129 réponses à ce sujet

[ElChipmunko]

Found the selection below on the mass effect twitter page: http://twitter.com/#!/masseffect

May be pertinent to the discussion.

@chawls93

@masseffect why is Shepard on Earth and not a Commander anymore? Is this explained? I don't recall 'Arrival' ending like that

Mass Effect @masseffect

@chawls93 The demo is separate- without spoiling any of the events that are important to the storyline from previous games and present!


@chawls93

@masseffect Ohh okay, I kind of assumed. Will there be more dialogue options/scenarios in the full game for the 'Role Playing' mode?

Mass Effect Mass Effect @masseffect

@chawls93 There will be more choices and options in the full game for sure!

2:24 PM - 15 Feb 12 via HootSuite · Details

[Dragoonlordz]

ElChipmunko wrote...

Found the selection below on the mass effect twitter page: http://twitter.com/#!/masseffect

May be pertinent to the discussion.

@chawls93

@masseffect why is Shepard on Earth and not a Commander anymore? Is this explained? I don't recall 'Arrival' ending like that

Mass Effect @masseffect

@chawls93 The demo is separate- without spoiling any of the events that are important to the storyline from previous games and present!


@chawls93

@masseffect Ohh okay, I kind of assumed. Will there be more dialogue options/scenarios in the full game for the 'Role Playing' mode?

Mass Effect Mass Effect @masseffect

@chawls93 There will be more choices and options in the full game for sure!

2:24 PM - 15 Feb 12 via HootSuite · Details

I kind of already heard about those responses, however I would say they are not really to have any effect on this poll those specific ones because firstly if we have to be told via tweets what the story is instead of seeing/explained in game that would just annoy me. The second part is outside of the introduction itself (confirmed by Chris) while the poll is about the introduction. However I have no complaints about relaying that information in this thread in general.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 16 février 2012 - 12:44 .

[Mr. MannlyMan]

Honestly, the intro felt rushed and characters were lacking in delivery.

The exchange between Shepard and the Defense Committee felt especially banal and unnecessary.
"We don't know what to do, Shepard. Can you guide us in this desperate hour?"
"No. I don't know what to do either."
"Okay, that's disappointing."
"Yeah, I've got nothing."
"Oh man, now what?"
"We stand together?"
"Holy Jesus, we're doomed!"

Even for a tutorial level, it's the shortest in the series. In terms of carrying the last game's torch, so to speak, it does a poor job as well. Honestly, the setpieces were amazing, but the story... man, I'm hoping that the next few levels of the game have better flow and better dialogue to them. The intro just sort of rushed you out the door without any sort of build-up.

Modifié par Mr. MannlyMan, 16 février 2012 - 12:46 .

[Walla Walla 06]

Introduction was absolutely rushed. Even as someone who has played waaaay too much Mass Effect and has completed Arrival many times and all of that, I was confused as to what exactly happened. Did Shepard turn himself in? Was he caught? After all, in one playthough, I was a Renegade and basically told Hackett that I didn't really feel like being a scapegoat. What about the Normandy and its crew? We know that the Alliance basically took it, but what else? Mass Effect 2's intro was great and made it so that a 2 year gap actually worked out fine, since you start off almost right where you left off before you leap forward in time. This intro was atrocious though.

Oh, and what if you're one of the many people who played Mass Effect 2 but didn't do any DLC? You're probably wondering how Shepard all of a sudden ends up basically imprisoned by the Systems Alliance.

[2484Stryker]

Mr. MannlyMan wrote...

Honestly, the intro felt rushed and characters were lacking in delivery.

The exchange between Shepard and the Defense Committee felt especially banal and unnecessary.
"We don't know what to do, Shepard. Can you guide us in this desperate hour?"
"No. I don't know what to do either."
"Okay, that's disappointing."
"Yeah, I've got nothing."
"Oh man, now what?"
"We stand together?"
"Holy Jesus, we're doomed!"

Even for a tutorial level, it's the shortest in the series. In terms of carrying the last game's torch, so to speak, it does a poor job as well. Honestly, the setpieces were amazing, but the story... man, I'm hoping that the next few levels of the game have better flow and better dialogue to them. The intro just sort of rushed you out the door without any sort of build-up.

You forgot "we fight or we die - that is the plan".  Srsly, did they hire Michael Bay to write the intro?

