2915 réponses à ce sujet

[JoePilot]

JakeMacDon wrote...

Once more:  DEMO.  DEMO.  DEM-OH. Compressed and heavily edited DEMO.  

If it were the case that the problems of the demo did not exist in the full game, Bioware would be screaming it from the rooftops to allay everyones fears.  Hell, there's been a dozen threads about this stuff here already, and not one peep.  Bioware's MO is to sound off whenever the fans are misinformed, and to shut up and play dumb whenever the fans are right, but there's nothing that can be done to change it.

Also, in those cases where gameplay changes from demo to full game, companies are smart enough to place a disclaimer in the demo stating as much.

You're being incredibly naive if you think anything is changing from this demo to the full release, except maybe one or two dialoge options.

[Errationatus]

Gabey5 wrote...

Not really. The brass does not know the specifics of the situation leading up to arrival. The trial would have given us a recap on events, eased us in. Secondly the admirals dying has little impact if we barely get to see them. If we got to know a few personally like in Tali's trial judges, even a few bits about their personailty before getting smacked in the face with "the reapers are here".  If we don't feel any connection with anyone,  there is no real sense of loss. The normandy getting blown up was more emotional than the attack on earth.

If we got like a few scenes to walk around, shepard going to a shooting range before the trial begins, a nice tutorial out of the way, then the attack

Once again:  DEMO.  Game will very likely be different despite all the doomsayers.  They are unhappy that they did not get a three hour demo precisely the way they wanted.  We must also therefore be disappointed.  

Kasumi's boyfriend, paraphrasing:  "If this gets out the Alliance could be implicated."  Implies they know stuff. 

The admirals dying has an impact:  it makes any trial irrelevant and that is why it was never included in the game.  The coincidence of the Reapers' extremely good timing is forced, yes, but that's the way it rolled.

I cannot imagine why people cannot accept these few simple facts.  

[Halo Quea]

I'll ask the question again. Why force Arrival on us if they never intended for there to ever be any consequences for it?

So Shepard just hangs around on Earth? He turns himself in because Hackett says so? Why couldn't Renegade Shep just stay with Cerberus? At LEAST Cerberus has a damned plan! LOL!!

The Committee sat around for six months doing what? And their only response is , "OMG!"

I don't know whether to laugh or fart over this nonsense.

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

JoePilot wrote...

JakeMacDon wrote...

Once more:  DEMO.  DEMO.  DEM-OH. Compressed and heavily edited DEMO.  

If it were the case that the problems of the demo did not exist in the full game, Bioware would be screaming it from the rooftops to allay everyones fears.  Hell, there's been a dozen threads about this stuff here already, and not one peep.  Bioware's MO is to sound off whenever the fans are misinformed, and to shut up and play dumb whenever the fans are right, but there's nothing that can be done to change it.

Also, in those cases where gameplay changes from demo to full game, companies are smart enough to place a disclaimer in the demo stating as much.

You're being incredibly naive if you think anything is changing from this demo to the full release, except maybe one or two dialoge options.

It seems There is lots of cut-scene and contents which are erased before developing begins and yet there is some issues remained. I declare This game as a 'RUSHED' one.

[Errationatus]

DJBare wrote...

And you know this how?

  

By all the implications given that this was where he was to get his sentence, as it were.  They changed the focus of the meeting once the Reapers started eating their way to Earth.  Inference.

  
I'm sorry, I did not see the body count or the listed dead, Anderson and Shepard got out, others got out, oh and lets not forget the records stored on datapads.

  

Still irrelevant.  The Earth and a great many other places will soon be in shambles.  Shepard's trial will be very, very low on the list of things to worry about when it's all over.  Or do you think once they win and rebuild, the very first thing the new government and Admirality will do is go, "Okay, now about Shepard going to jail..."  Please.

  
But you are right about one thing, all that is irrelevant to this discussion, this is about a scene that the press were informed was going to be the opening for the game, the "press" the folk that pass the news on to us, this is why I said earlier, the industry needs to learn to keep quiet until they have something solid.

