1895 réponses à ce sujet

[Ilzairspar]

john v rambo wrote...

I like Patrick Weekes

me too.

[Joush]

Not sure if it's been mentioned yet, but Patrick Weekes seems to be very bad at math, or ignorant of basic Mass Effect lore.

Roughly a dozen light years can be crossed in a day's travel but must stop to discharge the drive core and refuel. The Milky way is 1,000 light years thick and about 120,000 light years in diameter.

Let's take the Quarians for example. They are at Earth and want to go to Rannoch in the outer rim. Given relative positions on the map, that looks like somewhere between 100,000 and 80,000 light years. Let's say it is the low end.

That's 18 years of constant travel, and even if we are very generous about their ability to discharge drive cores and collect fuel on the way, that should add at least 20% down time to the journey. So 20 years, one way, for the Quarians to get home.

Travel between clusters in Mass Effect would take years. It's no longer a casual space travel story after the end of ME3.

Of course, I'd expect them to just ignore that and have FTL work at the speed of plot. ME has always been about ignoring lore. (Every space battle in the game, for example).

[JPN17]

A lot of crap explanations in there. It's like these guys just completely forget things they've already done. Like the keepers preventing the reapers from disabling the mass relays in 3 despite the fact that Saren and the geth had no problems disabling the relays in 1. Just doesn't make any sense at all. Hard to believe the writers of the game couldn't figure this stuff out when they had over 2 years to do it.

[xsdob]

Joush wrote...

Not sure if it's been mentioned yet, but Patrick Weekes seems to be very bad at math, or ignorant of basic Mass Effect lore.

Roughly a dozen light years can be crossed in a day's travel but must stop to discharge the drive core and refuel. The Milky way is 1,000 light years thick and about 120,000 light years in diameter.

Let's take the Quarians for example. They are at Earth and want to go to Rannoch in the outer rim. Given relative positions on the map, that looks like somewhere between 100,000 and 80,000 light years. Let's say it is the low end.

That's 18 years of constant travel, and even if we are very generous about their ability to discharge drive cores and collect fuel on the way, that should add at least 20% down time to the journey. So 20 years, one way, for the Quarians to get home.

Travel between clusters in Mass Effect would take years. It's no longer a casual space travel story after the end of ME3.

Of course, I'd expect them to just ignore that and have FTL work at the speed of plot. ME has always been about ignoring lore. (Every space battle in the game, for example).

Wow, it takes some balls to say to the person who hold omnipotence over the mass effect story, "no your wrong about the lore, let me prove it with stuff you can change!"

More than likley, they'll jsut have the reapers mas effect drives cut the time down from taking years to taking months. So that the quarians get home in a year and 8 months or so. That's not so bad, considering they brought the life ships into battle and they can last 100 more years or so, as stated in ascension.

[Joush]

Yes, you can totally ignore the lore in the codex and the information available to have it work however you like if you write the story. That is bad writing, and claiming the problem is trivial within the lore suggest you don't know the setting very well or you aren't good at math.

[Norman250]

Joush wrote...

Not sure if it's been mentioned yet, but Patrick Weekes seems to be very bad at math, or ignorant of basic Mass Effect lore.

Roughly a dozen light years can be crossed in a day's travel but must stop to discharge the drive core and refuel. The Milky way is 1,000 light years thick and about 120,000 light years in diameter.

Let's take the Quarians for example. They are at Earth and want to go to Rannoch in the outer rim. Given relative positions on the map, that looks like somewhere between 100,000 and 80,000 light years. Let's say it is the low end.

That's 18 years of constant travel, and even if we are very generous about their ability to discharge drive cores and collect fuel on the way, that should add at least 20% down time to the journey. So 20 years, one way, for the Quarians to get home.

Travel between clusters in Mass Effect would take years. It's no longer a casual space travel story after the end of ME3.

Of course, I'd expect them to just ignore that and have FTL work at the speed of plot. ME has always been about ignoring lore. (Every space battle in the game, for example).

None of these are direct quotes. 

[MadRabbit999]

The Charnel Expanse wrote...

AllThatJazz wrote...

MadRabbit999 wrote...

The Charnel Expanse wrote...

Michael Gamble wrote...

The Charnel Expanse wrote...

Michael Gamble wrote...

Cmon - give us some time with the DLC, and let's try to avoid hatin' on Patrick or Jessica:P

Honestly, after all the valid and incisive criticism leveled at the Catalyst and his presence in the ending, why insist on keeping him around? 90% of what's wrong with the ending can be solved simply by retconning him out of existence.

