2915 réponses à ce sujet

[TheRevanchist]

Clearly Bioware is off to a good start following the above plan...

[Squallypo]

kylecouch wrote...



Clearly Bioware is off to a good start following the above plan...

thats just fantastic let me applaud you for this masterpiece (not being sarcastic at all) 

[Wulfram]

Terror_K wrote...

In ME3 there's almost nothing to connect to the previous game directly. You get greeted by a new guy who treats you like a best friend, meet an Admiral that's likely a Councilor in your game with no explanations for his role, then rush past the VS just so The Reapers can attack. There's no indication as to the state of your crew, almost no way to express yourself, no moments that really reflect on Shepard's past deeds, and the events of Arrival seem insignificant just so you can get to the Reaper 'sploshuns!

We haven't seen how the intro is affected if you import, have we?

Modifié par Wulfram, 14 février 2012 - 12:48 .

[Spartan901]

There are an awful lot of conclusions being drawn from a demo from people who honestly have no idea what the final product will hold. There are many different methods to story telling. People are assuming the opening level of the demo plays out in its entirety, verbatim as it will the retail copy. Has anyone from Bioware confirmed this?

And let's say hypothetically that it does play out exactly the same in the final game? We don't see what happens after Shepard leaves aboard the Normandy. As it stands in the demo, sure there is plenty of info left out. But Bioware did mention they were making a concerted effort to bring new comers up to speed who are jumping in ME 3. So how do we know that periods in the game don't contain flashbacks for example, filling in the gaps between ME2 and ME3 and catching players up that missed Arrival. No where is it written that a story has to be told in chronological order. Ever played Uncharted 2? The game begins in a very "WTF" moment, and as the game progresses you learn how you arrived at that point. I'm not saying this is what Bioware is doing for sure with ME3. I'm saying that before you jump to conclusions, play the FINAL game, see if your questions and concerns are answered after making an INFORMED evaluation, and if not.....THEN go grab your "Bioware sucks....pacing....story...multiplayer....Ashley's hair down....rabble rabble rabble" pitchforks all you want. Until then, you're just assuming. And remember what mamma told about assuming.....

[Errationatus]

Geraro wrote...

What I am really not looking forward to is the enormous number of Quarians I'll undoubtably come across in multiplayer that hail from the "Deferens". <_<

 

I think you will find a great many folks concurring with you on that.  Let's not forget the fifteen Turian snipers named "Tarris", "Garrias", "Larris", etc, etc...  Salarian Vanguard Engineer Adepts.  That's what I want.  Accept no less, kids.

 
I have to agree with many of your concerns and, while I am not against improving the shooter aspects over what we saw in ME2 (and from the demo I feel pretty sure that BW have achieved that), the lack of dev talk regarding the RPG elements is concerning.

 

I'm not concerned about the FPS aspects of the game - I play and have played tons of FPS' and enjoy them immensely.  If they want to make it a straight-up shooter with a deep and involving story, they can have my money and some extra besides.  IF they decide to gut the story to specifically cater to the COD MP crowd, they will deserve every last ounce of derision they'll justly recieve.

 
Despite some valid points raised by other people in this thread who feel that the snappy intro sequence we saw in the demo is better than the somewhat overwrought introductions in ME1 and ME2, I think the remainder who were really looking forward to the exposition of a Shep trial are justified to be concerned that the RPG elements are being overshadowed by the shooter elements in the remainder of the game.

 

Don't forget that demos are not the game, and by that I mean they're condensed versions meant to give you a taste, not a full dinner, if you follow me.  Stuff will be cut, compressed or swapped about.  They all work that way, more or less.  As I said in a previous post, too much exposition and people stop listening to what's being said, or they get insulted because they start to think the writers think they're stupid.  It's a fine line to walk.  Like a guy once said, "if you take twenty lines to say something that could have been said in two - say it in two."

 
Apparently there is further background and story filler after the initial sequence which may address the RPG-lite concerns but we (at least most of us) will have to wait until March to find out if the finale matches our ridiculously high expectations or ends up being a disappointment.