Really?  Can you show me these press releases where it said explictly that Shepard would be in a full-on trial at the game's start?  I missed them.  Until I see those, I can't help but think folks be talkin' out dey buttholes.

Modifié par JakeMacDon, 15 février 2012 - 03:03 .

[Gabey5]

JakeMacDon wrote...

Gabey5 wrote...

Not really. The brass does not know the specifics of the situation leading up to arrival. The trial would have given us a recap on events, eased us in. Secondly the admirals dying has little impact if we barely get to see them. If we got to know a few personally like in Tali's trial judges, even a few bits about their personailty before getting smacked in the face with "the reapers are here".  If we don't feel any connection with anyone,  there is no real sense of loss. The normandy getting blown up was more emotional than the attack on earth.

If we got like a few scenes to walk around, shepard going to a shooting range before the trial begins, a nice tutorial out of the way, then the attack

Once again:  DEMO.  Game will very likely be different despite all the doomsayers.  They are unhappy that they did not get a three hour demo precisely the way they wanted.  We must also therefore be disappointed.  

Kasumi's boyfriend, paraphrasing:  "If this gets out the Alliance could be implicated."  Implies they know stuff. 

The admirals dying has an impact:  it makes any trial irrelevant and that is why it was never included in the game.  The coincidence of the Reapers' extremely good timing is forced, yes, but that's the way it rolled.

I cannot imagine why people cannot accept these few simple facts.  

Yes i know it is a demo but it has been confirmed their is no trial and the opening is what we get in the final.

That kasumi thing was vague and we don't know what exactly they know.

If they died it would notbe irrelevent because it is not about them. It is about shepard and starting the story out with some explanation of what has happened, shepard has not been in a coma, he was there on Earth, some supposition. Shepard should know what is going on and new players could use this as well

Again no tension, no build up, just BAM they are here.

This is a demo but it is also very telling about the opening story, gameplay and controls. Most of these problems will be in the full game, as they are built in and not easily changed.

Modifié par Gabey5, 15 février 2012 - 02:55 .

[Errationatus]

JoePilot wrote...

If it were the case that the problems of the demo did not exist in the full game, Bioware would be screaming it from the rooftops to allay everyones fears.  Hell, there's been a dozen threads about this stuff here already, and not one peep.  Bioware's MO is to sound off whenever the fans are misinformed, and to shut up and play dumb whenever the fans are right, but there's nothing that can be done to change it.

Also, in those cases where gameplay changes from demo to full game, companies are smart enough to place a disclaimer in the demo stating as much.

You're being incredibly naive if you think anything is changing from this demo to the full release, except maybe one or two dialoge options.

I never said it was definitely changing, just as it was as likely.  The devs silence is not a great mystery - it's sweeps month, it's the sell-it-to'em time.  Would you really wanna sieve through thread after thread of people whining about their own speculations over something already told to them by devs never happened in the first place - when it is quite clearly nonsense?

It's not naivete - it's simply that no one is listening because they're too busy complaining about what they thought they were entitled to and were never implicitly promised.  A couple of people ASSUMED there would be a trial and suddenly people flock demanding where the trial was - when there never was one.  

If anything, these threads are a beautiful illustration about how this kinda of crap starts and takes on a life of it's own - the "lie going around the room" syndrome.  The blind describing an elephant.  

BSN does this with exquisite alacrity on virtually any idiotic rumour.  It's amazing to behold.

Modifié par JakeMacDon, 15 février 2012 - 03:11 .

[Errationatus]

Gabey5 wrote...

Yes i know it is a demo but it has been confirmed their is no trial and the opening is what we get in the final.

  

That's been confirmed definitely?  100% unalterable fact?

  

That kasumi thing was vague and we don't know what exactly they know.

  

Being implicated implies they know enough to get them in deep deep doodoo.  Would certainly suggest itself to me.

  
If they died it would notbe irrelevent because it is not about them.

  

True.  It's about the decision they would have made concerning Shepard's fate.  Now that decision is irrelevant.  They are dead and the arrival of the Reapers renders everything about any trial or sentence done and void.

  
 It is about shepard and starting the story out with some explanation of what has happened, shepard has not been in a coma, he was there on Earth, some supposition. Shepard should know what is going on and new players could use this as well

  

As I said, it is unlikely Shepard spent those six months on Earth.