Why not just answer this question directly?

Is your question about whether or not we are going to retcon the catalyst? The answer is no. We've already said we are not changing the endings, but again - there are many things that we *can* do without changing them. 

My question is WHY you're so resistant to retconning him out.
He damages the ending in such a fundamental way that as long as he remains in place, the ending is irredeemable.

That is not what  we all believe (And we are definetely  NOT the minority), that is your opinion which you are entitled to.

Agreed. I'm not a fan of the catalyst, but irrdeemable? I don't think so, as long as the confusing bits are explained better

As long as the part about having to resolve the conflict between organics and synthetics remains in place, it's doomed. It completely alters the theme of the series at the worst possible time.

I do not beleive that is correct.. 

Soverign made us beleive the reapers were all a bunch of murdering, maniacs killing for the sake of killing organics (Which btw, if this was true made no sense... why then leave non-space faring races if that was the case?)

Same with Harbinger in ME2.

In ME3, the Catalyst which uses the image of a child from Shepard's head and it is NOT a child... tells us what the reapers are really all about.

Now this might contradict what Soverign said, but like Sovreign said, they are all individual nations and they all think individually, even if the original purpose by which they were built was to preserve Organic life as a genetic "paste".

I do not see how this part of the story goes agaisnt anything that happened before.

[Kanon777]

Joush wrote...

Yes, you can totally ignore the lore in the codex and the information available to have it work however you like if you write the story. That is bad writing, and claiming the problem is trivial within the lore suggest you don't know the setting very well or you aren't good at math.

Well, get ready to be angry because this is about to happen. Dont take everything too seriously or you wont be able to enjoy most stories...

[xsdob]

JPN17 wrote...

A lot of crap explanations in there. It's like these guys just completely forget things they've already done. Like the keepers preventing the reapers from disabling the mass relays in 3 despite the fact that Saren and the geth had no problems disabling the relays in 1. Just doesn't make any sense at all. Hard to believe the writers of the game couldn't figure this stuff out when they had over 2 years to do it.

When did saren actually suceed in shuting off all the relays? From what I heard, only the relay in the serpent nebula was locked, all the other relays worked fine, or else why not just say "activate the relay network" instead of "Unlock the relays around the citadel". Seems odd that they would differenciate so much.

Of course you could also be right, but that's just specualtion and semantics on both our parts. However, I would rather trust the person who shares omnipotence over the mass effect universe to handle it than just assume he's wrong and to move on.

[Varus Praetor]

So, crap loads of content cut due to time constraints.....pretty much as I expected.


"-What was up with the Rachni story? Why did we get railroaded?

Welcome to game development. In some games (Alpha Protocol) they make a bold choice where some decisions can knock entire missions out of the story. At BioWare, we never want people to be locked out of content due to a decision several games ago. We just didn't have the resources to do an alternate for the Rachni mission, so we decided that the Rachni mission could occur whether or not players saved the Queen."

This pretty much sums up for me why Bioware is now an inferior storyteller compared with CD Projekt, from my perspective. They are afraid to take risks with the story that impact the gameplay. And this is why your choices do not matter. If this were a CD Projekt game players that had killed the Rachni wouldn't have to face a Macgyvered abomination just so that everyone got to experience the same content. Guess what, I don't WANT to always experience the same content. I want my choices to matter in a meaningful way. Fail BW. Utter fail.

[Astralify]

Varus Praetor wrote...

So, crap loads of content cut due to time constraints.....pretty much as I expected.


"-What was up with the Rachni story? Why did we get railroaded?

Welcome to game development. In some games (Alpha Protocol) they make a bold choice where some decisions can knock entire missions out of the story. At BioWare, we never want people to be locked out of content due to a decision several games ago. We just didn't have the resources to do an alternate for the Rachni mission, so we decided that the Rachni mission could occur whether or not players saved the Queen."

This pretty much sums up for me why Bioware is now an inferior storyteller compared with CD Projekt, from my perspective. They are afraid to take risks with the story that impact the gameplay. And this is why your choices do not matter. If this were a CD Projekt game players that had killed the Rachni wouldn't have to face a Macgyvered abomination just so that everyone got to experience the same content. Guess what, I don't WANT to always experience the same content. I want my choices to matter in a meaningful way. Fail BW. Utter fail.

I agree with you.

