389 réponses à ce sujet

[daftPirate]

Chris Priestly wrote...

Adeste Fideles wrote...

for me this was the single most disappointing aspect of me3. it's as if they weren't even trying anymore.

And I think this was one of the best parts of the game. There were "traditional" quests in the game, but having these"eavesdrop" quests were there for people who explored and paid attention.

Seriously. Why the frak does Shepard need to butt into everyone's conversations? Why is it better to have virtually the same "Is there something I can help with?" conversation with everyone on the Citadel? You can listen to all the context you need to without jumping in like a frakkin' boy scout. I could be wrong on this, but if I remember correctly most such missions in ME1 were given by people who actually wanted to talk to Commander Shepard, as in they were literally calling his name, or it was an emergency situation he was taking charge of (Feros and Noveria).

'S just me of course, but IMO, it was done better in ME3.

[XTR3M3]

they were what they were. my biggest beef other than having to be nosy as hell was the extremely poor journal tracking. I don't know how many times I talked to someone and then gave them what they needed that I had inadvertently found on some world I scanned at some other point in the game. Trying to track the missions involved opening up the journal, then googling the damn thing.

the ME2 were eavesdrop missions sometimes but at least you could tell what the hell to do and a lot of times actually had choices in them.

ME3's whole theme seems to be no choices as far as the new missions go. The only content with choices seems to be mission continues from past games. All new stuff like the side missions and the end were choice free.

Modifié par XTR3M3, 20 avril 2012 - 12:41 .

[Saiyan1126]

daftPirate wrote...

Seriously. Why the frak does Shepard need to butt into everyone's conversations? Why is it better to have virtually the same "Is there something I can help with?" conversation with everyone on the Citadel? You can listen to all the context you need to without jumping in like a frakkin' boy scout. I could be wrong on this, but if I remember correctly most such missions in ME1 were given by people who actually wanted to talk to Commander Shepard, as in they were literally calling his name, or it was an emergency situation he was taking charge of (Feros and Noveria).

'S just me of course, but IMO, it was done better in ME3.

The problem isn't how you get the mission, but what the game allows you to do with the mission. Like I said, in ME1 & 2, most side missions gave you a choice on how to handle the mission. In ME3 Shepard isn't seeing people in need and deciding how to help them in his way; he just becomes the galactic delivery service. After all these missions I felt like the Normandy became the Planet Express.

[MisterJB]

Chris Priestly wrote...

Adeste Fideles wrote...

for me this was the single most disappointing aspect of me3. it's as if they weren't even trying anymore.

And I think this was one of the best parts of the game. There were "traditional" quests in the game, but having these"eavesdrop" quests were there for people who explored and paid attention.

Really? I mean, really?
Saving civillians on Irune without actually...doing it... was good?
Well, I respectfully disagree.

Paying attention would be, IMO, realizing that asari killed Joker's sister and be able to tell him.

[daftPirate]

Saiyan1126 wrote...

The problem isn't how you get the mission, but what the game allows you to do with the mission. Like I said, in ME1 & 2, most side missions gave you a choice on how to handle the mission. In ME3 Shepard isn't seeing people in need and deciding how to help them in his way; he just becomes the galactic delivery service. After all these missions I felt like the Normandy became the Planet Express.

I'm not 100% sure I follow. Are you referring to not being able to land on the planet and do all the stuff personally?

Nashiktal wrote...

irishScott3 wrote...

I liked it. It made the side-quests feel more fluid and it makes sense that's what Shepard would do. He helps people. If he hears about something he could help out with, he does.

Honestly I don't get people saying this is creepy. If you had a serious problem and some world-famous medal-of-honor winner comes up to you and says "hey, heard about your problem and fixed it. Here you go." Are you going to be creeped out? No, you're going to be grateful that the well-known personification of the ideal human just helped you out.

Uh no, I would be creeped the **** out. Just because s/he solved a problem doesn't mean I want big brother breathing down my neck. If was out in public, talking to my girlfriend that I was in distress because I left my phone at home, and out of nowhere someone dumps the phone in my lap...

Put on top of that my home was probably in reaper territory and that brings up so many questions it's not even funny.

Not to mention I am sure shep has better things to do than creeping around people waiting for someone to mention a problem they have.

