589 réponses à ce sujet

[Rodia Driftwood]

Well, my initial response to this was "why?", but I guess it means more fans, more love, more fun. =)

My initial question is this:

Will it feature any Console-Exclusive features to it?.

Will Microsoft ever get off their high horse and let go of Mass Effect 1 so that us PS3 owners can play it?.

[TenkoTAiLS]

Awesome to see the series on another platform. It would be really awesome if it was a "trilogy edition" or something with all the games and DLC etc. Tho as awesome as that would be you would get a lot of negative feedback from the PC and 360 users still waiting on the Recon and Terminus packs like the PS3 got and still has >.<

[HippeusOmega]

Yuqi wrote...

Nintendo already has an established reputation for being mostly on the G-rated side. It is also going to be a few years into the next console cycle before the price drops to an acceptable (mass-markatble) level.

I think it's a bad move.

Another good point. What is the Wii U Release Price? Like $400+?

[AmstradHero]

This is utterly incomprehensible to me. The furor over the ending led developers to explain that Mass Effect 3 as an entire game was intended to be an "ending". If this is the case, why would you give only an ending to new customers?

The reason the conflicts and decisions in ME3 matter was because they were the culmination of conflicts and struggles that had been showcased throughout two games through characters that the players learned to like, trust and/or respect. These character provide the context, meaning and basis for the emotional impact of the key scenes in ME3. Without this context, these scenes possess very limited value because the player is given no reason to empathize with either of the sides involved in the conflict.

In short, releasing only the ending on a new console says "The rest of our story didn't matter." Inherently, because the value of ME3's story relies on the value of the previous storytelling, ME3's story also does not matter. This is the worst possible indictment on the Mass Effect series, because by doing so, it effectively says: "Our story doesn't matter. It just matters that we have fun gameplay."

This move appears to be a shameless attempt to make more money, and completely undermines the artistic merit of any writing in the entire Mass Effect series. I'd like for more people to be able to experience Mass Effect, but this is an appalling indictment on the value attributed to the storytelling of the series.

If this is the value that BioWare now place on storytelling, then BioWare are no longer the great company they once were.

[Hogge87]

Rodia Driftwood wrote...

Well, my initial response to this was "why?", but I guess it means more fans, more love, more fun. =)

My initial question is this:

Will it feature any Console-Exclusive features to it?.

Will Microsoft ever get off their high horse and let go of Mass Effect 1 so that us PS3 owners can play it?.

I'm wondering this too. ME1 is worthless too them. It's kind of like the rights to the N64 version of Goldeneye, where Nintendo owns part of it, Rare (in turn now owned by Microsoft) owns another part and of course someone else owns the Bond license. The result is that noone can make a true remake of the original Goldeneye game.

Unlike some peoples claims, I don't believe that Microsoft are allowed to release a remake or even enhanced port of Mass Effect 1 without some kind of agreement with EA. If my memory is correct, they only have the exclusive publishing rights, they don't actually own the rights to the characters, code or anything else. So the ME1 license is sort of worthless to them.
It's probably EA who need to get their thumbs out and pay up.

[Hogge87]

Panznerr wrote...

Yuqi wrote...

Nintendo already has an established reputation for being mostly on the G-rated side. It is also going to be a few years into the next console cycle before the price drops to an acceptable (mass-markatble) level.

I think it's a bad move.

Another good point. What is the Wii U Release Price? Like $400+?

That's a tough one. Nintendo have a history of selling their consoles cheaply, but they also have a history of selling them for what they're worth, unlike their competitors. I am very certain it won't be 400$+.
Since Nintendo haven't released any specs, and the only games made exclusively for the Wii U were ZombiU and Pikmin, we can't tell if it's a true next gen system or not (although we do know it's going to be more powerful than the current gen of machines). If it's not, then the price will probably be low. If it is, then I don't see the problem with the price tag. The PS3 did cost 599$ at launch, remember?

Regarding Nintendos ratings: they've supported games like Perfect Dark and Conkers Bad Fur Day (the latter one actually being much more censored in the Xbox version than on the N64) and of course, while Nintendos games usually are rated suitable for children, they are bought by adults.

