2915 réponses à ce sujet

[Goddy10]

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?

Probably because we were expecting there to be a Role Playing moment at the beginning of the game where you actually defend yourself against the charges. I have been defending the demo from Day One but I have to say, I'm disappointed that this isn't in there.

[bluewolv1970]

There was supposed to be a trial?

[DJBare]

bluewolv1970 wrote...

There was supposed to be a trial?

Yes, it's now on the cutting room floor, the cleaner will be along soon.

[Anthadlas]

Chris Priestly wrote...

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?

Because you can't make a crappy and rushed intro to a game that explains nothing and then blame the players when they can't seem to fill in the blanks.
How are we supposed to know who James Vega is if he isn't mentioned at the end of ME2 or the Beginning of ME3? and why are we suddenly all friendly with him? What happened to our ship and why is it now alliance? Why is Shepard being led to a courtroom that is a defense council? and most importantly, Why is Shepard not in prison for killing hundreds of thousands of Batarians?
It seems like quite a long time has passed between ME2 and ME3 so how are we supposed to know what happened if you don't actually bother informing us about it in either game?

Modifié par Wraith 02, 16 février 2012 - 04:45 .

[2484Stryker]

Wraith 02 wrote...

Because you can't make a crappy and rushed intro to a game that explains nothing and then blame the players when they can't seem to fill in the blanks.
How are we supposed to know who James Vega is if he isn't mentioned at the end of ME2 or the Beginning of ME3? and why are we suddenly all friendly with him? What happened to our ship and why is it now alliance? Why is Shepard being led to a courtroom that is a defense council? and most importantly, Why is Shepard not in prison for killing hundreds of thousands of Batarians?
It seems like quite a long time has passed between ME2 and ME3 so how are we supposed to know what happened if you don't actually bother informing us about it in either game?

Exactly.  In fact, I'd settle for a one liner like "7-9 months later...on Earth"  That would set up the story at least a bit and I as the audience would then be more open to expecting new faces that we have no idea who they are and situations that we had no idea developed.

[RSX Titan]

There is no doubt the intro is spotty at best. I hope Priestley is wrong about the opening being the same in the full game.

[Daywalker315]

Wraith 02 wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

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?

Because you can't make a crappy and rushed intro to a game that explains nothing and then blame the players when they can't seem to fill in the blanks.
How are we supposed to know who James Vega is if he isn't mentioned at the end of ME2 or the Beginning of ME3? and why are we suddenly all friendly with him? What happened to our ship and why is it now alliance? Why is Shepard being led to a courtroom that is a defense council? and most importantly, Why is Shepard not in prison for killing hundreds of thousands of Batarians?
It seems like quite a long time has passed between ME2 and ME3 so how are we supposed to know what happened if you don't actually bother informing us about it in either game?

Did you ever stop to think maybe some of that info might come AFTER the frantic escape from Earth while the Reapers attack bit? BioWare isn't one to just not introduce their characters, after all. So, yeah, maybe some of the info about James and what you did on the "Arrival" mission will get talked about on the Normandy, once you reach the Citadel, or at some other point during the 97% of the game we haven't seen yet? Come on, doomsayers. It was a short demo and the 2nd mission was cut down for size and presumably spoilers. Relax.

Also, come to think of it, yes, a short cinematic recap of the Arrival mission and then a "6 months later" thing would have helped ease new players and players who didn't play Arrival into it. Seems easy enough, I guess. Maybe something like that is in the full game before the intro or maybe not. Either way, it is what it is at this point. It's not so bad if they talk about it shortly after the intro and fill everybody in to what has been going on, which I'm sure they will.

Modifié par Daywalker315, 16 février 2012 - 05:01 .

[Nerevar-as]

Wraith 02 wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

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?

Because you can't make a crappy and rushed intro to a game that explains nothing and then blame the players when they can't seem to fill in the blanks.
How are we supposed to know who James Vega is if he isn't mentioned at the end of ME2 or the Beginning of ME3? and why are we suddenly all friendly with him? What happened to our ship and why is it now alliance? Why is Shepard being led to a courtroom that is a defense council? and most importantly, Why is Shepard not in prison for killing hundreds of thousands of Batarians?
It seems like quite a long time has passed between ME2 and ME3 so how are we supposed to know what happened if you don't actually bother informing us about it in either game?