  
Again no tension, no build up, just BAM they are here.

This is a demo but it is also very telling about the opening story, gameplay and controls. Most of these problems will be in the full game, as they are built in and not easily changed.

  

That's not necessarily true either.  The demo was bootlegged (remember that?) how long ago, and just released officially now.  Things can change.  Unfortunately we cannot know anything for certain until March, so getting our hindends in a twist is an exercise in futility.

Some people kick the nest just to rile up the bees.

[RSX Titan]

JoePilot wrote...

PhantomSpectre wrote...

DJBare wrote...

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.



{smilie}

So, there won't be any kind of Trial scene in final game (not counting DLC possibilities, which are not that likely either).

Can't say I'm not disappointed about this as there were a lot of potential with this trial scene.

I just wonder, why exactly devs/writers decided to cut the Trial part from the game.

Because their metrics told them that they only had 15 minutes from the start of the game to the ACTION PEW PEW, or else gamers would get bored and quit.  I **** you not.  They had to cram as much 'story' as possible into those precious few moments, and the trial didn't make the cut.   Welcome to the state of the games industry.

Design by committee, turn out sh*tty.

Exactly. They learned with DA:O that most players didn't pop the achievement/Trophy  for finishing the Origin story which means they didn't play the game for very long. Also, just take a look at the overall shift in theme. ME1 starts out with discovering a threat to the known galaxy and the role of Humanity in the Galactic Community. ME2 focuses soley on Humanity's plight with the Collectors. ME3 is being marketed as the "Fight for humanity" and "take back the Earth". It's clear to me in which direction Bioware has taken the series and while I would prefer a different approach, If ME3 is polished I'll enjoy it. 

[YankeeBravo]

JakeMacDon wrote...

Okay, this is getting kinda ridiculous. I must have missed where BW said we would get a full or even partial trial for an opening.  

Anyone care to point where this was explicitly promised?  Cause it sounds like people are confusing their wants with reality, and they need facts or they need to STFU about something that never existed.  Without proof, y'all just look stupid.

Oh, and a point some folks don't seem to notice:  Shepard, when were first see him is in a DETENTION CENTRE.  Look here at and around 7:51.  He's not a civilian:  he's been in detention.  The quip about the meals and clean bed is meant as a joke.  I can't be the only one who reads the signage, can I?  

Folks just gotta calm dem ******.

Well...Blame Bioware and Chris Priestly. 

In many of their interviews/previews, Priestly's right there playing up how ME 3 starts out with Shepherd facing a court-martial/trial and how big a deal it was that he'd be answering for his actions over the course of the series.

With the way it's been handled, I think it's fairly obvious that they did actually have a trial of some sort in place until they got pissed over leaks and ripped it out clumsily. Either that or they decided relatively late that they needed to get to the explosions and shooting faster to satisfy the people who think ME 3 is supposed to be a TPS/GoW clone.

After all, yes, there's  'detention' stenciling on a wall that Shepherd passes by while talking with Anderson. However, the problem with that is Anderson explicitly says "the **** you pulled, anyone else would have been court-martialed and discharged" etc...

So....Just that opens up a lot of questions of what exactly happened during those six months if Shepherd hasn't been court-martialed and what exactly his status is in regard to the Alliance during that time period.

It's just either a case of really sloppy writing or problems caused by late development plot/structure changes that went uncorrected as of whatever build the demo is based on.


The bottom line is that Chris Priestly's assurance that it was there and further statement that the emergency defense meeting when Shepherd's summoned  is the "trial" are troubling when combined with the further "streamlining" Bioware's done to make the game accessible to new players to the series. Which in itself is insane as the end of a trilogy is NOT the place to trying to make it more accessible to newcomers unless the events of the previous two games are essentially meaningless.

I'll hang on to my pre-order and see the trilogy through, but the lack of dev accountability and openness on what to expect has me scared rather than excited as I was before this.

[TheRevanchist]

And aside from a few altered lines of dialogue and no armor or weapon changes...the DA2 demo was EXACTLY the same as the final product.

