27765 réponses à ce sujet

[chris2365]

EatChildren wrote...

To give credence to the Q3/Q4 2015 estimate, and considering the extended development time of moving from last generation to the new, and moving to a new engine with a large scope game design, if Dragon Age: Inquisition does indeed make Q3/Q4 this year, then roughly the same time will have passed between Dragon Age 2 and Inquisition as Mass Effect 3 and Montreal's Mass Effect.

Dragon Age 2 = March 2011. Dragon Age 3 = ~September/October 2014.
Total = ~Three years, six months.

Mass Effect 3 = March 2012. Mass Effect 4 = ~September 2015.
Total = ~Three years, six months.

Fits like a glove for two established series moving to a new engine, and accustomed to a new generation of hardware.

While I think we all appreciate the longer dev cycle, if dialogue has already started being written (with everything else you implied), shouldn't the game be coming a litte bit sooner? With the game already in a somewhat playable state and a good part of the storyline written, they should be ready to leave the ''design'' phase and getting into the ''production'' phase. Unless I'm wrong, a good chunk of game developpement is figuring out just what you are going to do. They seem to have moved beyond that now.

One thing to consider is that DAI was delayed by a year, mostly for technical reasons. As we've all said, DAI will help develop RPG systems for Frostbite, but I think the impact will be a shorter dev cycle for ME Next. That extra year will not apply to ME Next (or it will at least be reduced signifcantly). Montreal won't have to do all the work that Edmonton did. Quote from Aaryn Flynn:

''The freshman round of games these teams are developing have taken longer to develop because the studios are learning the ins and outs of the software, and are essentially molding what was a first-person shooter engine into something that works for their own genres of games. For example,Flynn said BioWare typically has 28-month build times, but Inquisition is taking longer because his team had to create tools for handling back-end systems common to role-playing games (skill proficiencies, attack stats, etc.) that the engine didn't already have.

"We've got a longer development cycle for Dragon Age, but that comes from two things: One is the investment in Frostbite to make it an RPG engine, and that's a big one for the team. They're helping eat that rock for Mass Effect," said Flynn.

The inherent beauty of this, though, is that the next studio that makes an RPG won't have to do that back-end work; it can simply build on the back of BioWare's work. These longer dev cycles won't last forever.''


Maybe I'm just desperate for a new Mass Effect game, but I think a Q1/Q2 2015 release date is certainly fesable.

Modifié par chris2365, 19 janvier 2014 - 05:10 .

[chris2365]

I'll add a tweet while I'm at it

User:
@AarynFlynn obscure q: you mentioned one reason for DA:I's longer dev time was Frostbite work, what was 2nd reason?

Aaryn Flynn ‏@AarynFlynn:
All of the investment and work in the DA franchise and game itself - huge level creation, playable races, tactical combat, mounts, etc.

User:
@AarynFlynn makes sense! thanks Can you say if the next ME will have a similarly high level of investment compared to previous trilogy?

Aaryn Flynn ‏@AarynFlynn:
Sorry that's harder to comment on, so I can't say anything. What I can say is our ambition for the next ME game is just as large

Aaryn Flynn ‏@AarynFlynn:
Just as large compared to DAI I mean.

[Lady Sif]

Modifié par Rachel73, 19 janvier 2014 - 05:19 .

[Nitrocuban]

They can use big parts of DAI's customisations to Frostbite for ME4, right?

[ElitePinecone]

Nitrocuban wrote...

They can use big parts of DAI's customisations to Frostbite for ME4, right?

Yep, I think it's actually essential. It sounds like DAI is "inventing" a lot of the systems that just didn't exist before in Frostbite, things that RPGs use all the time but Battlefield would have no use for. 

(For example, I vaguely remember hearing that a way of handling conversations took time to recreate)

[rapscallioness]

Rachel73 wrote...

Rachel73 wrote...

Michael Gamble ‏@GambleMike
@Vince_Waldon BSN will be doing whiteboard analysis for weeks.

in reply to this
Vince Waldon[/b] ‏@Vince_Waldon
@GambleMike Ha you may be right. If so, a free hint: it may help to play the tweet backwards. :-)

haha. it is to laugh.

i got a free hint, too: show us something worth looking at. a lil something that perhaps even piques our interest in your upcoming product. cuz right now we got nothing. No. Thing.

A timeline? perhaps sum concept art w/out the artists--as charming as they are--blocking the majority of the pic? A title?

we have no idea wth is going on w/this next game. at all. heck we've even been "scolded" for calling the next game me4. "No. don't call it that. Cuz.. it could be anything. Or...or nothing at all!"

I understand you're taking your time. And DAI is coming out, and all that, but it's been almost two years. I would like some solid info on the direction of this next game.