[kimuji]

tobito113 wrote...

jakal66 wrote...

killnoob wrote...

put more magical explosions, problem solved. You cannot imagine that how many retakers would shut-up if you allow them to pick an option that allows Shepard to live without killing the geths or EDI. 

So true,so sad but so true!

PEOPLE ACCEPT THE FACT THAT THE ENDING IS NOT,I REPEAT, IS NOT GOING TO CHANGE!!!!STOP BANGING YOUR HEADS AGAINST CONCRETE!!!!    IT        IS       NOT     GOING    TO    BE    CHANGED!

The thnigs is, its SO easy for Bioware to retcon the Geth destruction by claming that the highest EMS Red ending destroys only the reapers, we know that sheps synthetics stay intact and he can survive if your EMS is high enough, so its easy to apply the same logic for the Geth+EDI's body

Incredible, we agree. That solutions has many advantages:

- very little work needed from the ME3 team, and they can keep their Starchild without altering him.
- those who were thinking that a more ethical ending was missing should be satisfied.
- it leaves enough room for interpretation to either believe the Starchild was saying crap (yes that means that if you don't like the Starchild you can basically ignore what he says) or wasn't fully aware of (or hiding)  what a perfectly functioning Crucible was capable of.

We must be realistic they'll never make a new end for the game, and this is the best acceptable compromise I can think of.

[xsdob]

Astralify wrote...

Varus Praetor wrote...

So, crap loads of content cut due to time constraints.....pretty much as I expected.


"-What was up with the Rachni story? Why did we get railroaded?

Welcome to game development. In some games (Alpha Protocol) they make a bold choice where some decisions can knock entire missions out of the story. At BioWare, we never want people to be locked out of content due to a decision several games ago. We just didn't have the resources to do an alternate for the Rachni mission, so we decided that the Rachni mission could occur whether or not players saved the Queen."

This pretty much sums up for me why Bioware is now an inferior storyteller compared with CD Projekt, from my perspective. They are afraid to take risks with the story that impact the gameplay. And this is why your choices do not matter. If this were a CD Projekt game players that had killed the Rachni wouldn't have to face a Macgyvered abomination just so that everyone got to experience the same content. Guess what, I don't WANT to always experience the same content. I want my choices to matter in a meaningful way. Fail BW. Utter fail.

I agree with you.

I really miss the days when games were judged by how much fun a person had and not how bold their decision making was.

[JPN17]

xsdob wrote...

JPN17 wrote...

A lot of crap explanations in there. It's like these guys just completely forget things they've already done. Like the keepers preventing the reapers from disabling the mass relays in 3 despite the fact that Saren and the geth had no problems disabling the relays in 1. Just doesn't make any sense at all. Hard to believe the writers of the game couldn't figure this stuff out when they had over 2 years to do it.

When did saren actually suceed in shuting off all the relays? From what I heard, only the relay in the serpent nebula was locked, all the other relays worked fine, or else why not just say "activate the relay network" instead of "Unlock the relays around the citadel". Seems odd that they would differenciate so much.

Of course you could also be right, but that's just specualtion and semantics on both our parts. However, I would rather trust the person who shares omnipotence over the mass effect universe to handle it than just assume he's wrong and to move on.

You're right the only relay in game to be confirmed that was locked was the serpent nebula relay (don't know if it has a name). Still though the fact remains that they were able to disable it. I can't see any explanation for why the reapers couldn't have done the same with the Charon relay. Why would the keepers do nothing to stop Saren 3 years earlier, but all of the sudden prevent the reapers in ME3? Seems like a huge plot hole to me.

After ME2 I would have agreed with you, but after seeing what went on in ME3 (particularly in regard to the ending) and the fact that Deception was released with praise, I have no reason to trust that the writers of the game have any respect for the established lore of Mass Effect. And that's very sad.

[Kanon777]

kimuji wrote...

tobito113 wrote...

jakal66 wrote...

killnoob wrote...

put more magical explosions, problem solved. You cannot imagine that how many retakers would shut-up if you allow them to pick an option that allows Shepard to live without killing the geths or EDI. 

So true,so sad but so true!

PEOPLE ACCEPT THE FACT THAT THE ENDING IS NOT,I REPEAT, IS NOT GOING TO CHANGE!!!!STOP BANGING YOUR HEADS AGAINST CONCRETE!!!!    IT        IS       NOT     GOING    TO    BE    CHANGED!