[Dragoonlordz]

JakeMacDon wrote...

-snip-

First off, your the one coming off in here as to quote you "whiny b!tchiness", "squealing" and "howl of outrage" it is all coming from you. The immaturity and ranting again is what "you" are doing, the childish hissy fit and throwing your toys out the pram once more "you".

Secondly you admit that as far as your concerned "That folks wanted one is completely understandable", then why are you throwing a hissy fit over that being exactly what is going on in this thread stating a disappointment that was not one and expressing a desire to have one even if (me personally) would be willing to buy DLC for it since cannot be added to the retail as already gone gold, or have you not actually bothered to even read it (this thread). Ignorance is bliss and you have overdosed on it. If need clarification and short summary of what it indeed is we are talking about here then read my review linked in my signature wich covers in general the principle of this thread regarding the trial aspect.

Lastly the whole "not needed" argument is childish, do not "need" to be on Earth at all, do not "need" to see the Reapers attack and in fact do not "need" to even play the game. Need has nothing to do with it in the slightest, it is about subjective preference, desire and what people would "like" and not "need". Learn the difference before you make a bigger fool of yourself.

There is a large consensus on these forums in both this thread and especially in the feedback thread Chris created that a vast amount of people felt the introduction was far, far too rushed and it needed 'something' to pad it out so would not feel so rushed. A trial would of achieved this and that is this threads preference to what a lot of people see as a problem. There may be other ways to pad it out to not feel so rushed but this is the route some of us would like to have used to fix that. Now as said it's gone gold so only hope they offer something in future (DLC is most likely) to extend, expand and improve the beginning of the game to remove that feeling of rushed that so very many people feel it was.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 15 février 2012 - 03:50 .

[RSX Titan]

kylecouch wrote...

And aside from a few altered lines of dialogue and no armor or weapon changes...the DA2 demo was EXACTLY the same as the final product.

This is why a lot of fans are nervous. DA2 was the most dissapointing game I've played in a long time. ME2 was much different than ME1 but it's still a great game. DA2 is just flat out terrible and is the only Bioware game I haven't played through more than once. As I said earlier, while I had hoped ME3 would start with a hearing of some sort, the demo did not leave me feeling a sense of dread like the DA2 one did. I'm confident ME3 will still be an awesome game even if its not what I had hoped it would be.

[Errationatus]

 Well, on further perusal of the demo, I was wrong.  

Shepard was saved only by his/her's knowledge of the Reapers, as said by Anderson himself.

There wasn't a trial because it was aborted by Shepard's knowledge and reports, apparently, and the undeniability of them.  When we come in, the Defence Committee is calling for Shepard to give them a sense of direction and it is pretty clear that they already accept the Reapers as a fact.

So, what I earlier speculated about, that they were judges and that it was sentencing end of the trial was wrong, and I apologize for further expanding on any misinformation.  

This does not however change my earlier assertion of the irrelevancy of a trial because, as it turns out, the folks in the game thought it was pretty irrelevant as well.  As to Shepard being in detention...?  Well, that could have simply been a holding area for the high profile types, as it is kinda cushy.

Again, apologies.
This is what happens when you don't pay as much attention as you should.  

[Gabey5]

Modifié par Gabey5, 15 février 2012 - 05:44 .

[Gabey5]

yeah chris confirmed it

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.

Modifié par Gabey5, 15 février 2012 - 03:41 .

[Errationatus]

YankeeBravo wrote...

 

SNIP
 
See my post below.

 
I'll hang on to my pre-order and see the trilogy through, but the lack of dev accountability and openness on what to expect has me scared rather than excited as I was before this.

Well, I am still leery of the game's story myself, but as I said in another thread, I'll get my money's worth out of this game one way or another.

[YankeeBravo]

kylecouch wrote...

And aside from a few altered lines of dialogue and no armor or weapon changes...the DA2 demo was EXACTLY the same as the final product.

And as I recall, isn't Jake's "you can infer what happened in that 6 months for yourself" more or less what Bioware's response was to people complaining about the jump in time in DA2 that was left unexplained?