[Lieber]

chris2365 wrote...
Maybe I'm just desperate for a new Mass Effect game, but I think a Q1/Q2 2015 release date is certainly fesable.

That would be releasing too close to Dragon Age Inquisition. I don't think it woudl be a good idea business wise.

[chris2365]

Lieber wrote...

chris2365 wrote...
Maybe I'm just desperate for a new Mass Effect game, but I think a Q1/Q2 2015 release date is certainly fesable.

That would be releasing too close to Dragon Age Inquisition. I don't think it woudl be a good idea business wise.

They did it with Dragon Age Origins and Mass Effect 2. They only came out 3 months apart (DAO in Novemeber and ME2 in January). 

[Sion1138]

Certainly it is a quality whiteboard, I'd guess about 2.5 meters wide by 1.2 meters tall.

I can't quite discern the brand of the markers.

Modifié par Sion1138, 19 janvier 2014 - 11:20 .

[EatChildren]

chris2365 wrote...

Maybe I'm just desperate for a new Mass Effect game, but I think a Q1/Q2 2015 release date is certainly fesable.

It's entirely possible. I tend to take the most pessimistic stance for these kinds of things, which is why I estimate ~Q3/Q4 2015 as the ideal launch date. But to be fair, it's not like less than a year between Dragon Age and Mass Effect would be unusual. Origins and Mass Effect 2 released only two months apart.

But I think the expected longer dev cylce for moving to a new generation of systems and engine, even if with the benefits made by Edmonton, will increase the dev time. Especially since unlike the trilogy Montreal aren't following the exact same thematic and mechanical standard set in the Shepard arc, so they would have had to conceptualise and build a lot of new stuff for themselves. For reasons I wont go into just yet, I'm also under the belief that the very, very earliest conceptualisation at Montreal (before and around the time ME3 came out) for the series future was very, very different from what they ended up going forward with and what we'll see.

[Phoenix_Also_Rises]

EatChildren wrote...

chris2365 wrote...

Maybe I'm just desperate for a new Mass Effect game, but I think a Q1/Q2 2015 release date is certainly fesable.

It's entirely possible. I tend to take the most pessimistic stance for these kinds of things, which is why I estimate ~Q3/Q4 2015 as the ideal launch date. But to be fair, it's not like less than a year between Dragon Age and Mass Effect would be unusual. Origins and Mass Effect 2 released only two months apart.

But I think the expected longer dev cylce for moving to a new generation of systems and engine, even if with the benefits made by Edmonton, will increase the dev time. Especially since unlike the trilogy Montreal aren't following the exact same thematic and mechanical standard set in the Shepard arc, so they would have had to conceptualise and build a lot of new stuff for themselves. For reasons I wont go into just yet, I'm also under the belief that the very, very earliest conceptualisation at Montreal (before and around the time ME3 came out) for the series future was very, very different from what they ended up going forward with and what we'll see.

Gah, you say these things and they just make my bones itch with anticipation.

Now excuse me while I go and fire up yet another trilogy run to assuage my curiosity.

[MrDbow]

Late 2015 or early-to-mid 2016 sounds good to me.

[ElitePinecone]

<p>

EatChildren wrote...</p>
<p>For reasons I wont go into just yet, I'm also under the belief that the very, very earliest conceptualisation at Montreal (before and around the time ME3 came out) for the series future was very, very different from what they ended up going forward with and what we'll see.

</p>
<p>Do you mind if I PM you about this theory? I'd be interested in hearing what you think. </p>

[EatChildren]

ElitePinecone wrote...

<p>

EatChildren wrote...</p>
<p>For reasons I wont go into just yet, I'm also under the belief that the very, very earliest conceptualisation at Montreal (before and around the time ME3 came out) for the series future was very, very different from what they ended up going forward with and what we'll see.

</p>
<p>Do you mind if I PM you about this theory? I'd be interested in hearing what you think. </p>

Sure, go nuts.

[bayofangels]

EatChildren wrote...
For reasons I wont go into just yet, I'm also under the belief that the very, very earliest conceptualisation at Montreal (before and around the time ME3 came out) for the series future was very, very different from what they ended up going forward with and what we'll see.

It's a fair bet, considering the changes in DLC and to the game itself after everything that happened with the ending. I wonder if a prequel series was planned next - BW referenced ME3 being the end of the story. But everything that's happened since is them trying to smooth things over for a sequel, which is what most fans want.

[EatChildren]

bayofangels wrote...

It's a fair bet, considering the changes in DLC and to the game itself after everything that happened with the ending. I wonder if a prequel series was planned next - BW referenced ME3 being the end of the story. But everything that's happened since is them trying to smooth things over for a sequel, which is what most fans want.

