55528 réponses à ce sujet

[Dwailing]

EpyonX3 wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...


Video Game Development

Now I know EC is more like a huge patch but the development cycle must have been similar when creating EC. Add to the fact that MS is known for taking more time then usual to approve patches. F1 2010 took a good week to be released on the 360 after the patch was submitted on top of having a 2 GB download limit.

Oh God, please tell me you did not just cite a wikipedia article as an element of proof that the EC justifies 3 months and 2 gigs. 

Yes. Because it explains the process of video game development. They started EC from scratch. It was not planned. Therefore, they had to go through the processes of stating a new development cycle, even if it's just for EC.

Who says that the EC wasn't planned?  I remember Arian thought that, but I'm not completely sure.  Personally, I'm starting to think that what we got in the EC might have been what they intended originally, it's just that they didn't have the time.  I'm not saying that they necessarily ran out of time, but rather, they decided it would be better to release the endings in the form we saw originally (Prompting speculation.), and then they decided to release the full original endings (So they can claim that they weren't actually changing the endings because this is what they had intended in the first place.) given the amount of time they had to develope them (To prompt even more speculations.).  Remember, they had originally asked for six more months of dev time (June 2012) back when the release date was Holiday 2011, but they only got three months (March 2012).  And when did the EC come out?  In June, three months after the release of ME3, but six months after they had asked for more time.

Edit: I know this may be a little inelegant, but hopefully you'll all understand what I'm getting at.

Modifié par Dwailing, 28 juin 2012 - 05:23 .

[EpyonX3]

llbountyhunter wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...
Prove it.

Lair of the Shadow Broker took less time and has more content.

Next.

Link? And I don't think LotSB has more content. Two levels perhaps but not many, if any, prerenderd scenes and slideshows.

Liara's apartment, office building, city (chase scene), hotel, Shadow Broker's ship (interior and exterior).

That's a lot of level design.

Sure and it'snot my intention to say that it didn't take time. But levels are not as space and time consuming as prerendered cinimatics. There's motion capture, level deisgn, sound design, recordings, rendering, implementation and then testing.

EC still consisted primarily of slideshows

No the endings consitsed primarily of slides. However, the entire EC contains more cinematics than slides.

[llbountyhunter]

EpyonX3 wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...
Prove it.

Lair of the Shadow Broker took less time and has more content.

Next.

Link? And I don't think LotSB has more content. Two levels perhaps but not many, if any, prerenderd scenes and slideshows.

Liara's apartment, office building, city (chase scene), hotel, Shadow Broker's ship (interior and exterior).

That's a lot of level design.

Sure and it'snot my intention to say that it didn't take time. But levels are not as space and time consuming as prerendered cinimatics. There's motion capture, level deisgn, sound design, recordings, rendering, implementation and then testing.

EC still consisted primarily of slideshows

No the endings consitsed primarily of slides. However, the entire EC contains more cinematics than slides.

So picky....lol.... and still not enough to warrant 3 months of effort.

[Lokanaiya]

I just got a friend of mine who knows absolutely nothing about Mass Effect or even games in general to listen to Harbinger's line right before you get hit, and she says that it really sounded like "Serve us" to her.

[EpyonX3]

Dwailing wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...


Video Game Development

Now I know EC is more like a huge patch but the development cycle must have been similar when creating EC. Add to the fact that MS is known for taking more time then usual to approve patches. F1 2010 took a good week to be released on the 360 after the patch was submitted on top of having a 2 GB download limit.

Oh God, please tell me you did not just cite a wikipedia article as an element of proof that the EC justifies 3 months and 2 gigs. 

Yes. Because it explains the process of video game development. They started EC from scratch. It was not planned. Therefore, they had to go through the processes of stating a new development cycle, even if it's just for EC.

Who says that the EC wasn't planned?  I remember Arian thought that, but I'm not completely sure.  Personally, I'm starting to think that what we got in the EC might have been what they intended originally, it's just that they didn't have the time.  I'm not saying that they necessarily ran out of time, but rather, they decided it would be better to release the endings in the form we saw originally (Prompting speculation.), and then they decided to release the full original endings (So they can claim that they weren't actually changing the endings because this is what they had intended in the first place.) given the amount of time they had to develope them (To prompt even more speculations.).  Remember, they had originally asked for six more months of dev time (June 2012) back when the release date was Holiday 2011, but they only got three months (March 2012).  And when did the EC come out?  In June, three months after the release of ME3, but six months after they had asked for more time.

Edit: I know this may be a little inelegant, but hopefully you'll all understand what I'm getting at.

If EC was planned, we would have seen it much sooner because the scripts, designs of the levels for prerendered scenes and some dialog would have been complete or at least conceptualized. Or, they would have delayed the game another month or two.

[EpyonX3]

llbountyhunter wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...
Prove it.