Recent history repeating itself a bit here it's starting to kinda seem...

[Errationatus]

Dragoonlordz wrote...


First off, your the one coming off in here as to quote you "whiny b!tchiness", "squealing" and "howl of outrage" it is all coming from you. The immaturity and ranting again is what "you" are doing, the childish hissy fit and throwing your toys out the pram once more "you".

 

That's cute.  What you did here is called misdirection.  You turn it back on me as something I did, when I simply pointed out the general millieu of this thread.  This is an attempt to cheat on a discussion, and it's lame.  It's what you do when you can't actually refute anything - you make it personal, when it isn't.  Nice try, though.

 
Secondly you admit that as far as your concerned "That folks wanted one is completely understandable", then why are you throwing a hissy fit over that being exactly what is going on in this thread stating a disappointment that was not one and expressing a desire to have one even if (me personally) would be willing to buy DLC for it since cannot be added to the retail as already gone gold, or have you not actually bothered to even read it (this thread). Ignorance is bliss and you have overdosed on it.

 

Again, nice try in trying to obscure exactly what I said.  I've thrown no hissy fit and wanting a DLC of a trial is pointless. Why would they bother when it's already been dealt with in dialogue?  Either your ability to comprehend what you read is faulty or you are deliberately distorting what I said.  Again, this is a cheap ploy to obscure what I actually said and support your own baseless contentions.  You lose this way, before you even begin.  I'm jus' sayin.

 
Lastly the whole "not needed" argument is childish, do not "need" to be on Earth at all, do not "need" to see the Reapers attack and in fact do not "need" to even play the game. Need has nothing to do with it in the slightest, it is about subjective preference, desire and what people would "like" and not "need". Learn the difference before you make a bigger fool of yourself.

Again, you obviously did not read what I wrote previously or have subsequently posted.  The trial was not needed, not even in the game itself, so it remains irrelevant.  It would have been nothing more than filler, and I stand by that contention.  That you and others want it is irrelevant.  It's simply unnecessary, in my opinion, and it has never been anything but my opinion.  I admit when I'm wrong, so CTFO.

[YankeeBravo]

JakeMacDon wrote...

YankeeBravo wrote...

 

SNIP
 
See my post below.

 
I'll hang on to my pre-order and see the trilogy through, but the lack of dev accountability and openness on what to expect has me scared rather than excited as I was before this.

Well, I am still leery of the game's story myself, but as I said in another thread, I'll get my money's worth out of this game one way or another.

Yes, but my point with the trial/hearing thing isn't so much it not existing as having apparently been axed/modified so far into development that we're left with gaping holes and nonsensical comments.

You've gone with the 'well, Shepherd's knowledge aborted the trial, so...' line of thought, but the problem is that's not really stated anywhere and still doesn't entirely fit the situation at the start of the game.

Such a scenario could explain away Anderson commenting that anyone else would have been court-martialed and discharged, but...

We're still left with the problem that for some reason, Shepherd is no longer a part of the Alliance military, whether through being dismissed (though that would go against Anderson's comment) or through resigning, which wouldn't make much sense, or some bizarre unknown third option.

Like I said, it's the kind of basic structural problems that Bioware has NOT been known for. Certainly not something you'd expect from a company whose reputation has been built on the strength of their story-driven games, so...

I don't know.

[Errationatus]

YankeeBravo wrote...

kylecouch wrote...

And aside from a few altered lines of dialogue and no armor or weapon changes...the DA2 demo was EXACTLY the same as the final product.

And as I recall, isn't Jake's "you can infer what happened in that 6 months for yourself" more or less what Bioware's response was to people complaining about the jump in time in DA2 that was left unexplained?

Recent history repeating itself a bit here it's starting to kinda seem...

Yeah, unfortunately they do tend to rely on us to fill a lot of it in ourselves.  I'm not saying that's necessarily a bad thing once in a while, but when they substitute it for actual story, it gets problematic.

[Halo Quea]

JakeMacDon wrote...

 Well, on further perusal of the demo, I was wrong.  

Shepard was saved only by his/her's knowledge of the Reapers, as said by Anderson himself.

