206 réponses à ce sujet

[AndersL]

Elegana wrote...

Bad:
-Graphics: Biggest issue with me. The graphics look inferior to ME2, IMO. It looks more like an HD remake of ME1.

This. What's up with that??

[Sunflash0]

The concerns listed are all legitimate concerns. I think if Bioware has time to address these issues, ME3 will go from being an excellent game to being a near perfect game.

[AndersL]

Sunflash0 wrote...

The concerns listed are all legitimate concerns. I think if Bioware has time to address these issues, ME3 will go from being an excellent game to being a near perfect game.

EA > Bioware. Won't happen.

[DnVill]

with all these complaints on the demo. The game is starting to look like another DA2 quality game which was a backwards step for the DA franchise.

I do hope that this doesn't turn out to be like ME: Deception.

[Arthas9]

Gatt9 wrote...

Arthas9 wrote...

GreatCake wrote...

Theobuomai wrote...

Been scrolling thru the ME twitter.  Here's something of note:
______




@masseffect Can anyone affiliated with BW/ME reassure that the complete game is going to be more polished?

@nme_insane Rest easy! The demo is just a demo and there will be far more in the full game!
______

Sure, still vague, but seems  to confirm that the demo really isn't at par with the full game...

This has, indeed, let me rest a bit easier. Still skeptical, though. "Far more" does not mean "more polished." He kind of avoided the question.

Alright. Yesterday I made contact with one of the devs here (he asked me not to tell his name and not to publish what he wrote me as it was written - so I'm going to respect that). He told me that the demo is definitely an older build and that some of the aforementioned problems will have been fixed for the game. He also told me that the dialogue system has way lot more to offer in the retail version than in the demo (most of the dialogues in the game have more than two options), and that there will be tons of significant choices which will have serious impact on the story and universe in the game. He also told me that the game's script is longer than ME 2's.  That's what I was told. 


But iSpiN's right: all this hassle could have been avoided if they had released a more polished version of the demo which would have resembeled the quality of the final product. Anyway... it's still a bit reassuring. 

Theoretically possible.

The demo is absolutely spun off a build at some point a number of months in the past,  and developed in parallel with the game.  The level of work necessary to take the actual game and cut out huge amounts to get down to the demo's size is not trivial.  They would've focused on making some level feature complete,  branched,  and developed the branch into the demo.

At some point,  it would no longer be feasible to merge the mainline into the demo-branch,  due to the significant differences,  leaving the demo different from the main game to some degree.

That said,  I have issues with the quoted poster's assertions.  I doubt very highly a Bioware developer made that statement to someone they don't know from a can of paint,  that could cost them their job.  EA has been known to take a very dim view to it's employees speaking out of turn.

Well, it's absolutely ok to me if you think that I came up with the things I wrote (which I did not). I'm sorry but even if I made the private message I received  from the dev. public (which I will not - I made him a promise, cause he did't want to get into the awkward situation in he would get  tons of messages that he wouldn't be able to handle)... so if I put this pm on this board without giving his name away, it still wouldn't be proof enough to those who are sceptical. I also don't know why anyone with a sane mind, especially one who wrote tons of posts expressing his discontent about the quality of the demo and who was (and still is) quite vocal about his concerns would come up with something like this. Think about it. But as I said, it's alright to me, if you think that I'm lying. One other thing: the person or developer \\ moderator mentioned before did not give any specific detail about anything concerning the bug fixes and about the story. He did not spoil anything to me or he did not tell me the secret of secrets, he only told me that the dialogue system is going to be nothing like the one we could see in the demo (it will offer way lot more and there will be significant choice options in the game and that its script is longer than the previous ME installments), and that the demo is "definitely an older build" (mark the quotation marks) and that "some of the bugs will have been resolved in the final game". That's all he said. You're welcome to not believing me. It did not save the day to me completely either, but it sounded very reassuring ( especially that I had preordered the CE) and it made some of my concerns go away. Full stop...I easily get tired of writing statements like these when I know that it won't deliver proof to those who are already sceptical, so it wouldn't make any difference. I think this is the last time I write about this matter. Happy days my fellow ME fan(s).