Again, I don't care if they snip RPG elements here and there.  Give me a full shooter with an involved story.  I'd love that. That's cool.  Blend them. Also cool.  The point is, if I want to play Modern Warfare, I'll play Modern Warfare.  I want Mass Effect.  I want the story and I want the characters I've come to like and I want them deep and worth my time and hundred bucks.  That's what it boils down to - and all it should boil down to, IMO.

Stoopid havingtowait'n'see.  <_<

[Iakus]

[quote]Il Divo wrote...

[quote]iakus wrote...

The Exile's an original character, but not in an original setting.  It's Star Wars, during and after the Mandalorian Wars.  Canderous even talks about the battle at Malachor V.  All KOTOR 2 did was expand on it and put the Exile into a prominent role. [/quote]

But that's not really relevant. The point would work if we had control of the Exile in KotOR 1. Much like the ME1 to ME2 transition, KotOR 2 could have been about anything in the world, since KotOR 1 had closed all the plot threads. 

KotOR 2 was also a far more character-focused story than ME3. The culmination of KotOR 2 was centered around the Exile, his/her existence as a wound in the force, and efforts in the Mandalorian Wars. While Shepard is a key character, once the actual Reaper invasion takes off, it's far from clear if we'll have even remotely the same opportunity for that kind of exposition. The climax of KotOR 2 involving Kreia and Malachor V depends on your character's backstory. It's far more character-driven than Mass Effect, to the point where the comparison doesn't hold too well. [/quote]

And here's the crux of it.  We don't know.  We have no idea how much exposition Shepard will be given about events in the first two games.  I do know that Shepard being a "brick" was a big complaint about the second game, and there were statements that this will be addressed.  Maybe this will happen.  Maybe not.  

But would you agree with me if I said that if Shepard did get the degree of exposition the Exile had throughout KOTOR2, it would be worth, or at least make up for, not having a trial at the beginning?

[quote]
The repercussions of Shepard's actions should be like dialogue to me.  I wouldn't want it all in one rush then forgotten about.  Like Shepard's ressurection.  I want it spread across the whole game.  If SHepard has to deal with that on and off throughout the game, I'll forgive the lack of trial. [/quote]

This still presumes that it's going to have the same degree of importance later on, which we really don't know. Again, given how ME3 is going to be more about stopping the Reaper invasion once its underway, I'm inclined to say we're not going to deal with it later on. [/quote]

And I say that if said repercussions  aren't dealt with then the entire point of making a trilogy has been completely missed by the developers.  But that's a more wide-scale problem than we're dealing with here...


ME1 gave a hearing for Saren and afterwards you had the opportunity to discuss your perceptions with your party members. This worked far better than if the player had simply been made aware of the trial in the aftermath. This is even more critical in ME3, where Shepard being on trial for his actions, is a culmination of everything the player has done in the last two games. No one believed him about the Reapers in ME1. No one wanted to deal with him regarding the Collectors in ME2. ME3 was a great opportunity to force every major political figure to look Shepard in the eye and confront him. [/quote]

Keep in mind I haven't played the demo myself, but from what I've seen and heard, Anderson's last order to Shepard is to go to the other races and "Make them see the danger" or something like that.

[Iakus]

JakeMacDon wrote...

Don't forget that demos are not the game, and by that I mean they're condensed versions meant to give you a taste, not a full dinner, if you follow me.  Stuff will be cut, compressed or swapped about.  They all work that way, more or less.  As I said in a previous post, too much exposition and people stop listening to what's being said, or they get insulted because they start to think the writers think they're stupid.  It's a fine line to walk.  Like a guy once said, "if you take twenty lines to say something that could have been said in two - say it in two."

This is also true.  It may be that this intro isn't the complete intro, and some content was removed stuff has been taken out due to space, (hmm, where have I heard that before?  ) and the "real intro" will be more in-depth.

[RSX Titan]

Spartan901 wrote...

There are an awful lot of conclusions being drawn from a demo from people who honestly have no idea what the final product will hold. There are many different methods to story telling. People are assuming the opening level of the demo plays out in its entirety, verbatim as it will the retail copy. Has anyone from Bioware confirmed this?