There wasn't a trial because it was aborted by Shepard's knowledge and reports, apparently, and the undeniability of them.  When we come in, the Defence Committee is calling for Shepard to give them a sense of direction and it is pretty clear that they already accept the Reapers as a fact.

So, what I earlier speculated about, that they were judges and that it was sentencing end of the trial was wrong, and I apologize for further expanding on any misinformation.  

This does not however change my earlier assertion of the irrelevancy of a trial because, as it turns out, the folks in the game thought it was pretty irrelevant as well.  As to Shepard being in detention...?  Well, that could have simply been a holding area for the high profile types, as it is kinda cushy.

Again, apologies.
This is what happens when you don't pay as much attention as you should.  

No this is what happens when you have lack of clarity and high expectations. This where WE ALL are right now because Bioware won't simply come in and explain themselves. 

So you have some expecting the full game to look, play and function alot like the demo.  You have others who think that the demo doesn't represent the game at all and that the full game is going to be a quantum improvement. lol!

If the trial is out, just tell us.  If there never was a trial intended, then set us straight.  Most of us in here are adults and can handle it.  Sure there will be some grumbling, the point is that the matter would be CLOSED.

I'm starting to get that Dragon Age 2 feeling right now.   Anyone remember the DA2 demo?  Remember how there were almost NO images of Kirkwall, the main environment we were playing in?   Has anyone even bothered to notice how few screenies we've had of ME3? No other locations or levels.  And almost NO gameplay?  And how little Bioware wants to show us of it's final chapter of this epic trilogy?    Are they truly protecting us from spoilers.................or the truth?

Now before anyone lights a match and throws gas at me, I'm just wondering that's all.    That's all

[Errationatus]

YankeeBravo wrote...

Yes, but my point with the trial/hearing thing isn't so much it not existing as having apparently been axed/modified so far into development that we're left with gaping holes and nonsensical comments.

 

In the demo, Yankee.  I've yet to see proof that anything made was cut at any point.  A script is not actual content.

 
You've gone with the 'well, Shepherd's knowledge aborted the trial, so...' line of thought, but the problem is that's not really stated anywhere and still doesn't entirely fit the situation at the start of the game.

 

It is vaguely implied by Anderson, but it could have been less terse, I agree.

 
Such a scenario could explain away Anderson commenting that anyone else would have been court-martialed and discharged, but...

We're still left with the problem that for some reason, Shepherd is no longer a part of the Alliance military, whether through being dismissed (though that would go against Anderson's comment) or through resigning, which wouldn't make much sense, or some bizarre unknown third option.

 

It could have been a bone to the batarians or to the media.  Speculation, of course.  The Detention Centre could have been for the same reason.  Looks good in print, as it were, cushy in actuality.

 
Like I said, it's the kind of basic structural problems that Bioware has NOT been known for. Certainly not something you'd expect from a company whose reputation has been built on the strength of their story-driven games, so...

I don't know.

Yah, tricky.  I'd like to go the benefit of doubt route here and wait for the full story in my hands.  I certainly see no reason to condemn the entire game from one quick crappy demo, though.

[TheRevanchist]

YankeeBravo wrote...

kylecouch wrote...

And aside from a few altered lines of dialogue and no armor or weapon changes...the DA2 demo was EXACTLY the same as the final product.

And as I recall, isn't Jake's "you can infer what happened in that 6 months for yourself" more or less what Bioware's response was to people complaining about the jump in time in DA2 that was left unexplained?

Recent history repeating itself a bit here it's starting to kinda seem...

Pretty much...and as I said long ago in this thread...if you have to infer, invent or assume anything about someone elses story...then the author has totaly failed in their job to tell a good story.

[RSX Titan]

I don't sense that this game is going the route of DA2 at all. I believe there is a large portion of the fanbase that was hoping ME3 would fall somewhere in between ME1 and ME2 and the demo opens up further criticism to the point that ME3 is much more like ME2. I have always maintained that ME1 was not the game Bioware was shooting for but due to their inexperience with a TPS, they were forced to give it the KOTOR treatment. ME2 was more shooter oriented as ME3 appears to be and that is what I think they wanted all along.