Haha, might as well post here then. Wasn't going to simply because I didn't want to derail the twitter thread, but yes, that's basically my theory too. Based on stuff Gamble and co said around the period Mass Effect 3 was wrapping up development and shortly after it came out, before the vocal backlash against the trilogy's ending, whenever asked about the series' future, the wording used was heavily in favour of "side story" style content set within a contained timeline. They'd often refer to the fact there were many stories to be told, bla bla bla, and First Contact War was thrown around as a reference point a few times.

I wouldn't be in the least bit surprised to learn that in the very early stages the plan was for Montreal to do just that; make a spin-off set in the past, around a major "historic" Mass Effect event. And possibly not even playing exactly like the trilogy games. I'll dig it up later, but there's an old rumour that Montreal were actually set to work on a first person shooter style Mass Effect universe game. Seems crazy, but the rumour's source was a guy who leaked Citadel DLC's major plot (as in, the whole story) and content points the day DLC was formally revealed, LONG before it actually came out. And he was spot on about everything then, so I've no reason to believe his info re:Montreal's Mass Effect was, at the time, too correct.

But then there was the whole ending backlash and the arguable sweeping disinterest in a prequel/midquel. I still firmly believe (for a number of reasons) that the PAX leak was totally legitimate, any errors caused my misinterpretation and miscommunication, but the substance of leak accurate and indicative of what Montreal is doing. That being a proper success to the Mass Effect formula we know; action RPG, strong narrative, returning species and mechanics, etc. I also firmly believe that the highest probability is that it's a sequel, or at least masquarading as a sequel or vague timeline point where it doesn't matter where it's set. Something that totally disconnects Shepard's trilogy arc, themes, and narrative, as it should, and as BioWare has reiterated a hundred times now. Yannick Roy, I think it was, was also vocal that the next Mass Effect game would feature the important series tropes in mechanics and narrative that people have come to love, so it won't be a genre spin-off.

I'm applying a lot of conjecture to a circle of tweets and vague teases, but yeah. Long and short of it, I feel EA/BioWare's intention was to have Montreal move on to a prequel/midquel that was also mechanically, and in design, fundamentally a spin-off to the Mass Effect series. Perhaps there was intention for Edmonton to work on a mainline, traditional entry, or Mass Effect would simply enter EA's genre rotation as a science fiction shooter while other series would take up the action RPG mantle. This was planned, or discussed, shortly before and after Mass Effect 3 released. Due to the ending backlash, a whooooole lot of market assessment and analysis of the fanbase, and series projection versus other EA franchises and what gaps they can fill, the decision was made to move Montreal's Mass Effect into a much bigger project and effectively give them the full Mass Effect title, making a true sequel/successor to the series in design, scope, and play. As from the perspective of marketing, this seemed like a smarter, more appreciable (by the fanbase) move for the series instead of churning out spin-offs that are Mass Effect in name and lore only.

~fin

[ElitePinecone]

Hm.

The thing about Montreal making a first-person action-oriented shooter wasn't a rumour, it was actually in production as "Mass Effect: Team Assault". Geoff Keighley revealed it in his Last Hours of ME3 interviews - Team Assault *was* a prototype attempt at making a standalone multiplayer game, but Montreal converted the project into ME3's existing multiplayer system because it made sense to integrate it with the Reaper war story.

Here's a minute long video.

That was back in 2010, though. Given that Montreal was only really doing supplementary work for the franchise right up until 2012 with ME3, I don't really think their plans "changed" so much as they finished one project and went on to another. They worked on the multiplayer side of ME3 after shelving META, then went straight into pre-production for whatever the Bioware higher-ups decided ME Next will be. (As well as doing Omega, I suppose)

META might've been planned to stand on its own at one point, but it was converted into ME3's MP - it wasn't the basis for an "ME4", that we know of. I haven't heard anything about them ever doing a historical game that was purely action - the multiplayer prototype was player-versus-player shooting, there was no plot involved as far as we know.

So... I don't think we can necessarily say that any plans changed, because META was the prototype for ME3's MP, not ME Next. It's possible Montreal or Edmonton had a vision for what the next game would be, and it's possible that this did change after the ending backlash, but I haven't seen any information to indicate either way at this point. Without knowing if an original plan existed, it's hard to say if the current game in production is what they were always intending.

[EatChildren]

No, not META. I know about META, and yes you're right, that was scrapped/evolved into the third person hoard mode we ended up getting. This is a separate rumour sourced ~November 2012 (see here: http://www.gamefront...e-a-great-game/ , comments section, user Sachel). Here he claims that Montreal's Mass Effect is a first person shooter set around the First Contact War and built on Frostbite, streamlined role playing systems, and so on.