And let's say hypothetically that it does play out exactly the same in the final game? We don't see what happens after Shepard leaves aboard the Normandy. As it stands in the demo, sure there is plenty of info left out. But Bioware did mention they were making a concerted effort to bring new comers up to speed who are jumping in ME 3. So how do we know that periods in the game don't contain flashbacks for example, filling in the gaps between ME2 and ME3 and catching players up that missed Arrival. No where is it written that a story has to be told in chronological order. Ever played Uncharted 2? The game begins in a very "WTF" moment, and as the game progresses you learn how you arrived at that point. I'm not saying this is what Bioware is doing for sure with ME3. I'm saying that before you jump to conclusions, play the FINAL game, see if your questions and concerns are answered after making an INFORMED evaluation, and if not.....THEN go grab your "Bioware sucks....pacing....story...multiplayer....Ashley's hair down....rabble rabble rabble" pitchforks all you want. Until then, you're just assuming. And remember what mamma told about assuming.....

People said the same thing about the DA2 demo and then it turned out the game was as stripped down as it appeared.. Fans are nervous and rightfully so. 

[Knight of Bronze]

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?

[Tony_Knightcrawler]

If it's a trial, shouldn't we see witnesses giving statements, be asked hard questions about our actions, etc..? I know VS is there, but we don't see any of that and it seems more like they're giving their input about the unknown contacts (Reapers).

[izmirtheastarach]

Don't know how clearly people need to be told that the intro in the demo is that same one as is in the final game, before they will believe it.

[AlanC9]

What's the topic here? Are we talking about a trial, or about the actual ME3 start?

[izmirtheastarach]

AlanC9 wrote...

What's the topic here? Are we talking about a trial, or about the actual ME3 start?

The orignal topic was the trial, but when Chris popped in to tell us the demo intro is the final game's intro, things sort of widened to include that as well. 

[Il Divo]

iakus wrote...

And here's the crux of it.  We don't know.  We have no idea how much exposition Shepard will be given about events in the first two games.  I do know that Shepard being a "brick" was a big complaint about the second game, and there were statements that this will be addressed.  Maybe this will happen.  Maybe not.  

But would you agree with me if I said that if Shepard did get the degree of exposition the Exile had throughout KOTOR2, it would be worth, or at least make up for, not having a trial at the beginning?

Based on that conditional? It's difficult to say. Tentatively, I'd say yes, but that for ME3 to achieve that level of exposition would come at great expense at the series' focus.

Remember, KotOR 2's narrative was entirely character-driven. Pretty much every plot point that happens, from the beginning to the climax, including every character conversation with those on your ship,revolved around that this one event which your character had been a part of and its consequences.
 
I just don't see Bioware having the resources to accurately represent the trial in the aftermath in addition to exploring other topics, especially in comparison to witnessing the event itself, which has had build up since ME1 began culminating in Arrival.

Modifié par Il Divo, 14 février 2012 - 02:20 .

[AK47 Total WAR]

Terror_K wrote...

I'm gonna address this portion of your post as best as I can.  First, let's keep in mind that in the demo we're not playing as an imported Shep.  Dialogue could be very well be different for new Sheps and imports.

In ME3 there's almost nothing to connect to the previous game directly...

Again, this could very well be because we're not playing as imported Shep.  It'd be awkward for a new player to be told "You blew up a relay and killed three hundred thousand batarians!", don't ya think? (Note that Anderson actually mentioned this in the private beta, along with a few other events.)

You get greeted by a new guy who treats you like a best friend...

How does Vega treat Shep like a best friend?  By saluting him or shaking his hand?  I saw him as being respectful to Shepard, not acting like his best friend.

...meet an Admiral that's likely a Councilor in your game with no explanations for his role...

It could very well be explained in an imported file why Anderson isn't a councilor anymore.  Maybe in the beginning, maybe later.  We just don't know enough yet.

...then rush past the VS just so The Reapers can attack...

They "rush past the VS" because the committee wants to see Shep immediately.  Not really enough time to sit down and reminisce.

There's no indication as to the state of your crew...

Again, in an imported file, maybe you're told what happened to your crew in the intro, maybe not.  If not, then in due time.  Not everything has to be explained in the first 15 minutes of the game.  There is such a thing as too much exposition.