Lair of the Shadow Broker took less time and has more content.

Next.

Link? And I don't think LotSB has more content. Two levels perhaps but not many, if any, prerenderd scenes and slideshows.

Liara's apartment, office building, city (chase scene), hotel, Shadow Broker's ship (interior and exterior).

That's a lot of level design.

Sure and it'snot my intention to say that it didn't take time. But levels are not as space and time consuming as prerendered cinimatics. There's motion capture, level deisgn, sound design, recordings, rendering, implementation and then testing.

EC still consisted primarily of slideshows

No the endings consitsed primarily of slides. However, the entire EC contains more cinematics than slides.

So picky....lol.... and still not enough to warrant 3 months of effort.

lol How many playthroughs did you do after EC came out?

[Andromidius]

llbountyhunter wrote...

It was like a hour and a half of gameplay.

And?  EC is less then an hour of combined cutscenes.

There's more level design in LotSB.  That's just obvious.

[masster blaster]

balance5050 wrote...

 @ Byne


Here's some stuff:

How does anyone live through this without armor and a helmet?

  

 

Also, the white light "dream transition effect is very telling that the ending could be a combination of a dream and being somehow mentally linked to some reaper somehow.


Dreams
http://desmond.image...jpg&res=landing

  
Shepard in Geth consensus



The ending

  

Also, look at Shepards eyes when he chooses either control or synthesize

 


Reposting for justice 

i know that this is very old but if it's the same Breath scene in the EC then look at the Mako in the not EC.

[Lokanaiya]

EpyonX3 wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...


Video Game Development

Now I know EC is more like a huge patch but the development cycle must have been similar when creating EC. Add to the fact that MS is known for taking more time then usual to approve patches. F1 2010 took a good week to be released on the 360 after the patch was submitted on top of having a 2 GB download limit.

Oh God, please tell me you did not just cite a wikipedia article as an element of proof that the EC justifies 3 months and 2 gigs. 

Yes. Because it explains the process of video game development. They started EC from scratch. It was not planned. Therefore, they had to go through the processes of stating a new development cycle, even if it's just for EC.

Who says that the EC wasn't planned?  I remember Arian thought that, but I'm not completely sure.  Personally, I'm starting to think that what we got in the EC might have been what they intended originally, it's just that they didn't have the time.  I'm not saying that they necessarily ran out of time, but rather, they decided it would be better to release the endings in the form we saw originally (Prompting speculation.), and then they decided to release the full original endings (So they can claim that they weren't actually changing the endings because this is what they had intended in the first place.) given the amount of time they had to develope them (To prompt even more speculations.).  Remember, they had originally asked for six more months of dev time (June 2012) back when the release date was Holiday 2011, but they only got three months (March 2012).  And when did the EC come out?  In June, three months after the release of ME3, but six months after they had asked for more time.

Edit: I know this may be a little inelegant, but hopefully you'll all understand what I'm getting at.

If EC was planned, we would have seen it much sooner because the scripts, designs of the levels for prerendered scenes and some dialog would have been complete or at least conceptualized. Or, they would have delayed the game another month or two.

I think you're forgetting about the rEApers....

[HellishFiend]

EpyonX3 wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

You're not proving anything by implying that I need to be more educated on the process of game development to participate in this discussion. 

Well that is what is required to make something like EC. If you don't understand why EC took so long, then perhaps you need to review the process. Making something like EC isn't as simple as you think. Three months is actually a short time to release something like this. You can even notice that some Quality Control was skipped a bit when you look at the low ems destroy scene. They forgot to remove the crucible firing sound trigger at the time it should have without EC.

I'm not trying to insult you or your intelligence. But you asked me for proof of why it took so long and I'm providing it. It's up to you if you want to accept it or not.

I think you need to look up an article on proof. Regardless of how short or long the development process of the EC was, you can not cite "general knowledge of the game development process" as proof. You would still need something tangible. Now if that article somehow contained a magic formula that says something like "X amount of gameplay hours = X amount of development time" then maybe you could cite that. But that is certainly not the case here. The mere existence of Duke Nukem Forever and Diablo III disallows your citation of general game development knowledge as an element of proof. One could easily argue that neither justifies their amount of development time. Would you cite general game development knowledge as proof against that assertion? There are too many factors involved. You need to cite factors, not general knowledge. 

[llbountyhunter]

Andromidius wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

It was like a hour and a half of gameplay.

And?  EC is less then an hour of combined cutscenes.

There's more level design in LotSB.  That's just obvious.

I was supporting you:P

[belsbern]

I thought this thread was about whether the ending still supported the Indoctrination Theory. It seems to be anything but. I guess after 1330 pages it has changed. I did not have the time to read all those posts. I have viewed all the new content and endings and still feel that IT is still true. Does anyone have anything against that?