So do you take issue with the eavesdropping, or the fact that they are pretty much all fetch quests? I don't see how it'd be any less weird to have some stranger walk up and insert himself into my business, even if it is Will Smith. That level of weird works both ways.

Personally, I also like it that no one was trying to use me as their personal hitman.

[Mad Cassidy]

daftPirate wrote...


Seriously. Why the frak does Shepard need to butt into everyone's conversations? Why is it better to have virtually the same "Is there something I can help with?" conversation with everyone on the Citadel? You can listen to all the context you need to without jumping in like a frakkin' boy scout. I could be wrong on this, but if I remember correctly most such missions in ME1 were given by people who actually wanted to talk to Commander Shepard, as in they were literally calling his name, or it was an emergency situation he was taking charge of (Feros and Noveria).

'S just me of course, but IMO, it was done better in ME3.

They're just another illustration of a decrease in player interaction and of further streamlining. You might have found it bizarre that you could always jump in, but at least in some ways you were able to chose how you reacted to the NPCs. In ME3 you get one token response. It doesn't feel interactive, and it doesn't feel like you're roleplaying. The same thing was done for a lot of companion dialogue sequences - there was a lot of banter over which the player had NO control. It made me fee like I was an observer without any real agency.

[MisterJB]

Chris Priestly wrote...

Adeste Fideles wrote...

for me this was the single most disappointing aspect of me3. it's as if they weren't even trying anymore.

And I think this was one of the best parts of the game. There were "traditional" quests in the game, but having these"eavesdrop" quests were there for people who explored and paid attention.

[Saiyan1126]

daftPirate wrote...

I'm not 100% sure I follow. Are you referring to not being able to land on the planet and do all the stuff personally?

If you read my earlier post, my problem isn't landing on planets. I felt like ME3 threw out how the previous games allowed you to "turn in" your side missions. It didn't let you choose how to deal with the missions. All the side missions were just "I want X. Bring it to me." In ME2 it was more like "I have a problem and I don't know what to do." That gave your Shepard room to handle the problem how he wanted to.

[Zambayoshi]

Selene Moonsong wrote...

Actually, they are enjoyable, at least to me. With the scattered red-herring conversations scattered around, it made it a bit more interesting to find them. Some give you minor quests that take you places, some are spoilers, and some are nothing more than simple and even mildly interesting conversations that makes the NPCs seem more believable as individuals.

Not to derail the topic, but the 'red-herring' conversations were awesome! I liked walking past the various people talking and hearing the next 'instalment' of the conversation. That one just inside the entry to Purgatory was hilarious!

[daftPirate]

MisterJB wrote...

Really? I mean, really?
Saving civillians on Irune without actually...doing it... was good?
Well, I respectfully disagree.

Paying attention would be, IMO, realizing that asari killed Joker's sister and be able to tell him.

You do save civilians on Benning, besides other things, like getting intel that save the Eden Prime resistance. Telling Joker about his sister would be an interesting inclusion, though. Not sure how it'd spin renegade or paragon, but interesting.

Mad Cass wrote...

They're just another illustration of a decrease in player interaction and of further streamlining. You might have found it bizarre that you could always jump in, but at least in some ways you were able to chose how you reacted to the NPCs. In ME3 you get one token response. It doesn't feel interactive, and it doesn't feel like you're roleplaying. The same thing was done for a lot of companion dialogue sequences - there was a lot of banter over which the player had NO control. It made me fee like I was an observer without any real agency.

 

I agree that streamlining can go and has gone too far, but really only with regards to squadmate dialogue. There several of the NPC quests that are just as directly interactive as they were in previous games.

Saiyan1126 wrote...

If you read my earlier post, my problem isn't landing on planets. I felt like ME3 threw out how the previous games allowed you to "turn in" your side missions. It didn't let you choose how to deal with the missions. All the side missions were just "I want X. Bring it to me." In ME2 it was more like "I have a problem and I don't know what to do." That gave your Shepard room to handle the problem how he wanted to.

 

Ah. That I understand, but still largely disagree. ME3 (admitedly weak) iteration of this was resolving the arguments between NPC's, besides whatever choices you'd make during missions, which were broader in scale than in previous games. I could almost agree with you, but not with particular set of quests given in ME3. Most of these things are not things Shepard should worry about or spend time on. Even the premise that "I recovered/found this while investigating Reaper controlled territory, I remember someone needed it" is stretched thin. What your suggesting I think would've needed a totally different set of missions to belong in the game.