...almost no way to express yourself...

I assume you mean the use of auto-dialogue?  Which I actually agree is a disappointment.  But that's a different matter.

...no moments that really reflect on Shepard's past deeds...

Like I said earlier, maybe it's different for an imported file.  In the beta, Anderson does recap your past events along the way to the committee, albeit without going into too much detail, but he does do it.  This demo is being barebones for the sake of not confusing a new player.  A new player wouldn't know Shep's past deeds; there's no need to explain it.

...and the events of Arrival seem insignificant just so you can get to the Reaper 'sploshuns!

The events of Arrival become irrelevant once the Reapers arrive.

Modifié par AK47 Total WAR, 14 février 2012 - 02:21 .

[DJBare]

Chris Priestly wrote...

Mass Effect 3 starts (roughly) 6 months after the end of Mass Effect 2. It starts with the end of the trial of Commander Shepard during which the Reapers first arrive on earth. This is the bit that starts the game and the demo.

Just reposting for those coming in late.

[txgoldrush]

Wow, fan whining and stupidity has just gone into overdrive....

The intro was fine, and fans are not listening when Bioware says there will be more dialogue choices in the actual game.

When has there been a rule where A) The character has to be properly introduced the first time you see him or her or if the character knows, the player should know.

Wait there isn't........do Witcher 2 players complain about not really knowing Vernon or Ves in the first 5 minutes of the game? No. They are introduced now and fleshed out later. And it beats the amnesia stupidity of the first game. Same thing with Vega, the player may not know him but Shep does, which is fine, as long as they develop and establish him later. Hell, its BETTER they do it later, as you know, a sparring scene establishment can do more for the story than a forced establishment during a more urgent situation, like Shep going to the admirality board at the beginning.

The trial simply does not work, its a pacing killer, and thats probably why it was cut We already had a trial in the series, two actually, there doesn't need to be another one...

As for Bioware playing to the CoD crowd by getting to the "splosions", oh wait, unlike it most games, the games "splosions" have substance to them, like people dying, like the child in the beginning. Nevermind the fact that each "spolsion" in the opening means more lives lost. This is another idiot fanboy rant.

And really, you fans should learn to play by ITS RULES and not YOUR RULES. No wonder why people hate DAII's story, because they treat it like a traditional RPG story when its not. It CAN have the opening it did. Why? Because its a frame story..it wasn't Hawke's story, its Varric's version of Hawke's story. While there are problems with DAII's story, mostly in mage class and mage sided games, the story has far more substance and originality than the hiughly overrated and cliched DAO.

And really those pining for old Bioware, to hell with that old tired recycled formula of the same old plots and character cliches, and to hell with all those one dimensional personalities. Lets try new ways of storytelling and characterization and have more subtle three dimensional characters.

Modifié par txgoldrush, 14 février 2012 - 02:36 .

[Terror_K]

Spartan901 wrote...

There are an awful lot of conclusions being drawn from a demo from people who honestly have no idea what the final product will hold. There are many different methods to story telling. People are assuming the opening level of the demo plays out in its entirety, verbatim as it will the retail copy. Has anyone from Bioware confirmed this?

Chris has commented that this pretty much is the entire intro of the game, adn that there's no actual trial material at all. We know there might be some slight variation on one line for Arrival players who have imported, where Anderson mentions the incident instead of the more generic comment of "the s#1t you've done" from the demo, though this is still speculation based on the leaked footage from last year. That could be a nod to Arrival players, or BioWare may have simply changed the line for everybody so as not to confuse newbies or even non-Arrival players who would be like, "destroyed an entire batarian system with a mass relay? Huh?!"

The thing is, we have to be somewhat realistic as well. An introduction can't be too long, and even in its rushed state it's longer than either of ME1 or ME2's. ME1's ends as soon as they go through the relay, which is only about a minute and a half long. ME2's ends once Shepard is spaced. This one doesn't end until the Normandy leaves earth, putting it at more than double the length of ME2's which was already about twice as long as ME1's. I suppose one could have had the opening end with The Reaper's arrival instead of the flight from Earth, but I think the emotional level reached at the latter is actually far better.

