281 réponses à ce sujet

[granyte]

ZLurps wrote...

Mass Effect 1 was released in November 2007
Mass Effect 2 was released in January 2010
Time between release of ME1 and ME2: Approx. 25 months.

Mass Effect 3 was released in March 2012
Time between release of ME2 and ME3: Approx 26 months.

Where's the rush?

We have less side missions, less squad mates (both which imo are good for pacing of game) and BioWare could recycle character models and other resources from ME2.

Again, where's the rush?

then how to explain the qualitie diference between me1-2 and me3?  EA management put it's nose in there but where oh wait i got it Origin forced up our butt and Multiplayer these were two integration completly new to ME and should have required more time to be integrated and polished

Modifié par granyte, 27 mars 2012 - 10:01 .

[ZLurps]

granyte wrote...

ZLurps wrote...

Mass Effect 1 was released in November 2007
Mass Effect 2 was released in January 2010
Time between release of ME1 and ME2: Approx. 25 months.

Mass Effect 3 was released in March 2012
Time between release of ME2 and ME3: Approx 26 months.

Where's the rush?

We have less side missions, less squad mates (both which imo are good for pacing of game) and BioWare could recycle character models and other resources from ME2.

Again, where's the rush?

then how to explain the qualitie diference between me1-2 and me3?  EA management put it's nose in there but where oh wait i got it Origin forced up our butt and Multiplayer these were two integration completly new to ME and should have required more time to be integrated and polished

I think most of ME3 was great. The Citadel for example, writing, voice cast, voice directing, I don't recall I don't recall any game that could top ME3 in that regard. There were so many nods to previous games, including fan favourite speculation about Leviathan of Dis (which was nice nod to us, but perhaps unnecessary) they get back in ME1 Bring Down the Sky DLC character Balak...  but we also get things like Asari conversation with therapist in hospital. Great work imo.

There are many other things, like how they masked the pipelines in level design.

What comes to multiplayer but BioWare said that it's done by other BioWare division. Must admit that I didn't bought it then, it's not a matter if it's separate division or not, the budget remains the same. However, like I said earlier, they could recycle character models, major NPC's (Miranda, Thane, Joker, and squadmates, Garrus, Liara (from LotSB)  ship models, the Citadel model, textures, other elements from ME2. etc.

What was cut?
- Vehicle exploration
- Half of the former squad mates are now NPC's (good cut IMO)
- We don't have many side missions (pacing was good in ME3 imo)
- Eden Prime mission (Javik)
- Omega (We had even tie-in comic for that, then it never happened, wtf?)
- Ending. >

Plot, well we see a lot of Cerberus do we?

What happened, well you must ask that from their producer. Other person that comes to mind is Walters, he was the lead writer and if they were so much in a rush and they didn't had any sort of ending writing during end of summer 2011, 3-4 months max. before original release date why he was writing comics?

Perhaps EA is involved there, at least what comes to multiplayer, but what comes to ending this looks like torch and run.

Modifié par ZLurps, 27 mars 2012 - 10:28 .

[MadRabbit999]

(Forum screw up, comment deleted)

Modifié par MadRabbit999, 27 mars 2012 - 10:47 .

[Evil_medved]

Yes but guns are better!11 It makes better gaem!11 Call of Mass: Future Warfare FTW!11

[Eain]

FemmeShep wrote...

Maybe OP, maybe.

Or maybe BioWare is moving in a new direction with developing their games, where they are more focused on telling the main plot, and less concerned with world/story immersion. We saw a similar style for DA2.

Sadly, I think this is something that we will continue to see. I think EA buying them out, is certainly an influence. There is a lot about ME3 that comes off as surface, lacking depth.

DA2 did not have a development style. They wanted to do Dragon Age the CoD way with a yearly released, and it backfired horrendously. DA2 is a crappy rushjob of a game for all the same reasons ME3 is. 

[shengar]

[quote]ZLurps wrote...

Mass Effect 1 was released in November 2007
Mass Effect 2 was released in January 2010
Time between release of ME1 and ME2: Approx. 25 months.

Mass Effect 3 was released in March 2012
Time between release of ME2 and ME3: Approx 26 months.

Where's the rush?

We have less side missions, less squad mates (both which imo are good for pacing of game) and BioWare could recycle character models and other resources from ME2.