That´s pretty clear from the conversation with Anderson. I don´t get how they can make it clearer.

For the others I´ll wait for the conversations in the Normandy, although I´m fearing because of this we´ll get conversations like the ones in ME1 intro, being told things the character clearly should already be aware of. I´d also have liked a more neutral tone with Vega, so we could later decide whether Shepard likes him or not, instead of being friendly from the beginning. They did it with the VS after all.

[DJBare]

Nerevar-as wrote...I´d also have liked a more neutral tone with Vega, so we could later decide whether Shepard likes him or not, instead of being friendly from the beginning. They did it with the VS after all.

And that's the crux right there, we have to assume they've always been good buddies, unless of course you read the books, but I'm with others on this, I should not have to rely on seperate media to bring me up to date on event's in the game world.

[TheRevanchist]

Daywalker315 wrote...

Wraith 02 wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

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?

Because you can't make a crappy and rushed intro to a game that explains nothing and then blame the players when they can't seem to fill in the blanks.
How are we supposed to know who James Vega is if he isn't mentioned at the end of ME2 or the Beginning of ME3? and why are we suddenly all friendly with him? What happened to our ship and why is it now alliance? Why is Shepard being led to a courtroom that is a defense council? and most importantly, Why is Shepard not in prison for killing hundreds of thousands of Batarians?
It seems like quite a long time has passed between ME2 and ME3 so how are we supposed to know what happened if you don't actually bother informing us about it in either game?

Did you ever stop to think maybe some of that info might come AFTER the frantic escape from Earth while the Reapers attack bit? BioWare isn't one to just not introduce their characters, after all. So, yeah, maybe some of the info about James and what you did on the "Arrival" mission will get talked about on the Normandy, once you reach the Citadel, or at some other point during the 97% of the game we haven't seen yet? Come on, doomsayers. It was a short demo and the 2nd mission was cut down for size and presumably spoilers. Relax.

Also, come to think of it, yes, a short cinematic recap of the Arrival mission and then a "6 months later" thing would have helped ease new players and players who didn't play Arrival into it. Seems easy enough, I guess. Maybe something like that is in the full game before the intro or maybe not. Either way, it is what it is at this point. It's not so bad if they talk about it shortly after the intro and fill everybody in to what has been going on, which I'm sure they will.

I'm so damn tierd of seeing "MAYBE IT COMES AFTER DUH STFU!"...I will tell ALL OF YOU RIGHT NOW....WHY that is the STUPIDEST way to go about that. You wana talk about a trial giving **** pacing? How about having Reapers blow the HOLY HELL out of everything...then suddenly pausing the entire Galactic War AFTER IT STARTED to explain everything to us!? How is -that- NOT **** pacing?! How is explaining what happend BEFORE THE WAR STARTS AFTER THE WAR STARTS better pacing then showing it to us...idk BEFORE THE WAR STARTS!? Has RedLetterMedia taught you people nothing!?

Modifié par kylecouch, 16 février 2012 - 05:13 .

[wright1978]

DJBare wrote...

Nerevar-as wrote...I´d also have liked a more neutral tone with Vega, so we could later decide whether Shepard likes him or not, instead of being friendly from the beginning. They did it with the VS after all.

And that's the crux right there, we have to assume they've always been good buddies, unless of course you read the books, but I'm with others on this, I should not have to rely on seperate media to bring me up to date on event's in the game world.

Yeah the buddy buddy attitude gets right up my nose. We better have the ability to be more in his face come the actual intro.

[Anthadlas]

Daywalker315 wrote...

Wraith 02 wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

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?