[Saiyan1126]

slyborg wrote...

Graph of the amount of "fetch" quests from ME-ME3

I missed that link. No wonder I thought even though ME2 felt like it was missing a lot of elements from ME1, it still had a lot of content. I loved the side quests in ME2. They felt more rewarding and important because each mission was in a different environment with a different objective.

There were a lot of memorable side missions, some of them weren't even combat missions. Like the mission on the old ship that was dangling on the edge of a cliff and required Shepard to solve the maze/puzzle of getting to the
other side. I also enjoyed the mission where a VI killed the crew of the ship and required you to solve puzzles to turn the power back on so you could shut down the VI. Then there was the side mission in the cave full of husks that I enjoyed, yet dreaded.

Modifié par Saiyan1126, 20 avril 2012 - 01:09 .

[malhar34]

Saiyan1126 wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

As already mentioned, we had the same sort of quests in ME2.

So, if you believe that we cut content and are lazy... well... at least we're consistant.

The problem is in ME2 there was replay value in the eavesdropping quests because you could actually talk to most (Salarian family data and Asari lover's locket were exceptions). Being able to talk to them gave them replay value because it could completely change the interaction.

I could tell the Krogan the truth about the fish, or I could sell him a fake one. I could yell at the rude Asari, or I could be polite and help them get off the Citadel. Even then there were more options; I could give them forged IDs, convince Customs with logic, or just wave around my Spectre status. I could help Ish blackmail, scare him off, or even snitch and get him killed.

There was no replay value in the ME3 side missions because they were all fetch quests without the ME style (Aria was the exception). I'd consider the side missions in ME2 a step forward from ME1; but the side missions in ME3 were 3 steps backwards. If the side missions in ME3 were worse than the past 2 games, that reeks of cut
corners.

(Before anyone mentions the ex-squadamate missions, those were more like loyalty missions)

You sir deserve an award. Can some one who supports ME3 fetch quests as a fulfilling replacement to ME2 fetch quests please reply to this.

[TekFanX]

Personally I've got no problem with fetch-quests.
The ones with an actual dialogue-wheel were pretty neat in my opinion.

But all those quests in Auto-Dialogue were disappointing and bleak...mildly put.

Stand next to two characters, listen to their discussion and get a quest with a "journal-entry"***.
Then fly off, fetch the item somewhere and return(This is not the part that bothers me).
The quest is then completed with another auto-dialogue in normal gameplay, not with a dialogue-wheel in the beloved cinematical view. Even quests that started perfectly fine with a dialogue-wheel and a conversation ended with auto-dialogue...I really hate this auto-dialogue-stuff.

The fetch-quests in ME2 were also fetch-quests, but in my opinion they were much better.
ME2-Spoiler:
Getting the brandy for Chakwas resulted in a long and wonderful dialogue where you coould find out more about her, a funny scene where she was so drunk she was knocked out, you had a drunk-effect for a short time with funny vision and you got a medi-gel-upgrade.

And Ish(?), the salarian on Omega who wanted you to fetch data-packets for him? You could talk him out of selling them in a (once again) perfect dialogue-session with a dialogue-wheel.

Even the small Quest on Illium with the Asari who lost the picture of her bondmate: Short, not really interactive dialogue, but you saw her up close. You saw her tears as she remembered him.
It really felt like you really did something.

So yes...I see why people call those new fetch-quest lazy.
I like fetch-quests, but compared to ME1 and ME2, a lot of the ME3-fetch-quests were just poor. Sadly I can't list them here, since there are no spoilers allowed in this section of the forum, but given the title of this thread, I'm sure people know which ones I mean.
There are some quests that start good in ME3, like the quest for Chakwas, but in the end it's auto-dialogue that finishes the quest.

***I put "journal-entry" in quotes, since I don't really see them as real journal-entries.
Journal-entries help you to keep track of your quests, how far you progressed in them and what you still need to do.
Like:
"Quest-Text"
"Find item A on a planet in this area. Completed."
"Deliver item A to NPC B. Pending."
In ME3 there is just this:
"Quest-Text"

[Gibb_Shepard]

Chris Priestly wrote...

Adeste Fideles wrote...

for me this was the single most disappointing aspect of me3. it's as if they weren't even trying anymore.