[Arthas9]

DnVill wrote...

with all these complaints on the demo. The game is starting to look like another DA2 quality game which was a backwards step for the DA franchise.

I do hope that this doesn't turn out to be like ME: Deception.

Lets just pray to the Almighty for it not to happen. I'm not familiar with the DA series (though I'm planning to pick up my copy of DA Origins in the near future), but I've heard some awful things about the second installment. No, it just can't and won't happen to my favourit (along with the The Witcher games) series. 

[Arthas9]

AndersL wrote...

Sunflash0 wrote...

The concerns listed are all legitimate concerns. I think if Bioware has time to address these issues, ME3 will go from being an excellent game to being a near perfect game.

EA > Bioware. Won't happen.

If we are talking about the story, script, voice acting and graphics-animation engine, no it won't happen. Those all fall into the "what's done is done" category, plus the game has gone gold. But for the rest (technical issues, bugs, controll functions, some graphical elements etc.) patches could be a good solution. 

Modifié par Arthas9, 18 février 2012 - 03:03 .

[Farbautisonn]

Arthas9 wrote...


I'm sorry but I won't give the name of the guy, neither any clues that could lead to him. The only thing I can tell you is that he's one of the moderators here on these boards and one of the devs at Bioware. Alright, one clue maybe: he responded on one of the topics yesterday (in this segment of the forums "...Spoilers Allowed"). That's all I'm going to say. Sorry, I kind of understand your scepticism, but why would I make up a story like this. If you check my posts here in this topic you will see that I'm just as concerned as anybody else here. That's why I wrote a PM to one of the devs, and he was a kind and cool enough guy to answer my questions (even if he stated that he could not give any specific info regarding the bug fixes, only that some of them are definitely will have been fixed in the offical release.) But I understand you, though I am not familiar with this kind of occupational hazard, I study medicine. 


I kind of agree with what you wrote on the second half of the post except the rpg vs. fps thingy. Yes, ME3 is a shooter, but it's predecessors were shooters too with rpg elements (what really made these games rpg were the dialogue and choices and consequences systems). As far as I can tell by playing the demo that this time around they put more emphasis on rpg elements (weapon and armor upgrade system, weight management, skill-trees etc.). So I wouldn't say that they only wanted to appeal to the fps crowds. Certainly they tried to (I only say this because of the sloppy cover system and omni-action-spacebar) make the action a lot more spectacular and dynamic, but it's ok, since you have to try and make your game surpass the last installments on as many fronts as possible. I kind of enjoy this mix of genres (and as an rpg fan myself I very much welcome the new rpg features). 

I respect that you wont give out your source. But unless I see an official post its just hear-say. Something I can choose to hope for, not something I should see as "canon". Youre studying medicin. You cant rely on hearsay either. You have to rely on empirical facts, research, verifyable sources and practice. If some random intern came up to you during surgery and said "I think this might work, because I once heard a guy say it did" you'd likely tell him to get the hell out of your OR. I write. If I write something that is unfounded in empirical data or void of any logic deduction, I end up looking like an idiot, the people who hire me end up looking like idiots and then people wont pay me. Unless I write fiction, and even there I have to have to establish some sort of "believeability".  

The guy you know might be a good and credible source. But I only have your word for it. And we just met . So, Ill remain sceptical. But Ill be happy to be wrong in my cynicism. I sure do hope you are right.

I dont mind the mixing of FPS and RPG. Ideally Id like to see a nice mix of the two. I like Mass Effect because its a hybrid. But I see the demo as being slainted very much toward the FPS bit. Not so much toward the RPG / storytelling bit. And since I am focused on the RPG and Storytelling bit I was dissapointed. There is a ton of potential in ME3. I just believe that this potential wasnt really dug into in the demo. I was presented with a handfull of dialogue options out of a 1-2hr shoot em up fest. Thats not enough for me, and it certainly isnt up to par with the ME experience I am used to. I cant walk 5 feet in ME2 without having some dialogue and lore available to me. I didnt see that at all in the demo. That rather bummed me out.