[BatmanPWNS]

You could have just had yes and no.

[KevShep]

RenownedRyan wrote...

Hopefully it's handled differently in the game. The breakneck pacing was ridiculous. Where is Shepard's trial?

I agree with this. Everything was way to rushed (I know its a demo). I too hope that its not the final version.
There is so much that I want to say in the trial as well.

[ElChipmunko]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

ElChipmunko wrote...

Found the selection below on the mass effect twitter page: http://twitter.com/#!/masseffect

May be pertinent to the discussion.

@chawls93

@masseffect why is Shepard on Earth and not a Commander anymore? Is this explained? I don't recall 'Arrival' ending like that

Mass Effect @masseffect

@chawls93 The demo is separate- without spoiling any of the events that are important to the storyline from previous games and present!


@chawls93

@masseffect Ohh okay, I kind of assumed. Will there be more dialogue options/scenarios in the full game for the 'Role Playing' mode?

Mass Effect Mass Effect @masseffect

@chawls93 There will be more choices and options in the full game for sure!

2:24 PM - 15 Feb 12 via HootSuite · Details

I kind of already heard about those responses, however I would say they are not really to have any effect on this poll those specific ones because firstly if we have to be told via tweets what the story is instead of seeing/explained in game that would just annoy me. The second part is outside of the introduction itself (confirmed by Chris) while the poll is about the introduction. However I have no complaints about relaying that information in this thread in general.

I dunno, seems to me like they said the demo omitted certain things that would explain Shepard's predicament that will be in the full game.  Although that may be done after the intro, so I agree it may not affect the poll.  In its current state I agree, the demo intro doesn't explain things very well.  However, that could be rectified with a flashback or recap en route to the next objective after Earth.

Who knows, I'm still excited for the game regardless

[Dragoonlordz]

BatmanPWNS wrote...

You could have just had yes and no.

Maybe but still would have had people complain.

As it stands only 3 out of 255 people so far have had any issue with wording.

[AlexXIV]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

I found neither of the choices in your poll satisfying.

Your alternatives would have been?

Basically it was lacking but it was the default introduction without imports. We don't know what the default shep did or didn't do. So the fact that it is dissatisfying may be due to the fact that the default Shep doesn't have the best standing with either the Alliance or Hackett or Anderson. However they all are fans of my Paragon Shep in my playthroughs so they would treat her with alot more respect. They wouldn't ground her either. They couldn't actually. However, as I said, this is the default intro. It could be worse and still not bother me if I get a proper intro for my imported Shep. I'm still kind of expecting a trial or something in which the events of Arrival and after are explained. I personally would never have went to trial for something the Alliance cannot prove. And if I would go there then only with Hackett who could explain most of it. For example that Shep was there because of Hackett and what the Alliance idiots were doing there. Also I want to know what happened to the rest of the crew. I can't just accept that Shep was locked away and that's it.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 16 février 2012 - 01:09 .

[billy the squid]

AlexXIV wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

I found neither of the choices in your poll satisfying.

Your alternatives would have been?

Basically it was lacking but it was the default introduction without imports. We don't know what the default shep did or didn't do. So the fact that it is dissatisfying may be due to the fact that the default Shep doesn't have the best standing with either the Alliance or Hackett or Anderson. However they all are fans of my Paragon Shep in my playthroughs so they would treat her with alot more respect. They wouldn't ground her either. They couldn't actually. However, as I said, this is the default intro. It could be worse and still not bother me if I get a proper intro for my imported Shep. I'm still kind of expecting a trial or something in which the events of Arrival and after are explained. I personally would never have went to trial for something the Alliance cannot prove. And if I would go there then only with Hackett who could explain most of it. For example that Shep was there because of Hackett and what the Alliance idiots were doing there. Also I want to know what happened to the rest of the crew. I can't just accept that Shep was locked away and that's it.

Priestly has already stated the demo is reflective of the introduction in the game. I wouldn't expect anything overly different upon release. Maybe a bit of extra dialogue here and there, but don't bank on any significant exposition which would actually explain the context of the situation and current events. That would be too sensible to have included in the first place.

Modifié par billy the squid, 16 février 2012 - 01:16 .

[AlexXIV]

billy the squid wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

I found neither of the choices in your poll satisfying.

Your alternatives would have been?