Because you can't make a crappy and rushed intro to a game that explains nothing and then blame the players when they can't seem to fill in the blanks.
How are we supposed to know who James Vega is if he isn't mentioned at the end of ME2 or the Beginning of ME3? and why are we suddenly all friendly with him? What happened to our ship and why is it now alliance? Why is Shepard being led to a courtroom that is a defense council? and most importantly, Why is Shepard not in prison for killing hundreds of thousands of Batarians?
It seems like quite a long time has passed between ME2 and ME3 so how are we supposed to know what happened if you don't actually bother informing us about it in either game?

Did you ever stop to think maybe some of that info might come AFTER the frantic escape from Earth

Doesn't it make more sense to explain these things before they happen rather than have 75% of people confused as to what exactly is happening?

[Anthadlas]

Nerevar-as wrote...

Wraith 02 wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

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?

Because you can't make a crappy and rushed intro to a game that explains nothing and then blame the players when they can't seem to fill in the blanks.
How are we supposed to know who James Vega is if he isn't mentioned at the end of ME2 or the Beginning of ME3? and why are we suddenly all friendly with him? What happened to our ship and why is it now alliance? Why is Shepard being led to a courtroom that is a defense council? and most importantly, Why is Shepard not in prison for killing hundreds of thousands of Batarians?
It seems like quite a long time has passed between ME2 and ME3 so how are we supposed to know what happened if you don't actually bother informing us about it in either game?

That´s pretty clear from the conversation with Anderson. I don´t get how they can make it clearer.

I don't see how Anderson refering to it as "that **** that you've done" comes across as being very clear on the subject.
So much for consequences to your actions when you can wipe out an entire Batarian system and then not even hear 1 person mention the word "Batarian" as an explanation of why you are locked up

Modifié par Wraith 02, 16 février 2012 - 05:18 .

[Soundsystem]

Goddy10 wrote...

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?

Probably because we were expecting there to be a Role Playing moment at the beginning of the game where you actually defend yourself against the charges. I have been defending the demo from Day One but I have to say, I'm disappointed that this isn't in there.

This. I was expecting to actually get to play my Shepard and have to defend my actions. Kind of similar to Tali's Loyalty mission.

At the very least I was expecting something to introduce James Vega and what has happened since the endup ME2.

[YankeeBravo]

Nerevar-as wrote...

Wraith 02 wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

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?

Because you can't make a crappy and rushed intro to a game that explains nothing and then blame the players when they can't seem to fill in the blanks.
How are we supposed to know who James Vega is if he isn't mentioned at the end of ME2 or the Beginning of ME3? and why are we suddenly all friendly with him? What happened to our ship and why is it now alliance? Why is Shepard being led to a courtroom that is a defense council? and most importantly, Why is Shepard not in prison for killing hundreds of thousands of Batarians?
It seems like quite a long time has passed between ME2 and ME3 so how are we supposed to know what happened if you don't actually bother informing us about it in either game?

That´s pretty clear from the conversation with Anderson. I don´t get how they can make it clearer.

For the others I´ll wait for the conversations in the Normandy, although I´m fearing because of this we´ll get conversations like the ones in ME1 intro, being told things the character clearly should already be aware of. I´d also have liked a more neutral tone with Vega, so we could later decide whether Shepard likes him or not, instead of being friendly from the beginning. They did it with the VS after all.

That's actually the heart of the problem. It's absolutely NOT "pretty clear from the conversation with Anderson".

In fact, the conversation with Anderson has him explicitly telling Shepherd 'Had it been anyone else, they would have been court-martialed and discharged, etc'.

Which pretty explictly would seem to say that Shepherd's reputation and exploits avoided that outcome.

The problem with that is, listening to Shepherd, he didn't avoid that outcome. He was stripped of his command and as tells Vega that he's 'not a commander anymore', it's obvious Shepherd think he was either dismissed from the Alliance military or that he resigned from it which would be so far out of character for him to do immediately before an invasion as to be ludicrous.

So the "wait and maybe later exposition will explain what happened" argument doesn't work.

What we're seeing in the demo is the result of Bioware making a late script edit to remove the "trial/hearing/whatever" but the writers didn't bother to make sure their patching of the new intro didn't create any problems with the existing script/dialogue.