The thnigs is, its SO easy for Bioware to retcon the Geth destruction by claming that the highest EMS Red ending destroys only the reapers, we know that sheps synthetics stay intact and he can survive if your EMS is high enough, so its easy to apply the same logic for the Geth+EDI's body

Incredible, we agree. That solutions has many advantages:

- very little work needed from the ME3 team, and they can keep their Starchild without altering him.
- those who were thinking that a more ethical ending was missing should be satisfied.
- it leaves enough room for interpretation to either believe the Starchild was saying crap (yes that means that if you don't like the Starchild you can basically ignore what he says) or wasn't fully aware of (or hiding)  what a perfectly functioning Crucible was capable of.

We must be realistic they'll never make a new end for the game, and this is the best acceptable compromise I can think of.

Actually i dont think we can even call it a retcon, since the end is so vague we might as well asume it DID happen but they didnt show us. That is why imo they dont need a complete rewrite of the ending, imo what they really need is

- modify the character of the catalyst to look more imponent (making the catalyst take multiple forms or appear as multiple people like in the dreams), and add more confrontation/ignore option so that shep dosent even need to listen to it. I would also like if it took the form of the original creator of the reapers, like Avina and Vendetta does with Humans and Proteans

-more gamplay options for the finale (fight with mecha illusive man ? scene where you control Harbringer!) 

-more cutscenes with each race and companions from ME2 you saved fightning the reapers

- one scene where the crew gets rescued, (LI scene)

- mega slide section with detailed epilogue for the characters (this should be written, its cheaper and allows for more lore content on even the minor characters and more variations of their future)

All of those ideas preserve the "artistic integrity" and would improve the ending

Modifié par tobito113, 08 avril 2012 - 10:19 .

[xsdob]

JPN17 wrote...

xsdob wrote...

JPN17 wrote...

A lot of crap explanations in there. It's like these guys just completely forget things they've already done. Like the keepers preventing the reapers from disabling the mass relays in 3 despite the fact that Saren and the geth had no problems disabling the relays in 1. Just doesn't make any sense at all. Hard to believe the writers of the game couldn't figure this stuff out when they had over 2 years to do it.

When did saren actually suceed in shuting off all the relays? From what I heard, only the relay in the serpent nebula was locked, all the other relays worked fine, or else why not just say "activate the relay network" instead of "Unlock the relays around the citadel". Seems odd that they would differenciate so much.

Of course you could also be right, but that's just specualtion and semantics on both our parts. However, I would rather trust the person who shares omnipotence over the mass effect universe to handle it than just assume he's wrong and to move on.

You're right the only relay in game to be confirmed that was locked was the serpent nebula relay (don't know if it has a name). Still though the fact remains that they were able to disable it. I can't see any explanation for why the reapers couldn't have done the same with the Charon relay. Why would the keepers do nothing to stop Saren 3 years earlier, but all of the sudden prevent the reapers in ME3? Seems like a huge plot hole to me.

After ME2 I would have agreed with you, but after seeing what went on in ME3 (particularly in regard to the ending) and the fact that Deception was released with praise, I have no reason to trust that the writers of the game have any respect for the established lore of Mass Effect. And that's very sad.

Who knows, for all we know the keepers have been secretly being worked on by the council to prevent them from doing what they did when saren attacked. Heck, there could even be a factor in that where if you helped chorban get the keeper data, that it made reprograming the keeprs to no longer allow the relays to shut down a lot simpler and allowed resources to be allocated elsewhere, netting a 30 war asset boost, otherwise you don't get the war asset boost but the keepers were still reprogramed.

[JPN17]

xsdob wrote...

JPN17 wrote...

xsdob wrote...

JPN17 wrote...

A lot of crap explanations in there. It's like these guys just completely forget things they've already done. Like the keepers preventing the reapers from disabling the mass relays in 3 despite the fact that Saren and the geth had no problems disabling the relays in 1. Just doesn't make any sense at all. Hard to believe the writers of the game couldn't figure this stuff out when they had over 2 years to do it.

When did saren actually suceed in shuting off all the relays? From what I heard, only the relay in the serpent nebula was locked, all the other relays worked fine, or else why not just say "activate the relay network" instead of "Unlock the relays around the citadel". Seems odd that they would differenciate so much.

Of course you could also be right, but that's just specualtion and semantics on both our parts. However, I would rather trust the person who shares omnipotence over the mass effect universe to handle it than just assume he's wrong and to move on.

You're right the only relay in game to be confirmed that was locked was the serpent nebula relay (don't know if it has a name). Still though the fact remains that they were able to disable it. I can't see any explanation for why the reapers couldn't have done the same with the Charon relay. Why would the keepers do nothing to stop Saren 3 years earlier, but all of the sudden prevent the reapers in ME3? Seems like a huge plot hole to me.