Basically it was lacking but it was the default introduction without imports. We don't know what the default shep did or didn't do. So the fact that it is dissatisfying may be due to the fact that the default Shep doesn't have the best standing with either the Alliance or Hackett or Anderson. However they all are fans of my Paragon Shep in my playthroughs so they would treat her with alot more respect. They wouldn't ground her either. They couldn't actually. However, as I said, this is the default intro. It could be worse and still not bother me if I get a proper intro for my imported Shep. I'm still kind of expecting a trial or something in which the events of Arrival and after are explained. I personally would never have went to trial for something the Alliance cannot prove. And if I would go there then only with Hackett who could explain most of it. For example that Shep was there because of Hackett and what the Alliance idiots were doing there. Also I want to know what happened to the rest of the crew. I can't just accept that Shep was locked away and that's it.

Priestly has already stated the demo is reflective of the introduction in the game. I wouldn't expect anything overly different upon release. Maybe a bit of extra dialogue here and there, but don't bank on any significant exposition which would actually explain the context of the situation and current events. That would be too sensible to have included in the first place.

That's funny because we were promised that some loose threads will be connected in ME3 and instead the first thing we learn is that there will be more loose threads right at the start who will maybe be ignored for the rest of the game. Really makes me wonder if Bioware is even listening to themselves if they say something to the community.

[Namevah]

I thought it was fine. I'll probably look back at ME2's as the better beginning, but compared to ME1, I really enjoyed it. Of course, that might've changed if I hadn't replayed ME1's intro a hundred times trying to make a custom Shepard I liked.

AlexXIV wrote...
That's funny because we were promised that
some loose threads will be connected in ME3 and instead the first thing
we learn is that there will be more loose threads right at the start who
will maybe be ignored for the rest of the game.

What loose threads, exactly?

[Gavinthelocust]

It felt like an abridged intro, like a whole chunk of it got cut out to save time.

[daddyjah21]

at least bioware didnt let down the COD fans...............

[billy the squid]

AlexXIV wrote...

billy the squid wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

I found neither of the choices in your poll satisfying.

Your alternatives would have been?

Basically it was lacking but it was the default introduction without imports. We don't know what the default shep did or didn't do. So the fact that it is dissatisfying may be due to the fact that the default Shep doesn't have the best standing with either the Alliance or Hackett or Anderson. However they all are fans of my Paragon Shep in my playthroughs so they would treat her with alot more respect. They wouldn't ground her either. They couldn't actually. However, as I said, this is the default intro. It could be worse and still not bother me if I get a proper intro for my imported Shep. I'm still kind of expecting a trial or something in which the events of Arrival and after are explained. I personally would never have went to trial for something the Alliance cannot prove. And if I would go there then only with Hackett who could explain most of it. For example that Shep was there because of Hackett and what the Alliance idiots were doing there. Also I want to know what happened to the rest of the crew. I can't just accept that Shep was locked away and that's it.

Priestly has already stated the demo is reflective of the introduction in the game. I wouldn't expect anything overly different upon release. Maybe a bit of extra dialogue here and there, but don't bank on any significant exposition which would actually explain the context of the situation and current events. That would be too sensible to have included in the first place.

That's funny because we were promised that some loose threads will be connected in ME3 and instead the first thing we learn is that there will be more loose threads right at the start who will maybe be ignored for the rest of the game. Really makes me wonder if Bioware is even listening to themselves if they say something to the community.

I'm a pragmatist, promises are not worth the paper they're printed on. Some threads may very well be resolved, I haven't seen the entire game, so I reserve judgment on it other than the introduction. Perhaps I've been spoilt by the more mature nature of games like The Witcher 2's geopolitical aspects.

I'm inclined to believe that they attempted to remover the exposition element because it was boring and implement the action element to attract people, all it did was make a mess. There is simply a lot of half explained and weakly reasoned dialogue and cutscenes, with a few nudges and winks towards events of ME2, without it ever being linked to the gap of 6 months between the games.

Hence the disjointed aspect of the introduction, nothing is really explain, not much is put in context and we're pushed to an action sequence and then we're gone. Really they could have removed the entire introduction and it wouldn't have made much difference.

[Grey34]

this is why i don't play demos of these kinda games i prefer to play the full game to judge it

[NPH11]

For a prologue it was a little rushed. I understand wanting to move right to the action, but the prologue should always be the time to get some story worked in, Look at the previous games.

