscene, I want more dialogue.

What old players do need is an explanation for how they ended up in custody on Earth and what happened to all the guys they spent the last game collecting.

(And if they didn't play Arrival, what they're in custody for)

Modifié par Wulfram, 13 février 2012 - 02:29 .

[Lady Discordia]

Il Divo wrote...

Lady Discordia wrote...
Dunno about everyone else, but I found ME1 pretty self explanatory  And ME2 is easily understandable to people who know ME1, if you dont then I think you could be forgiven for being confused. I think the reason why i'm being so harsh with the ME3 opening is that this game keeps being said to be a great place to jump into the series. Based on the opening, I strongly disagree.

(But I disagreed anyway, why the heck would you play the third part of a trilogy before playing the first 2??)

I'm more annoyed because it makes Arrival absolutely irrelevant. As a closer to ME2, the dlc already had some minor issues with Shepard being able to escape so easily, the relays suddenly being vulnerable to destruction, etc, but when I heard about the potential for a trial at the end, I at least saw what they were going for.

The intro seems to take all that and toss it out the window. I'm absolutely looking forward to the Reaper invasion. It's just that I think it should have had more time to establish the tone of the current situation. I was looking forward to defending myself against the Alliance similar to the Manaan trials in KotOR, the Saren trial in ME1, and the Tali trial in ME2.

Oh, I definitely agree with that. I literally just finished replaying Arrival about 5 minutes ago, and I remember when I first plaeyd it I loved the idea of Shepard having to go to extreme lengths just to even give us a chance to survive the Reaper invasion. I really wanted to the to capitalise on that fact in the trial, and show us that actions, not matter how necessary, have consequences. But now it just seems like they cant be bothered with trying to implement the DLC into the grand scheme of the game. Shame, really, there was so much potential.

[Dreadwing 67]

As for not knowing where the crew is, Shepard has been in..... I don't know, he's being held for a trial for six months and I doubt everyone would have waited in the Normandy to wait for a conclusion. Shepard might have been in contact and didn't need to let the player know.

A trial can last very long, longer considering he killed all those Batarian's (I was hoping for a party actually). I think everyone was expecting to be in a hearing (as was I).

As for the opening being rushed and what ever blah everyone else was going on about, I'll speak for myself tomorrow.

[CaptainZaysh]

Wulfram wrote...

I don't want more cutscene, I want more dialogue.

What old players do need is an explanation for how they ended up in custody on Earth and what happened to all the guys they spent the last game collecting.

Dialogue would be the clumsiest way to explain this.  Shepard's been in this HQ for 2-6 months.  Whyever would he and Anderson start running through what happened to his old crew?

"Is that why they grounded me?  Took away my ship?"

The writers are presuming you're intelligent enough to fill in some of the blanks, and they don't need to patronise you with a big infodump.  "That reminds me, Shepard, I got an email from your old crewmate, Grunt.  He's having a nice time on Tuchanka.  Also Miranda wrote to me.  She's on Illium now.  Do you remember Mordin Solus..."  etc etc.

Wulfram wrote...
(And if they didn't play Arrival, what they're on trial for)

Here's the thing, it doesn't actually matter.  When the Reapers arrive the trial is invalidated anyway, so the writers were right not to dwell on it.

[Iakus]

Il Divo wrote...

iakus wrote...

Now you begin to understand how I felt about ME2'?  

Haha, I always understood, I just disagree.

The primary distinction between the two (as I see it) was that ME1 didn't really establish anything about how ME2 was going to begin. We're given an off-hand comment about how Shepard is going to find a way to stop the Reapers. I finished ME1 and my final impression was "Okay, where is this going?" I finished ME2's Arrival and my final impression was "Okay, Shepard has to go back to Earth and answer for his actions (blowing up a relay, Cerberus, etc)." At which point, we were also given a good amount of build up between Gameinformer and Bioware about said trial. It's the bait and switch, as others have said.

Eh, if push came to shove I'd rather that Shepard answered for Arrival offscreen (as long as he/she did in fact answer for it and it gets brought up)  Rather than advancing the timeline by, say killing Shepard off for a little while

That would really suck:D

[Arppis]

DJBare wrote...

Thompson family wrote...

Re: OP

"Cmdr. Shepard, do you have anyone to testify in your defense?"

Reapers arrive.

"Yes sir."

Sweet!, now I just gotta wipe the coffee splatter off my monitor.

Haha, that was pretty good.

[Wulfram]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

Dialogue would be the clumsiest way to explain this.  Shepard's been in this HQ for 2-6 months.  Whyever would he and Anderson start running through what happened to his old crew?

"Is that why they grounded me?  Took away my ship?"

The writers are presuming you're intelligent enough to fill in some of the blanks, and they don't need to patronise you with a big infodump.  "That reminds me, Shepard, I got an email from your old crewmate, Grunt.  He's having a nice time on Tuchanka.  Also Miranda wrote to me.  She's on Illium now.  Do you remember Mordin Solus..."  etc etc.

I'm not asking for a big infodump, I'm asking for explanations for

1.  Why's shepard there.  Was he arrested, did he turn himself in.
2.  What's the general status of the crew.  Are they in custody along with Shepard, were they released or had they already gone their seperate ways.