[Dwailing]

EpyonX3 wrote...

Dwailing wrote...


Who says that the EC wasn't planned?  I remember Arian thought that, but I'm not completely sure.  Personally, I'm starting to think that what we got in the EC might have been what they intended originally, it's just that they didn't have the time.  I'm not saying that they necessarily ran out of time, but rather, they decided it would be better to release the endings in the form we saw originally (Prompting speculation.), and then they decided to release the full original endings (So they can claim that they weren't actually changing the endings because this is what they had intended in the first place.) given the amount of time they had to develope them (To prompt even more speculations.).  Remember, they had originally asked for six more months of dev time (June 2012) back when the release date was Holiday 2011, but they only got three months (March 2012).  And when did the EC come out?  In June, three months after the release of ME3, but six months after they had asked for more time.

Edit: I know this may be a little inelegant, but hopefully you'll all understand what I'm getting at.

If EC was planned, we would have seen it much sooner because the scripts, designs of the levels for prerendered scenes and some dialog would have been complete or at least conceptualized. Or, they would have delayed the game another month or two.

But they couldn't delay the game any longer, EA wouldn't let them have any more time.  Also, like I said before, they only said that they were reprioritizing the post-launch single-player DLC.  That doesn't mean they actually stopped developing other DLC, it just means they changed their priorities around slightly.

[Lokanaiya]

belsbern wrote...

I thought this thread was about whether the ending still supported the Indoctrination Theory. It seems to be anything but. I guess after 1330 pages it has changed. I did not have the time to read all those posts. I have viewed all the new content and endings and still feel that IT is still true. Does anyone have anything against that?

Just the trolls. Don't listen to them.

[Criddle]

Lokanaiya wrote...

I just got a friend of mine who knows absolutely nothing about Mass Effect or even games in general to listen to Harbinger's line right before you get hit, and she says that it really sounded like "Serve us" to her.

hmm I watched again and i think shes right...
But another point... In the Control Ending, why does the Crucible even fire? Because if the endings are literal, the Starchild is controlling them, and he must have some way to give them orders, so it does not need the Crucible to fire, if Shepard just replaces the Starchild on the Citadel, and becomes the new Catalyst, so its likely that he stays on the Citadel and give the Reapers the orders just as Starchild did....

[EpyonX3]

Lokanaiya wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...


Video Game Development

Now I know EC is more like a huge patch but the development cycle must have been similar when creating EC. Add to the fact that MS is known for taking more time then usual to approve patches. F1 2010 took a good week to be released on the 360 after the patch was submitted on top of having a 2 GB download limit.

Oh God, please tell me you did not just cite a wikipedia article as an element of proof that the EC justifies 3 months and 2 gigs. 

Yes. Because it explains the process of video game development. They started EC from scratch. It was not planned. Therefore, they had to go through the processes of stating a new development cycle, even if it's just for EC.

Who says that the EC wasn't planned?  I remember Arian thought that, but I'm not completely sure.  Personally, I'm starting to think that what we got in the EC might have been what they intended originally, it's just that they didn't have the time.  I'm not saying that they necessarily ran out of time, but rather, they decided it would be better to release the endings in the form we saw originally (Prompting speculation.), and then they decided to release the full original endings (So they can claim that they weren't actually changing the endings because this is what they had intended in the first place.) given the amount of time they had to develope them (To prompt even more speculations.).  Remember, they had originally asked for six more months of dev time (June 2012) back when the release date was Holiday 2011, but they only got three months (March 2012).  And when did the EC come out?  In June, three months after the release of ME3, but six months after they had asked for more time.

Edit: I know this may be a little inelegant, but hopefully you'll all understand what I'm getting at.

If EC was planned, we would have seen it much sooner because the scripts, designs of the levels for prerendered scenes and some dialog would have been complete or at least conceptualized. Or, they would have delayed the game another month or two.

I think you're forgetting about the rEApers....

Well that's possible, but they allowed one delay, why not another?

[EpyonX3]

Dwailing wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

Dwailing wrote...


Who says that the EC wasn't planned?  I remember Arian thought that, but I'm not completely sure.  Personally, I'm starting to think that what we got in the EC might have been what they intended originally, it's just that they didn't have the time.  I'm not saying that they necessarily ran out of time, but rather, they decided it would be better to release the endings in the form we saw originally (Prompting speculation.), and then they decided to release the full original endings (So they can claim that they weren't actually changing the endings because this is what they had intended in the first place.) given the amount of time they had to develope them (To prompt even more speculations.).  Remember, they had originally asked for six more months of dev time (June 2012) back when the release date was Holiday 2011, but they only got three months (March 2012).  And when did the EC come out?  In June, three months after the release of ME3, but six months after they had asked for more time.

Edit: I know this may be a little inelegant, but hopefully you'll all understand what I'm getting at.