Modifié par YankeeBravo, 16 février 2012 - 05:17 .

[CenturyCrow]

CasbynessPC wrote...
How did we get from the end of ME2 to this opening of ME3? Why is Shepard on Earth? Why is he/she no longer working with Cerberus (my Shepard kept the Collector base)? Who is this Vega person? Why is Ashley being friendly after what she did in ME2? Who repainted the Normandy, and why?

There is a huge gap between the end of ME2 and beginning of ME3. The trial could have easily covered that gap in the same way that the shuttle conversation on ME2 covered the ME1-2 gap. Plus that conversation was tailored so you could discuss as much or as little as you liked depending on whether you were a new or returning player.
I have no idea about most of what is going on in the first scene of the demo. That is what cutting corners means O.O 

I'm stuck trying to jump over that same gap. Did I crash and burn again?; missing some memory or what?

[Nerevar-as]

Wraith 02 wrote...

Daywalker315 wrote...

Wraith 02 wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

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?

Because you can't make a crappy and rushed intro to a game that explains nothing and then blame the players when they can't seem to fill in the blanks.
How are we supposed to know who James Vega is if he isn't mentioned at the end of ME2 or the Beginning of ME3? and why are we suddenly all friendly with him? What happened to our ship and why is it now alliance? Why is Shepard being led to a courtroom that is a defense council? and most importantly, Why is Shepard not in prison for killing hundreds of thousands of Batarians?
It seems like quite a long time has passed between ME2 and ME3 so how are we supposed to know what happened if you don't actually bother informing us about it in either game?

Did you ever stop to think maybe some of that info might come AFTER the frantic escape from Earth

Doesn't it make more sense to explain these things before they happen rather than have 75% of people confused as to what exactly is happening?

Your stimate of how many new players the game will have is quite optimistic. Anyway, if they explain between the first and second mission those people won´t be confused long. I guess they will explain as BW seems too worried of scaring players away to just say that if you are in the 3rd part of a trilogy it´s logical you´ve gone through the previous ones. That applies to films and often books, I can´t see why not to games.

[Anthadlas]

CenturyCrow wrote...

CasbynessPC wrote...
How did we get from the end of ME2 to this opening of ME3? Why is Shepard on Earth? Why is he/she no longer working with Cerberus (my Shepard kept the Collector base)? Who is this Vega person? Why is Ashley being friendly after what she did in ME2? Who repainted the Normandy, and why?

There is a huge gap between the end of ME2 and beginning of ME3. The trial could have easily covered that gap in the same way that the shuttle conversation on ME2 covered the ME1-2 gap. Plus that conversation was tailored so you could discuss as much or as little as you liked depending on whether you were a new or returning player.
I have no idea about most of what is going on in the first scene of the demo. That is what cutting corners means O.O 

I'm stuck trying to jump over that same gap. Did I crash and burn again?; missing some memory or what?

Actually a good point, Just mentioning that shepard has been in some sort of coma between ME2 and 3 would make alot more sense xD

[Nerevar-as]

YankeeBravo wrote...

That's actually the heart of the problem. It's absolutely NOT "pretty clear from the conversation with Anderson".

In fact, the conversation with Anderson has him explicitly telling Shepherd 'Had it been anyone else, they would have been court-martialed and discharged, etc'.

Which pretty explictly would seem to say that Shepherd's reputation and exploits avoided that outcome.

The problem with that is, listening to Shepherd, he didn't avoid that outcome. He was stripped of his command and as tells Vega that he's 'not a commander anymore', it's obvious Shepherd think he was either dismissed from the Alliance military or that he resigned from it which would be so far out of character for him to do immediately before an invasion as to be ludicrous.

So the "wait and maybe later exposition will explain what happened" argument doesn't work.

What we're seeing in the demo is the result of Bioware making a late script edit to remove the "trial/hearing/whatever" but the writers didn't bother to make sure their patching of the new intro didn't create any problems with the existing script/dialogue.

Shepard had no command to begin with, if I remember right from LotSB he was never reinstated into the Aliance military after being KIA.