And I think this was one of the best parts of the game. There were "traditional" quests in the game, but having these"eavesdrop" quests were there for people who explored and paid attention.

LOL. If this is Bioware's new idea of what exploration should be...

[Saiyan1126]

daftPirate wrote...

Ah. That I understand, but still largely disagree. ME3 (admitedly weak) iteration of this was resolving the arguments between NPC's, besides whatever choices you'd make during missions, which were broader in scale than in previous games. I could almost agree with you, but not with particular set of quests given in ME3. Most of these things are not things Shepard should worry about or spend time on. Even the premise that "I recovered/found this while investigating Reaper controlled territory, I remember someone needed it" is stretched thin. What your suggesting I think would've needed a totally different set of missions to belong in the game.

I 100% agree. They needed better missions. What we were given were half baked ideas. I always thought the main point of side missions (besides the obvious filler) was to give your player incentive to explore the world (galaxy in this case) you've created. These side missions WERE the exploration of the world they created. I personally felt like what we were given was not only a waste of my time for doing them, but a waste of BioWare's time for even bothering to make them at all.

[Vertigo_1]

daftPirate wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

Really? I mean, really?
Saving civillians on Irune without actually...doing it... was good?
Well, I respectfully disagree.

Paying attention would be, IMO, realizing that asari killed Joker's sister and be able to tell him.

You do save civilians on Benning, besides other things, like getting intel that save the Eden Prime resistance

That was on the MP map right? Those missions were weak IMO (though, still slightly better than the eavesdropping ones).

[daftPirate]

Saiyan1126 wrote...

daftPirate wrote...

Ah. That I understand, but still largely disagree. ME3 (admitedly weak) iteration of this was resolving the arguments between NPC's, besides whatever choices you'd make during missions, which were broader in scale than in previous games. I could almost agree with you, but not with particular set of quests given in ME3. Most of these things are not things Shepard should worry about or spend time on. Even the premise that "I recovered/found this while investigating Reaper controlled territory, I remember someone needed it" is stretched thin. What your suggesting I think would've needed a totally different set of missions to belong in the game.

I 100% agree. They needed better missions. What we were given were half baked ideas. I always thought the main point of side missions (besides the obvious filler) was to give your player incentive to explore the world (galaxy in this case) you've created. These side missions WERE the exploration of the world they created. I personally felt like what we were given was not only a waste of my time for doing them, but a waste of BioWare's time for even bothering to make them at all.

This is, I think, where people would start mentioning deadlines and time constraints. The fetch quests ME3 had (most of them anyway, not so much the 'save the salarian clutch of eggs' or 'save purgatory's power supply') felt mostly like part of the setting. I was okay with not stopping and conversing with every single person to start/end a quest because I'm Commander Shepard and there's a war on, for frak's sake, and he has bigger concerns. Even the context (can't really say 'content' in most cases) fitted into the setting of the Galaxy at War. It was assets, it was security, it was morale. I don't think BioWare had time to fit ME1/ME2 style sidequests into that context, while in ME1/ME2 there was really no reason for the sidequests to be related to the main story.

[daftPirate]

Vertigo_1 wrote...

daftPirate wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

Really? I mean, really?
Saving civillians on Irune without actually...doing it... was good?
Well, I respectfully disagree.

Paying attention would be, IMO, realizing that asari killed Joker's sister and be able to tell him.

You do save civilians on Benning, besides other things, like getting intel that save the Eden Prime resistance

That was on the MP map right? Those missions were weak IMO (though, still slightly better than the eavesdropping ones).

Can't disagree, weak, but I argue they were better than many of the copy-paste bunker missions in ME1. The N7 missions could have been quite good, if they weren't all one shot's. There were two sidequests in ME1 that overcame that lameness and struck me, narratively: Hades' Dogs and Bring Down the Sky. The rest, hunting the 4 identical Geth bases, or murdering Helena Blake's crime lords, were just as weak if not weaker than the N7 missions.

[LiquidLogic2020]

Chris Priestly wrote...

As already mentioned, we had the same sort of quests in ME2.

So, if you believe that we cut content and are lazy... well... at least we're consistant.

You don't think overdoing generic fetch quests is lazy? Well this explains a lot. And yes, you've realesed three subpar games in a row, I think it's safe to say that you are indeed consistant. 