Again, where's the rush?[/quote]
[/quote]
ME2 development and ME3 development  are kinda different. I said this mostly because the story and how ME2 plays out.

ME2, you were killed, resurrected, and given a task to prevent the collectors. That is enough to said that ME2 is kinda of fresh start thus it doesn't take ME1 story into consideration. The writing have less burden to think pf the consequences we have made before.

While in ME3, this is the last of the trilogy. Where all the consequences will take place and how it will change the ending(purposedly). Writing this stuff up is very hard. And without how the story should go, the rest of the team can't continue their work either. This is why I think that ME3 should take longer to develop since it was the trilogy finale, where all choices you made show it consequences (supposed to).

[Annora]

You're essentially saying that the very hard work the developers put in didn't actually happen. By likening them to a lazy, procrastinating student, you've cheapened the unthinkable amount of hours these real people put into it.

I won't say it wasn't rushed, this is pretty much par for the course in the industry, I just take issue with your comparison.

[Seival]

 Hold the line!

[ZLurps]

shengar wrote...

ZLurps wrote...

Mass Effect 1 was released in November 2007
Mass Effect 2 was released in January 2010
Time between release of ME1 and ME2: Approx. 25 months.

Mass Effect 3 was released in March 2012
Time between release of ME2 and ME3: Approx 26 months.

Where's the rush?

We have less side missions, less squad mates (both which imo are good for pacing of game) and BioWare could recycle character models and other resources from ME2.

Again, where's the rush?

ME2 development and ME3 development  are kinda different. I said this mostly because the story and how ME2 plays out.

ME2, you were killed, resurrected, and given a task to prevent the collectors. That is enough to said that ME2 is kinda of fresh start thus it doesn't take ME1 story into consideration. The writing have less burden to think pf the consequences we have made before.

While in ME3, this is the last of the trilogy. Where all the consequences will take place and how it will change the ending(purposedly). Writing this stuff up is very hard. And without how the story should go, the rest of the team can't continue their work either. This is why I think that ME3 should take longer to develop since it was the trilogy finale, where all choices you made show it consequences (supposed to).

I'm not sure I buy that. Notice that what we know for certain that Omega was cut, it was suppoded to have new content.

Whatever the case, making development schedule taking available resources in account is responsiblity of producer.

BioWare's founders Ray Muzyka and Greg Zeschuk are now Vice Presidents on EA. In their role as VP's they are responsible for revenue of products released under BioWare label.

I'm sorry.

Modifié par ZLurps, 27 mars 2012 - 11:34 .

[tiger-tron]

ME3 could have definately done with an extra year of development time. Maybe even two...

[Queenie4000]

FYI - Javik was originally intended for the game but due to time constraints they had to change that - via the The Final Hours of ME3 app word for word here ya go "After much deliberation, what was known as the first "CAT" or catalyst mission, where the player would meet a Prothean alien for the first time, was removed from the overarching plot. The mission would later be completed as post-release content, but to many on the team it was a heartbreaking loss."

To be fair, games often go through this though where they plan to do one thing but have to change a plot due to time constraints.

However, I do think they had alot on their plates and perhaps not enough time to fill those plates. I.E. - Kinect, MP..not even to mention all the things they had planned for the campaign but had to change.

Modifié par Queenie4000, 27 mars 2012 - 11:36 .

[ZLurps]

Anastassia wrote...

You're essentially saying that the very hard work the developers put in didn't actually happen. By likening them to a lazy, procrastinating student, you've cheapened the unthinkable amount of hours these real people put into it.

I won't say it wasn't rushed, this is pretty much par for the course in the industry, I just take issue with your comparison.

This is aimed for?

Modifié par ZLurps, 27 mars 2012 - 11:40 .

[ZLurps]

tiger-tron wrote...

ME3 could have definately done with an extra year of development time. Maybe even two...

Every year costs money. By adding a year more for development they were been at risk that product wont break even once released.

Modifié par ZLurps, 27 mars 2012 - 11:40 .

[Dusty Arne]

nitpicker!!!!

[Cody211282]

ZLurps wrote...

tiger-tron wrote...

ME3 could have definately done with an extra year of development time. Maybe even two...

Every year costs money. By adding a year more for development they were been at risk that product wouldn't break even once released.

Heavy risk



But the Priiizzzzzzeeee

[Dav3VsTh3World]

BUGS!!!!!

WE'VE GOT BUGS!!!