Given this, realistically, we couldn't have had too much of a trial. Certainly not the whole thing. Personally, I think it would have been best if it had been more of a case of Anderson coming to get Shepard and basically saying, "the Alliance brass have reached a verdict," and then have Shepard taken to them to give some final closing statements on the matter, whereby the Admirals ask him/her a few final questions in order to both give the player some dialogue choices and reflect their Shepard better (again, a little akin to Miranda and Jacob grilling Shepard in the shuttle on the way to meet TIM). After four or five questions and answers, that's when somebody should rush in and tell them to turn on the vid-screen (which, I have to add, was a nice callback to the original footage of Sovereign on Eden Prime from ME1). Then it should have largely played out the same, except we have the Alliance officers only just then wetting their pants instead of the instant panicked state their in from the get-go.

This would have provided better pacing to the whole thing, allowed the player to define their Shepard through dialogue as well as acknowledge their Shepard's major actions from the past game (including Shepard being able to defend the events of Arrival, as well as why he/she teamed with Cerberus.) and give the Reaper invasion more impact. IMO of course.

[izmirtheastarach]

No one is saying that we needed a 15 minutes trial scene. Just a few dialogue choices of Shepard defending himself. The idea that they COULD NOT have fit this into their pacing is silly. Make is a fst paced sequence. It's not rocket science.

Any acknowledgement of the gravity of what Shepard did would be fine. As has been said multiple times, even if they had just called Shep into the court to pass sentence, and then been interrupted by the news that the Reapers were arriving, that would be enough. But instead, the only way I knew that Shepard was on earth to answer for his crimes is because I was told so by Bioware staff. Otherwise I'd just think he was there to share his info on the Reapers with the "defense committee" (whoever they are).

Modifié par izmirtheastarach, 14 février 2012 - 02:43 .

[Terror_K]

txgoldrush wrote...

As for Bioware playing to the CoD crowd by getting to the "splosions", oh wait, unlike it most games, the games "splosions" have substance to them, like people dying, like the child in the beginning. Nevermind the fact that each "spolsion" in the opening means more lives lost. This is another idiot fanboy rant.

There's a difference between "sploshuns!!1" and "explosions" though. Of course you're going to have explosions, action, gunfire, big battles, etc. in a game that's about invasion, war and massive sentient machines rampaging about the galaxy. That's inevitable. But it's how you go about it and its execution that makes the difference. In the case of this introduction, it's like they purposefully rushed through and glossed over events and factors that should have been given a bit more time and focus, just to make sure there was some action in case the ADD-riddled 13 year old MW3 junkie vibrated out of his cheeto-crumb encrusted chair because there's "too much talking and people aren't dying yet!!" The whole thing is paced horribly and seems to be designed in a fashion that does so just to get to the action, rather than a well structured and gradual build up to the main event. There's not enough time to build tension or grow to the climax... it's like instead of filling the jug with cold water and allowing it to properly boil like they should have, the jug is already filled with hot water and damn near ready to whistle from the start. It's like if Return of the Jedi started with Luke arriving at Jabba's palace, and just as he's about to enter Jabba's sail barge drives by with Han already on it and ready for the sarlacc.

[ArkkAngel007]

1. Everything shouldn't be spoon fed. Yes, the absence of hard explanations from the beginning is a bit jarring, but there's enough there to keep things going until you reach the Normandy.

2. I thought we agreed that there was no trial, that Shepard was immediately grounded to keep him from getting into further shenanigans to protect him from the Council (I added the last part).

It's a shame that we don't get a more seamless transition between ME2 and ME3 (sans Arrival), but it's not a huge loss.

[Dragoonlordz]

txgoldrush wrote...

Wow, fan whining and stupidity has just gone into overdrive....

The intro was fine, and fans are not listening when Bioware says there will be more dialogue choices in the actual game.

When has there been a rule where A) The character has to be properly introduced the first time you see him or her or if the character knows, the player should know.

1. Wait there isn't........do Witcher 2 players complain about not really knowing Vernon or Ves in the first 5 minutes of the game? No. They are introduced now and fleshed out later. And it beats the amnesia stupidity of the first game. Same thing with Vega, the player may not know him but Shep does, which is fine, as long as they develop and establish him later. Hell, its BETTER they do it later, as you know, a sparring scene establishment can do more for the story than a forced establishment during a more urgent situation, like Shep going to the admirality board at the beginning.