ME1 had us start on the Normandy, giving us an opportunity to talk to various crew before throwing us into the action. Even then, the action was fairly slow paced had had some story being mixed in.

ME2 had a quicker pace, but still accomplished a fair bit of exposition between the destruction of the Normandy, Shepard's reconstruction and discussion during the opening mission leading to the trip to Freedom's Progress.

Here, we got a little exposition in the fact that the Reapers are coming, quickly, but beyond that we learned basically nothing about what happened following Arrival, except that Shepard was grounded.

HOWEVER, considering that this is a demo, I'll give Bioware the benefit of the doubt and assume this will be explained after we get on the Normandy, if it isn't I'll be disappointed

[EpicBoot2daFace]

I'd say the verdict's in.

[Deadmac]

I have never played a "Mass Effect" game before, so the demo was my first maiden voyage. Within the first several minutes of the game, I got the impression that BioWare doesn't want to make games anymore. "Mass Effect III" is a cinematic movie with 'slight' pauses for gameplay. It felt like I was watching a cheesy and boring police procedural tv series. Once the game 'allowed' me to select dialogue options, I didn't feel like my opinion on the situation mattered. Since the character was speaking 98% of the time, without me selecting dialogue options, I wasn't able to connect with the story or character. Regardless about what options you chose, the game is rigged to follow a very strict storyline. After the game 'allowed' me to move the character, the game (through the use of an npc) was still in control of my actions. Once the player losses control over the character's actions and choices, you are no longer playing a roleplaying game... Or, within this particular case, you are no longer playing a game. Its a cinematic-animated movie.

Personally, I do not see why 'this movie' is even called a 'game'.

Its just an animated movie.

"Dragon Age II" was a clear indication about the direction BioWare is going, and "Mass Affect III" just solidifies my subjective interpretation of the company's future. BioWare is moving toward games that are not games. Even though you may have control over certain elements, 98% of your involvement is from watching the cgi animations move across the screen. Within a few more years from now, BioWare's version of roleplaying games (games in general) will have zero gamer interaction. BioWare has successfully removed all the elements that require customization, independent thinking, and free reign interaction. BioWare is clearly against individualism and individual thinking.

BioWare should get out of the game business, so they can do what they truly desire. Animated movies.

Modifié par Deadmac, 16 février 2012 - 01:51 .

[neilthecellist]

The introduction to Mass Effect 3's single player campaign is almost like the introduction to Halo 2 from Halo 1, or Halo 3 from Halo 2. You don't know what actually happens between each game unless you purchase some novel or some other BS.

See, Mass Effect 2 followed Mass Effect 1 nicely, the 2 year pacing in between works out in line with the Lazarus Project. But in Mass Effect 3, it's almost as if the entire universe changes, like I'm playing Mass Effect 3 in a parallel universe where some past events are the same but suddenly everything else is different. Like, why does Cerberus look like evil terrorists? I'm sorry, but the whole point of introducing Cerberus in Mass Effect 2 is that they are morally AMBIGUOUS.

In fact, MORAL AMBIGUITY is the HEART of the Mass Effect series. Why is Cerberus suddenly labeled as "oh, they're completely evil"? Some Cerberus operatives were bad, others had good intentions, just like Saren was a bad Spectre but most Spectres are good and represent good.

From the demo, I can deduce that BioWare took all the moral ambiguity out of the previous games and dumbed it down to simple black and white choices. I'm very disappointed. I was really looking forward to this game.

So to sum it all up:

* intro sucked
* intro felt rushed
* intro felt like a parallel universe
* Shepard is now a black and white creature
* Cerberus is now a super evil villain only, like in Disney films
* Bad story + story game = bad story game.

[PsychoWARD23]

why can't people make simple polls anymore?

Either a yes, no, indifferent, or other.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

PsychoWARD23 wrote...

why can't people make simple polls anymore?

Either a yes, no, indifferent, or other.

You're part of the problem.

[DJBare]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

I'd say the verdict's in.

Yeah, and even though I already figured which way the wind would blow, it's surpassed my expectation by a long way, I expected something along the lines of 55/45, I guess bioware did drop the ball on this one.

[DJBare]

PsychoWARD23 wrote...

why can't people make simple polls anymore?

Either a yes, no, indifferent, or other.

I agree with yes/no, indifferent shouldn't even bother.

Modifié par DJBare, 16 février 2012 - 01:56 .