[SeismicGravy]

Jamie9 wrote...

SeismicGravy wrote...

Jamie9 wrote...
Kinect sold a lot, yes, but I don't believe anyone uses it.

I've heard rumours it's popularity has been given a boost thanks to Skyrims latest update.

Even so, ME3 was one game that just shouldn't have had it.

I don't usually tamper with people's post out of respect, but it was me who said that. I changed it to my username. :innocent:

Anyway, I'm always optimistic about new "hardware". Kinect just didn't have creative devs do anything with it. In ME3, it's there, you can use voice command, but would you buy a Kinect for that?

Is it even more fun to use the Kinect in that situation, which is what it comes down to?

I'm afraid I don't even know what it does in Skyrim. I play Bethesda games at launch then I get the GOTY. I don't really listen to them inbetween. Is it just voice commands again, that's what a quick google search seemed to indicate?

Mainly. However the ability to save your game just by saying "Quicksave" and also shouting "FUS RO DAH!" at the enemy seems to be the clincher.

It's not perfect though, because for some reason it manages to confuse "Disarm" with "Fatality!".

Modifié par SeismicGravy, 06 juin 2012 - 09:01 .

[indyracing]

Jason Ralph wrote...

Forget how Wii U will get caught up on ME1 & 2.

How are they going to participate in the Galaxy at War??? You know, the MP part you have to do otherwise you lose half of your War Assets??? Can't imagine the uproar there will be if they get to skip MP, and the PC, XBOX 360, and PS3 can't....

As the game stands now, War Assets don't matter, so what are they missing out on?

[Darth_Trethon]

Yeah the PS3 did cost $600 but the WiiU is just getting to that level while the 360 and ps3 have a far better developer support simply because the developers are used to these platforms. The WiiU is unknown territory and will take time to fully maximize its potential. By that time the next Xbox(dev kits rumored to already be in hands of developers) and playstation will be out and far better than the WiiU.

Even if the WiiU is better than the 360 and PS3 I doubt it'll be sufficiently better to warrant $50 or $100 more.

As far as ME3 is concerned....why bother porting it? The game is mostly amazing if you have a save to import but without that it's just an incredibly poor game that doesn't make much sense....no halfassed comic can really replace two games even if they try. The intro comic done for ME2 is incredibly poor and that only tries to replace ME1....attempting to replace two games like this is bound to end in catastrophe.

Modifié par Darth_Trethon, 06 juin 2012 - 09:16 .

[ElementL09]

The only way I see this working out in the slightest is that its just the campaign portion, and there will be a motion comic for the previous 2 entries.

Porting the end to a trilogy on a new console honestly doesn't make any sense. Nintendo must have payed up alot of cash for this to occur.

[BluRay]

Edit: Post removed. User banned 24 hours.

Modifié par Chris Priestly, 06 juin 2012 - 04:17 .

[Biotic Budah]

And now the disappointment about the ending has spread to all gaming platforms. Artistic integrity and huckster profiteering have won. Until the next cycle....

[YohkoOhno]

The reason the conflicts and decisions in ME3 matter was because they were the culmination of conflicts and struggles that had been showcased throughout two games through characters that the players learned to like, trust and/or respect. These character provide the context, meaning and basis for the emotional impact of the key scenes in ME3. Without this context, these scenes possess very limited value because the player is given no reason to empathize with either of the sides involved in the conflict.

The game works on 2 levels.  For long time fans of the series, it is a cumulation.

However, ALL game developers, if they are good at their craft, treat each game, regardless of "Number Suffix" or "Subtitle", treat each game as somebody's new game.  There are people who played Thief: Deadly Shadows without ever experience Thief 1 and Thief 2, there are people who played NWN2 who never played #1, there are people who played Doom 3 or Diablo 3 or Max Payne 3 without ever playing 1 or 2.  Every game is potentially somebody's first game.  This is why you have tutorials and other things.  You never assume or write just for the hard core.

I've played all Mass Effects and while it is an added benefit to have been there since the beginning, each can stand alone.