[ZLurps]

Cody211282 wrote...

ZLurps wrote...

tiger-tron wrote...

ME3 could have definately done with an extra year of development time. Maybe even two...

Every year costs money. By adding a year more for development they were been at risk that product wouldn't break even once released.

Heavy risk


But the Priiizzzzzzeeee

:lol:

[IntoTheDarkness]

When gay romance was controversial I was against that because every bit of extra time they spend on optional dialogues reduces the game's volume. Same went for multiplayer. I hope those who refuted me back then sees it now. It's not all-you-can-have. Game development is about taking what you absolutely need and cutting the rest.

We did not need a mulitplayer.
We did not need same sex romance(or even new romance)
We did not need unidentical maps for each mission, which the community overly criticized in DA2. Reused maps would have enabled many more side missions.
We did not need overly artistic design of each planet. ME1 quality would have done just fine. For ex, Dev interviewed how much effort they've put in designing Mars. That was a total waste of time for players will look at the scenery for no more than 10 sec. I don't care if all planets look ugly. ME trilogy is about narrative storytelling.

All these unnecessary workload, no wonder you get a game with small volume. BW totally screwed its prioritizing strategy.

[garf]

Thornne wrote...

What I find interesting is that all these things were pretty obvious during my playthrough. The broken quest journal was really annoying.

BUT, I did not care. I was really enjoying the game, for all it's flaws. I could excuse (or at least mostly ignore) the problems because it was ME3, and I was finally going to get a showdown with the Reapers and put the whole series to bed.

Then I hit the ending.

THIS.

I agree with you in hindsight OP I think there was some rushing I think there was perhaps an attempt to tell change Bioware's modus operandi.

I also wonder if it was a deliberate effort at pacing? ME 3 DOES convey a sense of desperation of 'minutes count' that the other two frankly lacked. Yes there was some necessary haste at the end of ME 2. but ME 3 felt the entire time like it was that last free mission before the suicide mission would get there in time to watch the crew turned to reaper fuel slurry.

Which did work for me. but yes. Overall ME 3 lacks the polish of ME 2 or the patience of ME1 each had their strong points.

[CroGamer002]

Rachni Queen is a clone if you killed original one on Noveria.

And if you save the clone, she bites you in the ass by killing Crucible personal and damaging Crucible.
If you saved original queen, she helps you with only making Crucible personal nervous.

So choices from ME1 and ME2 do matter in ME3, just not for the endings.

[shengar]

ZLurps wrote...

I'm not sure I buy that. Notice that what we know for certain that Omega was cut, it was suppoded to have new content.

Whatever the case, making development schedule taking available resources in account is responsiblity of producer.

BioWare's founders Ray Muzyka and Greg Zeschuk are now Vice Presidents on EA. In their role as VP's they are responsible for revenue of products released under BioWare label.

I'm sorry.

There are another things that should take into consideration too.
Initially, ME2 just released for Xbox360 and PC. While the PS3 version some olut later in 2011.
In ME3 case, the team must develop it for three system simultenaously. Although all they need to is just porting much of the game, but it stilll take Bioware resources. PS3 and XBOX360 have really different engine. Not to mention kinect support, the Multiplayer, and the absence of their former ME1 lead writer, which make the writing must work harder to do their job.

Just my opinion.

[chris fenton]

Thank you EA, for ruining even more good gaming! I would have waited another year EASY!
But no. EA is the worst gaming publisher in the history of gaming. And yes, the blame 100% goes to them.

[shengar]

ZLurps wrote...

Cody211282 wrote...

ZLurps wrote...

tiger-tron wrote...

ME3 could have definately done with an extra year of development time. Maybe even two...

Every year costs money. By adding a year more for development they were been at risk that product wouldn't break even once released.

Heavy risk


But the Priiizzzzzzeeee

:lol:

Heavy Risk indeed:lol:

But if succesfull, the priiizzzee are indeed........:O

[Tleining]

@ Terminus Echoes

so where is the evidence? You just point out thinks you didn't like and call it evidence to back up your theory.

Release Date:

you do understand the concept of a tentative release date, right? They could have gone the Blizzard way and just that: "It will come out when it's finished. Instead they tried to give a date. Might have been a mistake, but unless you are aware of how that date was set, you have no evidence.