[Arthas9]

Farbautisonn wrote...

Arthas9 wrote...


I'm sorry but I won't give the name of the guy, neither any clues that could lead to him. The only thing I can tell you is that he's one of the moderators here on these boards and one of the devs at Bioware. Alright, one clue maybe: he responded on one of the topics yesterday (in this segment of the forums "...Spoilers Allowed"). That's all I'm going to say. Sorry, I kind of understand your scepticism, but why would I make up a story like this. If you check my posts here in this topic you will see that I'm just as concerned as anybody else here. That's why I wrote a PM to one of the devs, and he was a kind and cool enough guy to answer my questions (even if he stated that he could not give any specific info regarding the bug fixes, only that some of them are definitely will have been fixed in the offical release.) But I understand you, though I am not familiar with this kind of occupational hazard, I study medicine. 


I kind of agree with what you wrote on the second half of the post except the rpg vs. fps thingy. Yes, ME3 is a shooter, but it's predecessors were shooters too with rpg elements (what really made these games rpg were the dialogue and choices and consequences systems). As far as I can tell by playing the demo that this time around they put more emphasis on rpg elements (weapon and armor upgrade system, weight management, skill-trees etc.). So I wouldn't say that they only wanted to appeal to the fps crowds. Certainly they tried to (I only say this because of the sloppy cover system and omni-action-spacebar) make the action a lot more spectacular and dynamic, but it's ok, since you have to try and make your game surpass the last installments on as many fronts as possible. I kind of enjoy this mix of genres (and as an rpg fan myself I very much welcome the new rpg features). 

I respect that you wont give out your source. But unless I see an official post its just hear-say. Something I can choose to hope for, not something I should see as "canon". Youre studying medicin. You cant rely on hearsay either. You have to rely on empirical facts, research, verifyable sources and practice. If some random intern came up to you during surgery and said "I think this might work, because I once heard a guy say it did" you'd likely tell him to get the hell out of your OR. I write. If I write something that is unfounded in empirical data or void of any logic deduction, I end up looking like an idiot, the people who hire me end up looking like idiots and then people wont pay me. Unless I write fiction, and even there I have to have to establish some sort of "believeability".  

The guy you know might be a good and credible source. But I only have your word for it. And we just met . So, Ill remain sceptical. But Ill be happy to be wrong in my cynicism. I sure do hope you are right.

I dont mind the mixing of FPS and RPG. Ideally Id like to see a nice mix of the two. I like Mass Effect because its a hybrid. But I see the demo as being slainted very much toward the FPS bit. Not so much toward the RPG / storytelling bit. And since I am focused on the RPG and Storytelling bit I was dissapointed. There is a ton of potential in ME3. I just believe that this potential wasnt really dug into in the demo. I was presented with a handfull of dialogue options out of a 1-2hr shoot em up fest. Thats not enough for me, and it certainly isnt up to par with the ME experience I am used to. I cant walk 5 feet in ME2 without having some dialogue and lore available to me. I didnt see that at all in the demo. That rather bummed me out.

Yep, fair enough, my friend. As I mentioned before I understand your scepiticism, and I will not try to convince you in any way about me being right or that my "source" (I wouldn't call him that cause I only exchanged one message with the guy) wrote the truth (which I can't be certain about either - in this case it's up to me wether I believe that he told me the truth out of good will and because being a nice person or that he only wanted to make me become calm enough to buy the game regardless my concerns... this is my choice, just as much it is your choice to belive me or the dev or not). 
Well you are right and wrong at the same time about what you wrote about the similarities between your and my future profession. Of course it's important not to listen to obvious stupidity, but in our profession we usually rely on professional experience rather than certain sources (this experience can mean the knowledge of some good professors, doctors, fellow collagues, new studies and scientific resarches and of course books which are acknowledged amongst medical sorts, you name it). So it is a bit easier for us to trust, but the actual responsibility for all consequences is a lot higher obviously. Anyway... just "thinking out loud." But I understand your point, and you're kind of right. 
Regarding the last issue, I think I misunderstood you and I think I couldn't make my point very well either: we stand on the same platform on this one. I also prefer rpg elements and the demo fails in that regard pretty bad because of the sloppy dialogue and choice system it shows, but at the same time it shows that this time around they put a lot more effort into other rpg elements that ME2 was lacking. Anyway, we agree...