[The Spamming Troll]

first playthrough i did all of them.

second play through i did zero of them.

still got the same ending.

Modifié par The Spamming Troll, 20 avril 2012 - 01:41 .

[Saiyan1126]

daftPirate wrote...

This is, I think, where people would start mentioning deadlines and time constraints. The fetch quests ME3 had (most of them anyway, not so much the 'save the salarian clutch of eggs' or 'save purgatory's power supply') felt mostly like part of the setting. I was okay with not stopping and conversing with every single person to start/end a quest because I'm Commander Shepard and there's a war on, for frak's sake, and he has bigger concerns. Even the context (can't really say 'content' in most cases) fitted into the setting of the Galaxy at War. It was assets, it was security, it was morale. I don't think BioWare had time to fit ME1/ME2 style sidequests into that context, while in ME1/ME2 there was really no reason for the sidequests to be related to the main story.

Yep, they obviously didn't have the time. That's why I was defending Adeste Fideles' "cut corners" argument. IMO Bioware should have invested more time in adding more missions like Aria's. I'd be more forgiving if ME2's weren't so great, but Bioware already showed what they're capable of. Is it too much to expect a company to expand on successful mechanics instead of abandoning them?

I was willing to believe Bioware when they said adding multiplayer wouldn't compromise the quality of singleplayer. Now the results speak for themselves. I can't imagine anyone would've rather had Bioware integrate the multiplayer missions in single player instead of making quality side missions.

Modifié par Saiyan1126, 20 avril 2012 - 01:46 .

[daftPirate]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

first playthrough i did all of them.

second play through i did zero of them.

still got the same ending.

Lol, same deal in ME1. Less so in ME2 *eyes playthrough where all the aliens in the squad but Grunt died from incomplete loyalty missions*

Saiyan1126 wrote...

Yep, they obviously didn't have the time. That's why I was defending Adeste Fideles' "cut corners" argument. IMO Bioware should have invested more time in adding more missions like Aria's. I'd be more forgiving if ME2's weren't so great, but Bioware already showed what they're capable of. Is it too much to expect a company to expand on successful mechanics instead of abandoning them?

 

Agreed.

Modifié par daftPirate, 20 avril 2012 - 01:44 .

[Icinix]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

Adeste Fideles wrote...

for me this was the single most disappointing aspect of me3. it's as if they weren't even trying anymore.

And I think this was one of the best parts of the game. There were "traditional" quests in the game, but having these"eavesdrop" quests were there for people who explored and paid attention.

LOL. If this is Bioware's new idea of what exploration should be...

I also find it interesting that Chris said 'traditional' quests in the game, becase the fetch quests seemed to replace the traditional quests. Not sit side by side with them.

That said, the leaked script did suggest there was intended to be a lot more in ME3 (naturally things get cut over time) than what we got. Its a shame, there were so many things that were potential areas of awesomeness.

Instead of lots of deep moving quests or plots, we got a lot of nods and references.

ME3 feels like a game that wanted to stand alone from everything else Mass Effect, and in doing so, lots a part of itself.

[Jymm]

I admit I didn't take the time to read this whole thread, but I tend to believe that the "eavesdropping" part is not as objectionable as the simplicity of the fetch quests they are linked to. And more importantly to the overall frequency. The eavesdrop concept is fine if not overused, and fetch quests are OK if not overused (which sadly they often are.)

I would hazard a guess that creating a lot of detailed quests suffered as a result of this being the third game in the series. As BW noted in their press conference, they had something like 15K plot states in ME3 compared to 6K in ME2 if my memory serves me. So they have to create or modify a ton of content to take into account all the characters who might not be around in your playthrough, all the differing states of every previous sidequest, etc. Trying to account for all of that rationally would eat up development resources that might otherwise have been used on more engrossing quest structures. My sincere hope is that for their next title this can be easily rectified as they will start with a blank slate of plot threads.

I would also point out that all the sidequests in ME1 used the same locations / assets over and over and we hated that. So now they have many fewer quests with locations, but much less notable re-use of assets and much improved level design and depth. Its all trade-offs.

[Sanunes]

I don't mind them, but I do think there are a few too many. I do wonder if the "creep" factor wouldn't be so high if you had to have found the item first? For hearing someone mention the "Rings of Allune" instead of the whole conversation doesn't seem as intrusive.