The Beginning:


Remember Me1's Opening? A Cutscene of Shepard being chosen, a cutscene of Shepard walking up to Joker, a bit of Small talk with Chakwas & Co. , and, oh look, Eden Prime is under attack.
ME3: A Cutscene of the Fleet with Anderson and Hackett talking, a cutscene of Shepard watching a Kid, Small talk with Anderson, Earth is under Attack.

And there we have it, prove that ME1 and 3 are exactly the same (that was sarcasm)


The Citadel:


Right, now please point out what you did on the Citadel in ME1. That's right, you spend hours just running along. Guess what the Fans did. That's right, they complained. So in ME2, it was changed. Fans still didn't like the useless Stairs. So in ME3, we have the important areas, where there is stuff for us to do, and a fast moving elevator.

Proof that Bioware gave us exactly what we were asking for. (not sarcasm)


Lack of a Squad:


Again, ask yourself what we Fans wanted. We wanted our Squadmates to interact with one another. To move around the Ship. The Fans also wanted the ME1 Squad back. And guess what. That's exactly what happened. We have the Survivors from ME1 (except Wrex ) on board the Normandy. Even Garrus and Tali from ME2 and EDI who moved up from Shackled AI to full Squadmate.

And they are moving around the Ship, talking to each other. Could Bioware have done that with 12 or more Squadmates? Maybe, but that's not evidence of them being rushed.


Only Two Main Planets:


So compare that to the previous games. ME1: Eden Prime, Therum, Feros, Noveria, Virmire and Ilos. Okay, that's six, in addition to that we have planetary exploration (which most people didn't like) and the odd base/space station. Not that much different.

ME2: Okay, lot's of Planets, but not much to do except shooting. If we follow the Main Story: Freedoms Progress, Horizon, Collector Vessel, Derelict Reaper, Collector Base. That's five.

Seems to me like ME3 is very similiar to the previous games.

From Ashes:


So, would you say DA:O was a rush job as well? They initially cut Shale from the Game, they put her back in, when the release was delayed. But according to your theory, at least going by the first release date, it would have been rushed.

Lack of Side Quests:


Question: How do you know, that the MP-Maps were used in SP and not the other way around?

In addition: Fan demands!
Fans wanted a sense of urgency. So doing a lot of Sidquests while the Galaxy is at stake. How dare they?
Same for the Journal. Fans didn't want to be led around. Always saying that they wanted to track their quests themselves. Well, there we have it.

I don't like the Journal, but i mostly ignore it. Checking the Map to see what NPCs i can interact with is more than enough.


Lack of Acknowledgement for Past Side Quests:


Like who/what? How is anyone supposed to counter that without knowing what you are talking about?
I got acknowledgements from pretty much everything i did in ME2 (mostly companion related). In addition, emails from Shiala and a news Report about Rana. And that's just what i can think of right now.


Choices Don't Matter:


Well, this would be the first point where i have to agree with you. Though i can't decided wether it was rushed or just deemed "too complicated" or "not important" by the devs. Hard to say.
Anyway, i agree with you on this one.


Space Hamster:


Sten: NO!

Where'd all my guns and armor go?:


Because rediscovering armor and weapons is an RPG-Element that they didn't want to remove?

Lack of Armor:


So, wait, I'm confused. You do realise, that the game-engine was changed, right? So it's pretty fair to assume, that all the armor had to be adjusted. Especially given the animations (rolling around, etc.)
In ME2 they received a lot of complaints for not including the armors from ME1, ...
Doomed if they do, doomed if they don't i say.


Lack of Love Interests:


While i would agree, that MaleShep has more LI Options than FemShep, especially when it comes to Hetero-Human-LI, your comparison only accounts for the "Gender"-Shep unique LIs. Liara, Tali, Jack, Miranda, Kaidan were apparently forgotten (oh, wait, you mentioned Kaidan).
You mentioned Ashley as MShep only. What if she died on Virmire?

And, once again: What were the Fans asking for? SameSex Romance! We got it.
Continuing our ME1 or 2 romance! With the exception of Jacob and Thane, we got it.

Oh, and if you don't like Allers. That's yor Problem. It is NOT evidence of ME3 being rushed.

The Ending:


uh, i'm unsure what to think of the ending. Right now i'm stuck between agreeing with you, and believing that Bioware was going for somethink really deep that just ended up getting buried somewhere between Circular Logic and RGB.


So all in all, i agree with two of your Points. But i couldn't see any evidence. A bit sad