Modifié par Arthas9, 18 février 2012 - 04:22 .

[GreatCake]

AndersL wrote...

Elegana wrote...

Bad:
-Graphics: Biggest issue with me. The graphics look inferior to ME2, IMO. It looks more like an HD remake of ME1.

This. What's up with that??

I agree. Graphics are really dissapointing, worse than ME2 with regard to the demo, imo. 

[Elvis_Mazur]

The thing is, I never had problem with Gears of War controls, and I remember that series having a rolls system too. The rolls in Mass Effect 3 seem to have screwed up the cover system because, many times, my Shepard would roll instead of going into cover.

[implodinggoat]

Well I just finished playing the multiplayer demo for a few hours....

And I really enjoyed it; but it also made me realize another concern I have.

Using the Cover System isn't Really Important Anymore: 

Throughout my time in the demo, I found that I rarely used the cover system.   More often I just ran behind a piece of cover to shield myself from incoming fire then strafed back out to attack and if I was really getting lit up I generally found it more effective to run like a mad man for the other side of the map rather than hunkering down in a secure position.

This links in with my earlier observation about how the level design of the Sur'Kesh single player map deterred strategic thought by not providing you with any advantageous positions from which to coordinate an attack.  

Granted these are multiplayer maps and are therefore don't really need to be designed with strategic coordination in mind.   None the less I couldn't help but notice that both the multiplayer maps provide precious little advantageous cover and you get flanked so often that trying to hunker down in cover is rarely advantageous.

While I like having the game flush me out of cover every now and then, I can't help but think that the devs have gone too far in this direction and in effect rendered the cover mechanic far less vital than it should be.

I enjoy making clever use of the cover system; but the game seems so focused on putting pressure on me that it doesn't provide me many opportunities to enjoy the cover mechanic and that's a shame.

[111987]

implodinggoat wrote...

Well I just finished playing the multiplayer demo for a few hours....

And I really enjoyed it; but it also made me realize another concern I have.

Using the Cover System isn't Really Important Anymore: 

Throughout my time in the demo, I found that I rarely used the cover system.   More often I just ran behind a piece of cover to shield myself from incoming fire then strafed back out to attack and if I was really getting lit up I generally found it more effective to run like a mad man for the other side of the map rather than hunkering down in a secure position.

This links in with my earlier observation about how the level design of the Sur'Kesh single player map deterred strategic thought by not providing you with any advantageous positions from which to coordinate an attack.  

Granted these are multiplayer maps and are therefore don't really need to be designed with strategic coordination in mind.   None the less I couldn't help but notice that both the multiplayer maps provide precious little advantageous cover and you get flanked so often that trying to hunker down in cover is rarely advantageous.

While I like having the game flush me out of cover every now and then, I can't help but think that the devs have gone too far in this direction and in effect rendered the cover mechanic far less vital than it should be.

I enjoy making clever use of the cover system; but the game seems so focused on putting pressure on me that it doesn't provide me many opportunities to enjoy the cover mechanic and that's a shame.

I think that's intentional. It's done to make the combat faster, more intense, and in a way realistic. In ME2, even on Isanity you could really just pick one piece of cover and and slowly kill everyone. In ME3 they have grenades, they flank, and I think it adds to the game's replayability rather than detracting from it. Because your are constantly forced to adapt to the battlefield, the gameplay doesn't become stale.