And more importantly, I'm asking for the opportunity to do a bit of character development.  How does Shepard feel about this - is he resentful or accepting?  Are they struggling with their own sense of remorse?  Has this effected their relationship with Anderson, or their attitude towards the alliance?

Here's the thing, it doesn't actually matter.  When the Reapers arrive the trial is invalidated anyway, so the writers were right not to dwell on it.

It matters, because it affects how Shepard feels about it.  It's very different to be treated this way for a solid reason - which killing hundreds of thosands of people is - or if it's unjustified.

[Dreadwing 67]

Wulfram wrote...

CaptainZaysh wrote...

Dialogue would be the clumsiest way to explain this.  Shepard's been in this HQ for 2-6 months.  Whyever would he and Anderson start running through what happened to his old crew?

"Is that why they grounded me?  Took away my ship?"

The writers are presuming you're intelligent enough to fill in some of the blanks, and they don't need to patronise you with a big infodump.  "That reminds me, Shepard, I got an email from your old crewmate, Grunt.  He's having a nice time on Tuchanka.  Also Miranda wrote to me.  She's on Illium now.  Do you remember Mordin Solus..."  etc etc.

I'm not asking for a big infodump, I'm asking for explanations for

1.  Why's shepard there.  Was he arrested, did he turn himself in.
2.  What's the general status of the crew.  Are they in custody along with Shepard, were they released or had they already gone their seperate ways.

And more importantly, I'm asking for the opportunity to do a bit of character development.  How does Shepard feel about this - is he resentful or accepting?  Are they struggling with their own sense of remorse?  Has this effected their relationship with Anderson, or their attitude towards the alliance?

Here's the thing, it doesn't actually matter.  When the Reapers arrive the trial is invalidated anyway, so the writers were right not to dwell on it.

It matters, because it affects how Shepard feels about it.  It's very different to be treated this way for a solid reason - which killing hundreds of thosands of people is - or if it's unjustified.

We will have a whole game to find out about it though, or we won't. I think Shepard would say the sacrifice was one of many he will have to make. I would imagine that we will find his feeling on many more descions coming up. And Reapers invading does put Shepards actions to shame.

[somecthemes]

Okay, here's why I'm thrilled the trial is off, this is the final game and I don't want to spend the first ten to fifteen minutes explaining the reality of Reapers when such becomes obvious as they crash through the ceiling. Hopefully, they'll end up nullifying the threat by saying at the beginning that the holding of Shep was just a diplomatic prevention of the Battarians taking Shep themselves, while once we meet the council and have our "haha, you were wrong" moment, they'll exonorate him then for his previous actions.

[Immortanius]

I'm still skeptical about the intro in the demo. Sure, Priestly has stated that it's taken from the main game and such...But he's also been wrong before. It's the same with other "officials" who have posted here on the forums. But we'll all know for sure on March 6th.

[Almostfaceman]

So I don't agree with the complaints. I don't have to be shown that the Alliance brass doesn't believe me about the Reapers - I already know this from the previous two games. I don't have to be shown being called in by the Alliance, since I've been told in Arrival it's going to happen. I see the results of my return to earth, I've been suspended. I see it's taken some time since I've been there long enough to get to know a soldier there. I get to see how they've been treating me because my bad attitude is on display when they call me in about the "sudden problem" at their doorstep. I get to skip over excessive pace-slowing dialogue (like I had in ME2's start). Then I get to look forward to more details being revealed as I play the rest of the story. It's the best opening in the ME franchise in my humble opinion.

[FGRaptor]

I know it's pretty much certain now that the intro in the demo is the final one, but I noticed one thing while playing through it again. In ME1 during character creation Shepard wears the N7 armor that you wear when you start the game. In ME2 you wear the Cerberus uniform during creation, which you then wear at first. In the ME3 demo you wear the N7 armor during creation, but you start in your uniform.

[Wulfram]

Almostfaceman wrote...

I don't have to be shown that the Alliance brass doesn't believe me about the Reapers - I already know this from the previous two games.

Well, apparently the intro isn't doing a very good job, since you missed that it makes it clear that they do believe Shepard about the reapers.

Modifié par Wulfram, 13 février 2012 - 03:07 .

[realguile]

Wulfram wrote...

Almostfaceman wrote...

I don't have to be shown that the Alliance brass doesn't believe me about the Reapers - I already know this from the previous two games.

Well, apparently the intro isn't doing a very good job, since you missed that it makes it clear that they do believe Shepard about the reapers.

Not enough to prepare properly and let shepard lead them.

[Squallypo]

so in resume, what can we somewhat expect from the *full game* ?

[Almostfaceman]

Wulfram wrote...

Almostfaceman wrote...

I don't have to be shown that the Alliance brass doesn't believe me about the Reapers - I already know this from the previous two games.

Well, apparently the intro isn't doing a very good job, since you missed that it makes it clear that they do believe Shepard about the reapers.

Nah, they're really hoping he's wrong. If they were 100% convinced they wouldn't have suspended him, and the Alliance would be evacuating Earth and the questions about how to stop them would have come much sooner. They're keeping him around just in case he's right.