After ME2 I would have agreed with you, but after seeing what went on in ME3 (particularly in regard to the ending) and the fact that Deception was released with praise, I have no reason to trust that the writers of the game have any respect for the established lore of Mass Effect. And that's very sad.

Who knows, for all we know the keepers have been secretly being worked on by the council to prevent them from doing what they did when saren attacked. Heck, there could even be a factor in that where if you helped chorban get the keeper data, that it made reprograming the keeprs to no longer allow the relays to shut down a lot simpler and allowed resources to be allocated elsewhere, netting a 30 war asset boost, otherwise you don't get the war asset boost but the keepers were still reprogramed.

And it took you what, 20 seconds to come up with that? Makes me wonder why the Bioware writers in 2 years couldn't come up with something. That's one of the things that bothers me the most is that most of the problems I have with the plot holes in ME3 could have been explained away with one dialogue line or one line of text. But apparently that was too difficult for Bioware. Hopefully the extended cut has a lot of answers that make sense. I'm not holding my breath though.

[Eain]

Michael Gamble wrote...

Is your question about whether or not we are going to retcon the catalyst? The answer is no. We've already said we are not changing the endings, but again - there are many things that we *can* do without changing them.

Wow this, well.... I guess it helps, actually? Knowing that the Spacekid is final, it really helps me put my worries to rest. Because I know they're pointless now.

Thanks for this clarification, at least. Not the answer I wanted, but still an answer that helps me close the book on this fiasco.

Thanks for ME1 and 2, Bioware.

[Myrmedus]

xsdob wrote...

Astralify wrote...

Varus Praetor wrote...

So, crap loads of content cut due to time constraints.....pretty much as I expected.


"-What was up with the Rachni story? Why did we get railroaded?

Welcome to game development. In some games (Alpha Protocol) they make a bold choice where some decisions can knock entire missions out of the story. At BioWare, we never want people to be locked out of content due to a decision several games ago. We just didn't have the resources to do an alternate for the Rachni mission, so we decided that the Rachni mission could occur whether or not players saved the Queen."

This pretty much sums up for me why Bioware is now an inferior storyteller compared with CD Projekt, from my perspective. They are afraid to take risks with the story that impact the gameplay. And this is why your choices do not matter. If this were a CD Projekt game players that had killed the Rachni wouldn't have to face a Macgyvered abomination just so that everyone got to experience the same content. Guess what, I don't WANT to always experience the same content. I want my choices to matter in a meaningful way. Fail BW. Utter fail.

I agree with you.

I really miss the days when games were judged by how much fun a person had and not how bold their decision making was.

Have you ever considered that when purchasing games like ME those two things are one and the same?

[xsdob]

JPN17 wrote...

xsdob wrote...

JPN17 wrote...

xsdob wrote...

JPN17 wrote...

A lot of crap explanations in there. It's like these guys just completely forget things they've already done. Like the keepers preventing the reapers from disabling the mass relays in 3 despite the fact that Saren and the geth had no problems disabling the relays in 1. Just doesn't make any sense at all. Hard to believe the writers of the game couldn't figure this stuff out when they had over 2 years to do it.

When did saren actually suceed in shuting off all the relays? From what I heard, only the relay in the serpent nebula was locked, all the other relays worked fine, or else why not just say "activate the relay network" instead of "Unlock the relays around the citadel". Seems odd that they would differenciate so much.

Of course you could also be right, but that's just specualtion and semantics on both our parts. However, I would rather trust the person who shares omnipotence over the mass effect universe to handle it than just assume he's wrong and to move on.

You're right the only relay in game to be confirmed that was locked was the serpent nebula relay (don't know if it has a name). Still though the fact remains that they were able to disable it. I can't see any explanation for why the reapers couldn't have done the same with the Charon relay. Why would the keepers do nothing to stop Saren 3 years earlier, but all of the sudden prevent the reapers in ME3? Seems like a huge plot hole to me.

After ME2 I would have agreed with you, but after seeing what went on in ME3 (particularly in regard to the ending) and the fact that Deception was released with praise, I have no reason to trust that the writers of the game have any respect for the established lore of Mass Effect. And that's very sad.