I would have liked more a trial where Shepard was presented as a homicidal madman and then Harbinger arrived as surprise defense witness, but if you played ME2 with the DLCs I see little confusing here.

[TheRevanchist]

Nerevar-as wrote...

Wraith 02 wrote...

Daywalker315 wrote...

Wraith 02 wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

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?

Because you can't make a crappy and rushed intro to a game that explains nothing and then blame the players when they can't seem to fill in the blanks.
How are we supposed to know who James Vega is if he isn't mentioned at the end of ME2 or the Beginning of ME3? and why are we suddenly all friendly with him? What happened to our ship and why is it now alliance? Why is Shepard being led to a courtroom that is a defense council? and most importantly, Why is Shepard not in prison for killing hundreds of thousands of Batarians?
It seems like quite a long time has passed between ME2 and ME3 so how are we supposed to know what happened if you don't actually bother informing us about it in either game?

Did you ever stop to think maybe some of that info might come AFTER the frantic escape from Earth

Doesn't it make more sense to explain these things before they happen rather than have 75% of people confused as to what exactly is happening?

Your stimate of how many new players the game will have is quite optimistic. Anyway, if they explain between the first and second mission those people won´t be confused long. I guess they will explain as BW seems too worried of scaring players away to just say that if you are in the 3rd part of a trilogy it´s logical you´ve gone through the previous ones. That applies to films and often books, I can´t see why not to games.

Just because other mediums do it...does not mean thats the proper way to do it...see my above post.

[Skyblade012]

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?

Because we don't know the plot.  I did play both games, and all the DLC.  From the games, I have no clue who Vega is, I have no idea when I lost the Normandy, and I have no clue when I got back to Earth.

From my perspective, I was chumming around the Terminus Systems, and now all of a sudden I'm on Earth, with no explanation, and apparently have been there, cooling my heels for a few weeks.  The Normandy is all of a sudden a full Allaince ship, with a new paint job and crew.  When did that happen?  James Vega is around and acting all buddy-buddy, and I have never seen him before.  I'm pulled in front of a defense committee I've never seen before, and who don't last more than two minutes, and instead of being fussed at for any of my actions, which is what I expected coming from ME2, they just go "save us, Shepard", and die.  You get no personal connection to the story because there is so little exposition.  You are just tossed straight into the action, immediately, with no real explanation of what is going on, or what has happened for the past six months.

Shepard has built up new relationships, the dynamics of the Alliance Military have radically shifted, the Normandy has been totally rebuilt, and we are just supposed to accept all of this, even though it is a stark contrast to the rest of the series's story telling style.


Go back and play the intros to ME and ME2.  Notice anything?  Both games set you up to a position where you are thrown in without knowing what's going on, but both set it up before you get there.  In both games, Shepard doesn't know what's going on either.  You are dropping blind into a combat situation, or you literally get blown up and have no clue where you are or what's going on.  In ME3, Shepard already knows all of this stuff that we are having to ask you about, and it feels weird.

Who is Vega?  How does he know Shepard?  When did the Normandy get taken from us?  What was done to it?  When did I get to Earth?  When was my court martial, yesterday, or six months ago?  And why do we have to ask you this instead of getting it from the game?

[nitefyre410]

Wraith 02 wrote...

CenturyCrow wrote...

CasbynessPC wrote...
How did we get from the end of ME2 to this opening of ME3? Why is Shepard on Earth? Why is he/she no longer working with Cerberus (my Shepard kept the Collector base)? Who is this Vega person? Why is Ashley being friendly after what she did in ME2? Who repainted the Normandy, and why?

There is a huge gap between the end of ME2 and beginning of ME3. The trial could have easily covered that gap in the same way that the shuttle conversation on ME2 covered the ME1-2 gap. Plus that conversation was tailored so you could discuss as much or as little as you liked depending on whether you were a new or returning player.
I have no idea about most of what is going on in the first scene of the demo. That is what cutting corners means O.O 

I'm stuck trying to jump over that same gap. Did I crash and burn again?; missing some memory or what?