This is why I don't understand why people are complaining about this being available on the Wii U without the first 2 being available.  You have to see the bigger picture.

[wolfsite]

YohkoOhno wrote...

The reason the conflicts and decisions in ME3 matter was because they were the culmination of conflicts and struggles that had been showcased throughout two games through characters that the players learned to like, trust and/or respect. These character provide the context, meaning and basis for the emotional impact of the key scenes in ME3. Without this context, these scenes possess very limited value because the player is given no reason to empathize with either of the sides involved in the conflict.

The game works on 2 levels.  For long time fans of the series, it is a cumulation.

However, ALL game developers, if they are good at their craft, treat each game, regardless of "Number Suffix" or "Subtitle", treat each game as somebody's new game.  There are people who played Thief: Deadly Shadows without ever experience Thief 1 and Thief 2, there are people who played NWN2 who never played #1, there are people who played Doom 3 or Diablo 3 or Max Payne 3 without ever playing 1 or 2.  Every game is potentially somebody's first game.  This is why you have tutorials and other things.  You never assume or write just for the hard core.

I've played all Mass Effects and while it is an added benefit to have been there since the beginning, each can stand alone.

This is why I don't understand why people are complaining about this being available on the Wii U without the first 2 being available.  You have to see the bigger picture.

True, but some outcomes and events in ME3 are locked out if you have not played ME1 or ME2 so there needs to be something for the transition.

[AmstradHero]

YohkoOhno wrote...

The reason the conflicts and decisions in ME3 matter was because they were the culmination of conflicts and struggles that had been showcased throughout two games through characters that the players learned to like, trust and/or respect. These character provide the context, meaning and basis for the emotional impact of the key scenes in ME3. Without this context, these scenes possess very limited value because the player is given no reason to empathize with either of the sides involved in the conflict.

The game works on 2 levels.  For long time fans of the series, it is a cumulation.

However, ALL game developers, if they are good at their craft, treat each game, regardless of "Number Suffix" or "Subtitle", treat each game as somebody's new game.  There are people who played Thief: Deadly Shadows without ever experience Thief 1 and Thief 2, there are people who played NWN2 who never played #1, there are people who played Doom 3 or Diablo 3 or Max Payne 3 without ever playing 1 or 2.  Every game is potentially somebody's first game.  This is why you have tutorials and other things.  You never assume or write just for the hard core.

I've played all Mass Effects and while it is an added benefit to have been there since the beginning, each can stand alone.

This is why I don't understand why people are complaining about this being available on the Wii U without the first 2 being available.  You have to see the bigger picture.

The Thief comparison is irrelevant because there is no real single overarching interrelated story throughout the three Thief games. (As much as I love the Thief games, the stories are only tangentially related) There are recurring characters that a nice tip of the hat to returning players, but they aren't vital to the story. Doom 3 has no plot, so that doesn't count. NWN2 and NWN1 aren't related at all. Diablo's plot is so laughably simple it doesn't warrant comparison, and again, while Max Payne is centred on a character, the games don't rely heavily on previous entries in the series. I'm aware that unfortunately, most "sequels" are not really strongly tied to previous titles in a series, even though this is the case in most other storytelling mediums.

This is where Mass Effect as a series differs from these games, and arguably any other major game series to date. The decisions the player makes carry over to subsequent games. The recurring characters play major roles in the resolution of conflicts and provide the emotional anchor for the player's investment within the conflict. Someone who comes into ME2 without having played has no attachment to Liara, Ashley, Kaidan, Tali or Garrus. As a result, the moments with those characters fall flat. If you go in to ME3 cold, then not only do those characters fall flat, but you have no context for the conflicts.

A player fresh to ME3 doesn't know any Krogans or any Salarians. They have no idea about Mordin's moral conflict about the Genophage, or the passion of Krogan to cure it. They get the facts about the situation, but have no emotional investment. Same deal with the conflict between the Geth and the Quarians - the player has no knowledge of Tali or Legion and has no emotional empathetic handle to provide them with guidance or to show the true weight of the choice being made.