That said, there still were plenty of parts where you could remain behind cover and pick your enemies off one by one (all the combat parts in the Earth demo, the turret segment on Sur'Kesh, etc...)

[Wookie1987]

111987 wrote...

I think that's intentional. It's done to make the combat faster, more intense, and in a way realistic. In ME2, even on Isanity you could really just pick one piece of cover and and slowly kill everyone. In ME3 they have grenades, they flank, and I think it adds to the game's replayability rather than detracting from it. Because your are constantly forced to adapt to the battlefield, the gameplay doesn't become stale.

That said, there still were plenty of parts where you could remain behind cover and pick your enemies off one by one (all the combat parts in the Earth demo, the turret segment on Sur'Kesh, etc...)

Yep, pretty much this. Cover is static, a battlefield is dynamic. I would expect to move and react accordingly to situations. It does get stale sitting in one bit of cover playing peekaboo with guns until all enemies are dead.

Must admit that the roll/stick to cover system needs some tweaking. Most of the times that i died in the demo is because i've somehow managed to stick to some random cover whilst trying to retreat.

[The Sapien]

AndersL wrote...

Elegana wrote...

Bad:
-Graphics: Biggest issue with me. The graphics look inferior to ME2, IMO. It looks more like an HD remake of ME1.

This. What's up with that??

Yeah, I kept hearing about how actually playing ME3 and not just watching uploads to YouTube was impressive graphics wise. But I was thoroughly let down by the graphics in the demo. Characters have better textures, but that's it. So I agree with the above. On the plus side, on my mid-end PC, I normally can't run new games on high settings, however, ME3 runs smoothly on high settings just like on old game should.

[The Sapien]

GreatCake wrote...

AndersL wrote...

Elegana wrote...

Bad:
-Graphics: Biggest issue with me. The graphics look inferior to ME2, IMO. It looks more like an HD remake of ME1.

This. What's up with that??

I agree. Graphics are really dissapointing, worse than ME2 with regard to the demo, imo. 

I think ME3 even runs smoother than ME2 because of baked in textures. Though I prefer dynamic lighting and shadows, the baked in stuff does help framerates during combat. Trying to see the bright side of this crap...

[The Sapien]

Still no 360 controller support on the PC! BioWare is the only dev not doing this. Why?

[The Sapien]

Arthas9 wrote...

DnVill wrote...

with all these complaints on the demo. The game is starting to look like another DA2 quality game which was a backwards step for the DA franchise.

I do hope that this doesn't turn out to be like ME: Deception.

Lets just pray to the Almighty for it not to happen. I'm not familiar with the DA series (though I'm planning to pick up my copy of DA Origins in the near future), but I've heard some awful things about the second installment. No, it just can't and won't happen to my favourit (along with the The Witcher games) series. 

Me thinks Devs just put out better material when they are still striving for success. Then, once at the top, coasting time. Not intentionally, just subconscious kind of thing.

[The Sapien]

Theobuomai wrote...

Been scrolling thru the ME twitter.  Here's something of note:
______
@masseffect Can anyone affiliated with BW/ME reassure that the complete game is going to be more polished?

@nme_insane Rest easy! The demo is just a demo and there will be far more in the full game!
______

Sure, still vague, but seems  to confirm that the demo really isn't at par with the full game...

Sounds like wishful thinking. A demo is supposed to win people over, showing off your best and what to expect. This is it people. It makes no sense to release a crap demo. Better no demo at all then. Wake up from your dreams.

I'm sorry, I'm really depressed now myself after playing more of the demo. The dream is over. My only gaming hope now is that I find a new title to fall in love with, soon.

[Ghost-621]

Thought I quote someone else and post this here.

"Bioware, pull your heads out of your asses, yank the plug out of Shep's ass, have some respect for the previous two games and fix the animations. Thank you."

[GreatCake]

The Sapien wrote...

Theobuomai wrote...

Been scrolling thru the ME twitter.  Here's something of note:
______
@masseffect Can anyone affiliated with BW/ME reassure that the complete game is going to be more polished?