2. The trial simply does not work, its a pacing killer, and thats probably why it was cut We already had a trial in the series, two actually, there doesn't need to be another one...

3. As for Bioware playing to the CoD crowd by getting to the "splosions", oh wait, unlike it most games, the games "splosions" have substance to them, like people dying, like the child in the beginning. Nevermind the fact that each "spolsion" in the opening means more lives lost. This is another idiot fanboy rant.

4. And really, you fans should learn to play by ITS RULES and not YOUR RULES. No wonder why people hate DAII's story, because they treat it like a traditional RPG story when its not. It CAN have the opening it did. Why? Because its a frame story..it wasn't Hawke's story, its Varric's version of Hawke's story. While there are problems with DAII's story, mostly in mage class and mage sided games, the story has far more substance and originality than the hiughly overrated and cliched DAO.

5. And really those pining for old Bioware, to hell with that old tired recycled formula of the same old plots and character cliches, and to hell with all those one dimensional personalities. Lets try new ways of storytelling and characterization and have more subtle three dimensional characters.

1., Yes they did or have you got selective memory.

2. Yes it does, it adds to immersion, there was no need for reapers to attack right from the offset, there was no need for that level or urgency. An axtra 5 or 10 minute trial would not destroy immersion or pacing as the pacing would pick up when attack not when turn on your console or press start. It could of kicked off the reaper attack at end of trial after 5 minutes of "actual" dialogue choices and would not destroy pacing at all because they would not have launched their attack yet.

3. Crossing the line from RP to corridor shooter was what people hated to begin with, the demo does nothing to change this impression of "increase RPG elements" promised. As for the underlined bit you clearly have no grasp at what "fanboy" means and your ranting post about others who are making less ranting posts just makes you look like the silly one here. Others did not feel the need to insult others especially to the degree you feel you are entitled to.

4. DA2 story was very badly told and done and the method they used to relay it was also tacky. The story was one of the worst Bioware have ever done regarding how they expressed it. From missing years to bondage style gameplay where you may as well be watching a film because you have ****** all effect on everything around you.

5. That 'tired old formula' is what made Bioware a huge success and a world renowned RPG developer not the hash jobs they have done of late where players become guinea pigs for their badly executed gaming experiments.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 14 février 2012 - 03:07 .

[TMA LIVE]

I'd at least like a reference to it beyond "Yo, you did that! Like, that was bad!"

If you're going to give the bare minimum at least tell use, in game, Shepard is in the middle of the trial. Or hell, that trial was suppose to happen at some point. Or it already happened, and Batarians ended up getting a kick ass deal in order to spare Shepard and the Alliance from war. Especially since the Alliance wasn't willing to sacrifice Shepard because of his knowledge.

But so far, all we have is that one line.

Modifié par TMA LIVE, 14 février 2012 - 03:04 .

[Les_Carver]

izmirtheastarach wrote...

No one is saying that we needed a 15 minutes trial scene. Just a few dialogue choices of Shepard defending himself. The idea that they COULD NOT have fit this into their pacing is silly. Make is a fst paced sequence. It's not rocket science.

Any acknowledgement of the gravity of what Shepard did would be fine. As has been said multiple times, even if they had just called Shep into the court to pass sentence, and then been interrupted by the news that the Reapers were arriving, that would be enough. But instead, the only way I knew that Shepard was on earth to answer for his crimes is because I was told so by Bioware staff. Otherwise I'd just think he was there to share his info on the Reapers with the "defense committee" (whoever they are).

Completely agreed. To be fair, I don't think the intro in the demo isn't exactly bad, but the actual trial deal could've worked way better as the intro for ME3. That way you'd remember your actions by defending yourself and then the reapers arrive and ruin everything, but cleaning your name on the other hand, WHICH, would lead you te be reinstated and bla bla...

There could be some reasons as to why this idea got simplified to the demo sequence, but it sounds like a mistake to me.

[Dreadwing 67]

Terror, do you live to hate and rant?