ME3 as a standalone game is a shallow gameplay driven experience, with none of the significant moral and storytelling depth that exists when taken as part of the series as a whole. That's why this is such a travesty. Mass Effect was supposed to have a key focus on the tale of Commander Shepard. By introducing ME3 alone on Wii U, BioWare/EA are effectively saying "the story isn't important."

Modifié par AmstradHero, 06 juin 2012 - 12:34 .

[GDragonFly7]

My first reaction to this was: "Why? It doesn't make any sense." I just don't get it. Making last part of the trilogy... to Wii U. I wonder who looked at that and said "YEAH! Thay's a great idea!". To be clear I'm not hating on BW or EA. I just think that this won't work.

[Galactica Phantom]

I too am curious as how you this Wii U version will lack in content
we PS3 players got shafted with ME2 when it came to Conrad Verner, Good chunks of Zhu's Hope (No Thorian or Shiala just some random colonist filling the roll of Shiala but thanking me for apparently saving the colony) Bringing Down The Sky DLC & more

[Roivas_Alenko]

I started ME serie with ME3. I liked the game, but I didn't really understand everything. I didn't really understand the bound between the characters, the reappers, the collectors (it this the good english name??).
Some point of the story where in the dark for me and, I had the feeling that  I 've missed lot of importants things and the end, well I didnt really understand what was happening @@.(even today, I don't really understand how we get "this" even with ME1 & 2 background, but well that's another debat) So I decided to get Me1 & ME2. And it changed like everything

Now, I'm a huge fan of Nintendo, I like there game (etc) but seriously, like I did for some people that wanted to get ME3 on PS3 or start the ME series with ME3, I'ld never recommand to anyone to play ME3 whitout ME 1 & 2 first. Playing only ME3 is like missing 50% of the game and like 90% of the univers & mythology.

Realeasing just ME3 alone on Wii U will only lead to horrible sales figures.. I truly don't know anyone that would recommand to anyone to get ME3 without playing ME1 & 2 first.

If EA/Bioware want to get good sales, they have to realese a ME trilogy for Wii U, even if it means to push ME3 realese for 1 year, otherwise, the game will not sell (and people will blame Nintendo for that, like always, saying there game system are for child, etc) +it's coming really late, so it need to come with lot of extras and i don't see any other extra than ME1+2 to justify to get ME on Wii U (and like i said before, remake ME1 + add removed things like gay romances, give add on... I know lot of people that would like to see ME1 with ME3 graphics)

Strating Me serie with ME3,  it's like starting to watch Return of the King without seeing Followship of the ring & Return of the King, a non sens.

(again, sorry for the english)

Modifié par roivasff14, 06 juin 2012 - 12:53 .

[DoomRaiden]

i personally believe EA "SUGGESTED" to release it for Wii U ... the same when they "ADVISED" to release it on PS3 on the last DLC of ME2, getting every other DLC free and a 15 minute comic to catch up on ME1 ... 15 mins? i hope PS3 fans were frustrated with that as much as the rest of us :\\

how much money do EA think they are gonna get from releasing ME3 on Wii U? putting it handheld ... you can't begin to experience it the way it's meant to be experienced. I love playstation but I hope it doesn't release on the PS Vita for the same reasons :\\

[Hogge87]

DoomRaiden wrote...

how much money do EA think they are gonna get from releasing ME3 on Wii U? putting it handheld ... you can't begin to experience it the way it's meant to be experienced. I love playstation but I hope it doesn't release on the PS Vita for the same reasons :

The Wii U isn't a handheld. It's only a possibility, most games  use the screen on the gamepad as the second screen on the Nintendo DS.

You're still going to have all the action on your TV. Only, if EA/BW do things properly, you'll get access to your powers, weapons and squad commands via the touchscreen. That's another thing I've disliked about the current ME games. I only ever use the powers tied to the quick buttons, which is less than half of your total powers.

[YohkoOhno]

AmstradHero wrote...

This is where Mass Effect as a series differs from these games, and arguably any other major game series to date. The decisions the player makes carry over to subsequent games. The recurring characters play major roles in the resolution of conflicts and provide the emotional anchor for the player's investment within the conflict. Someone who comes into ME2 without having played has no attachment to Liara, Ashley, Kaidan, Tali or Garrus. As a result, the moments with those characters fall flat. If you go in to ME3 cold, then not only do those characters fall flat, but you have no context for the conflicts.