@nme_insane Rest easy! The demo is just a demo and there will be far more in the full game!
______

Sure, still vague, but seems  to confirm that the demo really isn't at par with the full game...

Sounds like wishful thinking. A demo is supposed to win people over, showing off your best and what to expect. This is it people. It makes no sense to release a crap demo. Better no demo at all then. Wake up from your dreams.

I'm sorry, I'm really depressed now myself after playing more of the demo. The dream is over. My only gaming hope now is that I find a new title to fall in love with, soon.

Bioware has confirmed that the final game will be more polished more than once on their twitter page. It isn't wishful thinking, it's deciding whether to believe them or not. Personally, I won't believe them 'till the game's running on my console.

[Poison_Berrie]

Farbautisonn wrote...

The guy you know might be a good and credible source. But I only have your word for it. And we just met . So, Ill remain sceptical. But Ill be happy to be wrong in my cynicism. I sure do hope you are right.

He PM-ed a dev. It's not so much hearsay as an anonimous source. If Arthas9 has got a message than yes the source is credible. 
Giving Arthas9's posting history on this thread it seems unlikely that he would be pulling prank on us here.

[Farbautisonn]

Poison_Berrie wrote...

Farbautisonn wrote...

The guy you know might be a good and credible source. But I only have your word for it. And we just met . So, Ill remain sceptical. But Ill be happy to be wrong in my cynicism. I sure do hope you are right.

He PM-ed a dev. It's not so much hearsay as an anonimous source. If Arthas9 has got a message than yes the source is credible. 
Giving Arthas9's posting history on this thread it seems unlikely that he would be pulling prank on us here.

-If.

[Farbautisonn]

Arthas9 wrote...


Yep, fair enough, my friend. As I mentioned before I understand your scepiticism, and I will not try to convince you in any way about me being right or that my "source" (I wouldn't call him that cause I only exchanged one message with the guy) wrote the truth (which I can't be certain about either - in this case it's up to me wether I believe that he told me the truth out of good will and because being a nice person or that he only wanted to make me become calm enough to buy the game regardless my concerns... this is my choice, just as much it is your choice to belive me or the dev or not). 
Well you are right and wrong at the same time about what you wrote about the similarities between your and my future profession. Of course it's important not to listen to obvious stupidity, but in our profession we usually rely on professional experience rather than certain sources (this experience can mean the knowledge of some good professors, doctors, fellow collagues, new studies and scientific resarches and of course books which are acknowledged amongst medical sorts, you name it). So it is a bit easier for us to trust, but the actual responsibility for all consequences is a lot higher obviously. Anyway... just "thinking out loud." But I understand your point, and you're kind of right. 
Regarding the last issue, I think I misunderstood you and I think I couldn't make my point very well either: we stand on the same platform on this one. I also prefer rpg elements and the demo fails in that regard pretty bad because of the sloppy dialogue and choice system it shows, but at the same time it shows that this time around they put a lot more effort into other rpg elements that ME2 was lacking. Anyway, we agree...

We do agree. I just like to argue. Also a professional hazard. .

[AndersL]

The Sapien wrote...

AndersL wrote...

Elegana wrote...

Bad:
-Graphics: Biggest issue with me. The graphics look inferior to ME2, IMO. It looks more like an HD remake of ME1.

This. What's up with that??

Yeah, I kept hearing about how actually playing ME3 and not just watching uploads to YouTube was impressive graphics wise. But I was thoroughly let down by the graphics in the demo. Characters have better textures, but that's it. So I agree with the above. On the plus side, on my mid-end PC, I normally can't run new games on high settings, however, ME3 runs smoothly on high settings just like on old game should.

I had recently played Mass Effect 1 (on the 360) before trying out the demo. My reaction: The **** is this?! The graphics are horrible. Mass Effect 2's graphics were a major improvment, like the game itself... I have bad feelings about this one.

Modifié par AndersL, 19 février 2012 - 12:39 .