If EC was planned, we would have seen it much sooner because the scripts, designs of the levels for prerendered scenes and some dialog would have been complete or at least conceptualized. Or, they would have delayed the game another month or two.

But they couldn't delay the game any longer, EA wouldn't let them have any more time.  Also, like I said before, they only said that they were reprioritizing the post-launch single-player DLC.  That doesn't mean they actually stopped developing other DLC, it just means they changed their priorities around slightly.

Let's not forget that it was EA that made the delay, not bioware.

[Andromidius]

llbountyhunter wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

It was like a hour and a half of gameplay.

And?  EC is less then an hour of combined cutscenes.

There's more level design in LotSB.  That's just obvious.

I was supporting you:P

I knew that.

>_>

[EpyonX3]

HellishFiend wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

You're not proving anything by implying that I need to be more educated on the process of game development to participate in this discussion. 

Well that is what is required to make something like EC. If you don't understand why EC took so long, then perhaps you need to review the process. Making something like EC isn't as simple as you think. Three months is actually a short time to release something like this. You can even notice that some Quality Control was skipped a bit when you look at the low ems destroy scene. They forgot to remove the crucible firing sound trigger at the time it should have without EC.

I'm not trying to insult you or your intelligence. But you asked me for proof of why it took so long and I'm providing it. It's up to you if you want to accept it or not.

I think you need to look up an article on proof. Regardless of how short or long the development process of the EC was, you can not cite "general knowledge of the game development process" as proof. You would still need something tangible. Now if that article somehow contained a magic formula that says something like "X amount of gameplay hours = X amount of development time" then maybe you could cite that. But that is certainly not the case here. The mere existence of Duke Nukem Forever and Diablo III disallows your citation of general game development knowledge as an element of proof. One could easily argue that neither justifies their amount of development time. Would you cite general game development knowledge as proof against that assertion? There are too many factors involved. You need to cite factors, not general knowledge. 

Don't forget that I asked you for proof initially, since you asserted that it could not have taken so long. You then asked me for proof that it was justifiable.

I provided something. Now it's your turn.

[OdanUrr]

Dwailing wrote...

But they couldn't delay the game any longer, EA wouldn't let them have any more time.  Also, like I said before, they only said that they were reprioritizing the post-launch single-player DLC.  That doesn't mean they actually stopped developing other DLC, it just means they changed their priorities around slightly.

I know for a fact I didn't say they stopped development of other DLCs to release the EC.

[MilitanT07]

why does Shepard's eye become brown when going up the beam regardless of what it was before it?

[masster blaster]

Ownaholic wrote...

I'll just leave these here.
When Anderson says "They're controlling you", he looks directly at the camera (which is currently Shepard's POV) upon saying the word "You".
You can see this in video form here.

I thought this would be spark some new ideas of why is this still in the EC?

Edit: yes this was from a month ago but it's still in the EC.

Modifié par masster blaster, 28 juin 2012 - 05:36 .

[BP20125810]

They didn't work on ONLY EC for three months. It's clear that they also worked on the leviathan DLC. So, I think the added work on the extra DLC was the main reason for the three months. Plus, the development process DOES take a lot longer than people think.

[HellishFiend]

EpyonX3 wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

You're not proving anything by implying that I need to be more educated on the process of game development to participate in this discussion. 

Well that is what is required to make something like EC. If you don't understand why EC took so long, then perhaps you need to review the process. Making something like EC isn't as simple as you think. Three months is actually a short time to release something like this. You can even notice that some Quality Control was skipped a bit when you look at the low ems destroy scene. They forgot to remove the crucible firing sound trigger at the time it should have without EC.

I'm not trying to insult you or your intelligence. But you asked me for proof of why it took so long and I'm providing it. It's up to you if you want to accept it or not.

I think you need to look up an article on proof. Regardless of how short or long the development process of the EC was, you can not cite "general knowledge of the game development process" as proof. You would still need something tangible. Now if that article somehow contained a magic formula that says something like "X amount of gameplay hours = X amount of development time" then maybe you could cite that. But that is certainly not the case here. The mere existence of Duke Nukem Forever and Diablo III disallows your citation of general game development knowledge as an element of proof. One could easily argue that neither justifies their amount of development time. Would you cite general game development knowledge as proof against that assertion? There are too many factors involved. You need to cite factors, not general knowledge. 

Don't forget that I asked you for proof initially, since you asserted that it could not have taken so long. You then asked me for proof that it was justifiable.

I provided something. Now it's your turn.

You must have missed my point. My point was that one can NOT provide proof for that sort of thing without having an inside source. Instead you continued with it as if providing proof either way was somehow possible. 

[OdanUrr]

Criddle wrote...

Because if the endings are literal, the Starchild is controlling them, (...)

Are you certain?