Who knows, for all we know the keepers have been secretly being worked on by the council to prevent them from doing what they did when saren attacked. Heck, there could even be a factor in that where if you helped chorban get the keeper data, that it made reprograming the keeprs to no longer allow the relays to shut down a lot simpler and allowed resources to be allocated elsewhere, netting a 30 war asset boost, otherwise you don't get the war asset boost but the keepers were still reprogramed.

And it took you what, 20 seconds to come up with that? Makes me wonder why the Bioware writers in 2 years couldn't come up with something. That's one of the things that bothers me the most is that most of the problems I have with the plot holes in ME3 could have been explained away with one dialogue line or one line of text. But apparently that was too difficult for Bioware. Hopefully the extended cut has a lot of answers that make sense. I'm not holding my breath though.

I know the feeling, but those single lines of diolouge get cut out from movies and games all the time, remember all the cut content that was in ME2, and all the hidden diolouge.

It just happens, and people make mistakes, espically in the story telling medium, even after tripple, quaddruple, and even the fifth time they've looked their work over, they won't see the problem until the audience points it out.

I'm optmistic that bioware will get this new extended cut right, probably won't fix everything but enough to make the ending decent instead of bad.

[KrazyKiko]

JPN17 wrote...

After ME2 I would have agreed with you, but after seeing what went on in ME3 (particularly in regard to the ending) and the fact that Deception was released with praise, I have no reason to trust that the writers of the game have any respect for the established lore of Mass Effect. And that's very sad.

I would most certainly agree with your take on the ME lore; As a fan of the novels, I looked with anticipation for Deception.   Then I heard rumblings about inconsistencies with pre-established facts and events; I thought: How did this pass BioWare's editing?   At the time, I hoped this wasn't a sign to come for ME3, but looking back now, it was an unfortunate omen - at least for the last few minutes of the game.

[Valorefane Dragonwinter]

Weekes holding three folders of fan feedback, per Merizan.

[Ultra Prism]

Okay Mike Gamble said it, the team needs time so I am gonna wait

[Tirranek]

Valorefane Dragonwinter wrote...



Weekes holding three folders of fan feedback, per Merizan.

I approve of the Red. Had to be done. Sorry Legion =(

[xsdob]

Myrmedus wrote...

xsdob wrote...

Astralify wrote...

Varus Praetor wrote...

So, crap loads of content cut due to time constraints.....pretty much as I expected.


"-What was up with the Rachni story? Why did we get railroaded?

Welcome to game development. In some games (Alpha Protocol) they make a bold choice where some decisions can knock entire missions out of the story. At BioWare, we never want people to be locked out of content due to a decision several games ago. We just didn't have the resources to do an alternate for the Rachni mission, so we decided that the Rachni mission could occur whether or not players saved the Queen."

This pretty much sums up for me why Bioware is now an inferior storyteller compared with CD Projekt, from my perspective. They are afraid to take risks with the story that impact the gameplay. And this is why your choices do not matter. If this were a CD Projekt game players that had killed the Rachni wouldn't have to face a Macgyvered abomination just so that everyone got to experience the same content. Guess what, I don't WANT to always experience the same content. I want my choices to matter in a meaningful way. Fail BW. Utter fail.

I agree with you.

I really miss the days when games were judged by how much fun a person had and not how bold their decision making was.

Have you ever considered that when purchasing games like ME those two things are one and the same?

For a casual gamer like myself who doesn't really care about the type of game it is or the genre, I had a great time with mass effect. I felt that the game was good, and that the choices and how they effected the rest of the game, while not well executed, were still well done, and I felt that the game was a nice balance between action and story.

I didn't mind that the rachni queen was cloned, it was nice to see that if you spare the cloned queen, she turns on you and damages the crucible. That made it really nice, I would have liked to have seen that happen but ti was still nice to see them work it in there. I like how the few characters that replace plot important character have a different personality than the originals, and that they reacted differently, it made the choices feel pretty good. I also liked that if garrus dies, than he doesn't get replaced, and you don't just get his sister or something along for the ride.

But that's just me, I like minimal micromanagment, a story that lets me be a part of it or is nice to follow along, and the simple joy of having a nice and easy control system so that I don't die for pressing the wrong button or die due to a bad camera angle or glitch, and not having to do mundane and repetative things just to get experience.

So I don't really see the arguments about bioware being inferior or done for. The stories are still excellent, the controls in the game have improven greatly, and the characters are well written and engaging, plus I can see a difference in the way shepard is presented depending on what choices you make, though it's not like dragon age 2 where your in between diolouge changed depending on what options you picked the most.

Modifié par xsdob, 08 avril 2012 - 10:51 .