Actually a good point, Just mentioning that shepard has been in some sort of coma between ME2 and 3 would make alot more sense xD

 

Setting these trails especailly one of this magnitude take longer the 6 months...  he could be waiting for the trail to start for the past 6 months which mostly likely the case... but all that is moot  because the 

Reapers are falling down the from the sky like rain. 

[RSX Titan]

Nerevar-as wrote...

Wraith 02 wrote...

Daywalker315 wrote...

Wraith 02 wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

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?

Because you can't make a crappy and rushed intro to a game that explains nothing and then blame the players when they can't seem to fill in the blanks.
How are we supposed to know who James Vega is if he isn't mentioned at the end of ME2 or the Beginning of ME3? and why are we suddenly all friendly with him? What happened to our ship and why is it now alliance? Why is Shepard being led to a courtroom that is a defense council? and most importantly, Why is Shepard not in prison for killing hundreds of thousands of Batarians?
It seems like quite a long time has passed between ME2 and ME3 so how are we supposed to know what happened if you don't actually bother informing us about it in either game?

Did you ever stop to think maybe some of that info might come AFTER the frantic escape from Earth

Doesn't it make more sense to explain these things before they happen rather than have 75% of people confused as to what exactly is happening?

Your stimate of how many new players the game will have is quite optimistic. Anyway, if they explain between the first and second mission those people won´t be confused long. I guess they will explain as BW seems too worried of scaring players away to just say that if you are in the 3rd part of a trilogy it´s logical you´ve gone through the previous ones. That applies to films and often books, I can´t see why not to games.

Bioware has gone out of it's way to tell everyone that the game is accessible for new gamers. Hell, in an interview with the Doctors recently, they said numerous times that ME3 is the best entry point into the series. The funny think about the opening is that its terrible if you haven't played the first 2 games. You have absoluteley no idea whats going on aside from the fact you are being summoned to some sort of meeting. The opening is weak whether you are returning to the franchise or just getting started with it. 

[Anthadlas]

Nerevar-as wrote...

Your estimate of how many new players the game will have is quite optimistic.

I'm not talking about new players i'm talking about current players, and it is not an estimate. I cannot validate the accuracy of this poll as the sample size is too small but if it reflects the current community then it is over 75%

social.bioware.com/poll.php

Anyway, if they explain between the first and second mission those people won´t be confused long.

To be fair they shouldn't be confused at all, That is a very bad way to start a game

The fact that so many people think the intro is rushed and doesn't explain enough is bad but the fact that Bioware can't seem to understand that there is a problem is quite simply put disturbing

Modifié par Wraith 02, 16 février 2012 - 05:31 .

[YankeeBravo]

nitefyre410 wrote...

Wraith 02 wrote...

CenturyCrow wrote...

CasbynessPC wrote...
How did we get from the end of ME2 to this opening of ME3? Why is Shepard on Earth? Why is he/she no longer working with Cerberus (my Shepard kept the Collector base)? Who is this Vega person? Why is Ashley being friendly after what she did in ME2? Who repainted the Normandy, and why?

There is a huge gap between the end of ME2 and beginning of ME3. The trial could have easily covered that gap in the same way that the shuttle conversation on ME2 covered the ME1-2 gap. Plus that conversation was tailored so you could discuss as much or as little as you liked depending on whether you were a new or returning player.
I have no idea about most of what is going on in the first scene of the demo. That is what cutting corners means O.O 

I'm stuck trying to jump over that same gap. Did I crash and burn again?; missing some memory or what?

Actually a good point, Just mentioning that shepard has been in some sort of coma between ME2 and 3 would make alot more sense xD

 

Setting these trails especailly one of this magnitude take longer the 6 months...  he could be waiting for the trail to start for the past 6 months which mostly likely the case... but all that is moot  because the 

Reapers are falling down the from the sky like rain. 

That would have been one way to handle it, sure.

The problem is we have dialogue suggesting it's over and done with, only in two contradictory ways.

And of course with Chris' statement that it begins with the end of the trial, there's that.