A player fresh to ME3 doesn't know any Krogans or any Salarians. They have no idea about Mordin's moral conflict about the Genophage, or the passion of Krogan to cure it. They get the facts about the situation, but have no emotional investment. Same deal with the conflict between the Geth and the Quarians - the player has no knowledge of Tali or Legion and has no emotional empathetic handle to provide them with guidance or to show the true weight of the choice being made.

ME3 as a standalone game is a shallow gameplay driven experience, with none of the significant moral and storytelling depth that exists when taken as part of the series as a whole. That's why this is such a travesty. Mass Effect was supposed to have a key focus on the tale of Commander Shepard. By introducing ME3 alone on Wii U, BioWare/EA are effectively saying "the story isn't important."

Mass Effect 1 was never on the PS3.  Didn't hurt the PS3 people who bought ME2 and ME3.  I'm sure Wii U users will enjoy the standalone storyline.

Even thought there is the overall Reaper ARC, each story is seperate and contained, just like any movie.  In fact, Videogames are more independent of each others than movie sequels ever are.  Bioware certainly did not make this game require picking up the first two games.  Just because some choices do carry over and the fullest experience is enjoyed by those who were there from the beginning doesn't mean it's a "travesty" to release the game on a new platform.

[Darth_Trethon]

wolfsite wrote...

True, but some outcomes and events in ME3 are locked out if you have not played ME1 or ME2 so there needs to be something for the transition.

I am all for pandering to new players in lesser games that do not have choice import mechanics. But I am absolutely against pandering to new players in games like Mass Effect and Dragon Age and so on. There is absolutely no way, shape or form to properly replace one game(much less two games) with a filler comic. Anyone that picks up ME3 without having played the first two should be screwed which is pretty much the case right now. Hell the bloody game shouldn't even be playable without a save import.....for the benefit of the player, to spare him/her the pain of enduring a bad game, which what you're left with in the absence of an imported save.

You literally go from a 95% amazing game to a 100% crap game. People can barely endure 10 minutes of horrid storytelling, now imagine what would happen if the whole game was like that. There would be mass suicides. There is no playing ME3 without ME1 and ME2.

[LiarasShield]

Well I shall not comment on the ending but those that want to should go to my link but yeah I do agree their missing out a major part of mass effect without at least getting a chance to play mass effect 2

[YohkoOhno]

I am all for pandering to new players in lesser games that do not have choice import mechanics. But I am absolutely against pandering to new players in games like Mass Effect and Dragon Age and so on. There is absolutely no way, shape or form to properly replace one game(much less two games) with a filler comic.

Considering Bioware has always designed their games to be stand alone as well as thinking of the overall arc, you are sort of insulting them in this manner.

Bioware is very unusual in that they import save games--most games don't even do this type of thing. But that does not make their games so special they are not meant to stand on their own. The fact that ME2 was on the PS3 and ME1 wasn't proves this.

Those enjoying the trilogy get a bonus, but that doesn't make the game a failure as a standalone, nor does it mean they should not do for the Wii U what they did for the PS3 with ME2.

[Darth_Trethon]

YohkoOhno wrote...
Considering Bioware has always designed their games to be stand alone as well as thinking of the overall arc, you are sort of insulting them in this manner.

Bioware is very unusual in that they import save games--most games don't even do this type of thing. But that does not make their games so special they are not meant to stand on their own. The fact that ME2 was on the PS3 and ME1 wasn't proves this.

Those enjoying the trilogy get a bonus, but that doesn't make the game a failure as a standalone, nor does it mean they should not do for the Wii U what they did for the PS3 with ME2.

Easy for you to say since you never had to miss anything. ME2 was really poor without a save import....the few choices offered in the comic were not enough.....way too much was left out and the damage was severe. Now ME3 has so much depending on ME1 and ME2 that the damage is catastrophic without an import. Even a hour long comic with filler story and choices cannot repair that.