Naturally anybody can post garbage rumours, but what makes Sachel's claim believable is that then in Feb '13 (http://www.gamefront...etcon-incoming/) he correctly 'predicted' several key points of Citadel DLC. Like, the stuff he posted (as you'll read) isn't vague. He was/is either an employee of BioWare/EA, or knew someone who was, because he knew all the ins and outs of exactly what Citadel DLC was about before it was released. Someone had told him, or he knew first hand.

This is why I give credence to his ~Nov 12 leak of Montreal's project, an earlier rumour than Citadel. If his information is second hand then it could have been inaccurate, but I find it hard to believe one block of information (Montreal's Mass Effect) would be widely inaccurate when the following block (Citadel DLC) we know now was verifiable, in-and-out, 100% correct. It's one of those things I'm surprised hasn't been chased up much online, because the dude proved that at least at the time of writing his information was legitimate.

That's why the basis of my theory also ties into the various tweets/preannounced weasel wording and teasing from the BioWare/Mass Effect staff.

[ElitePinecone]

Hm, "Sachel" seems... misinformed, there, if not downright misleading.

For starters, EA Montreal and Bioware Montreal are separate studios. Nobody who worked there would confuse them. The thing about no involvement from Edmonton is demonstrably false - Casey Hudson announced in September 2012 that he'd be continuing on as Executive Producer, and a bunch of other Edmonton devs are working on it in a fairly big way.

I guessed earlier that Montreal started work on ME Next in mid-2012 (based on some devs tweeting in June), so why would they radically change the project between November 2012 and early 2013, when Yanick Roy was reassuring everyone that it would stay the same kind of game? If the ending was going to affect their plans, why would they wait six months or so to take that feedback into account? I don't know anything about game development, and even less about Bioware's plans for this sort of stuff, but it seems impossible that they'd go into production in 2012 then drastically change course somewhere before 2013, enough so that "Sachel"'s predictions don't gel with the current state of the project.

Even though the posts about Citadel are correct (in a way that makes me think they're a QA tester, not an actual developer), I don't think that means the later posts are right - they just seem like he's making things up. I mean, literally the most incendiary combination of words you could possibly associate with the next Mass Effect, in terms of getting a reaction from crazy hard-core fans, are "first-person", "more multiplayer", and "stream-line" (I'll chuck in 'wider audience', too). They read like he's just trolling people.

The Citadel "leak" is definitely correct, but I'd really question the accuracy of his other statements.

(For example, in a later post he gets confused between DICE and Montreal.)

[ElitePinecone]

Sorry, double post because I just found something else:

An earlier post doesn't really make me think Sachel is an adult, let alone someone who Bioware would hopefully ever employ. The style of writing and expression just seem totally, completely off.

Edit: sorry, wrong link before. I meant the "ME4 won't have Shepard" article, not the one about people leaving Bioware.

Modifié par ElitePinecone, 20 janvier 2014 - 12:30 .

[EatChildren]

Eh, don't really agree with your assessment at all, with the exception of the person possibly working on QA or some such other field distant from design.

- Low lever staff, or second hand information from someone who doesn't actually work at BioWare but knows someone who does, makes it easy to mix up studios. He corrects himself on the DICE/BW mixup.

- Production =/= pre-production. Game development is a turbulent affair that goes through many iterations of conceptualisation, and if a direction is deemed incorrect or of low value sweeping changes can be made to the project. For recent examples, see BioShock Infinite and Tomb Raider (reboot). For historic examples, see Twilight Princess and Metroid Prime. Or XCOM: The Bureau. Actually, 2K are notorious for burning money on project revisions and massive changes to games that end up taking years to develop with a mountain of scrapped content. It's sad and hillarious at the same time.

- Edmonton involvement is an easy mistake to make, again especially if he's not actually an employee. BioWare's business model follows a similar one to a lot of EA studios: conceptualisation and pre-production lock down a project, then staff is en-massed across multiple studios to enter the production stage. What is accurate is that Mass Effect 4 is primarily Montreal's work, not Edmonton, despite some senior Edmonton staff still being involved in the project.

- The later posts weren't later, they were before. The Montreal project claims came before Citadel DLC.

- The words sound insipid and like he's trolling, but so did the simple mention of multiplayer in Mass Effect 3 before it came out. So did the cutting of vehicle exploration. The minimising of dialogue. The removal of the spreadsheet loot system. And on top of this, multiplayer first person Mass Effect was, as you noted, a real, conceptualised, and prototyped project at one stage. It's not like these are crazy, alien ideas nobody BioWare thinks about.

- I don't believe his posting style is any indication of his age bracket or someone BioWare would employ. It's easy to romanticise the personalities of senior stuff, but remember there's ~600+ people under them. A lot of low level programmers, animations, texturers, modellers, QA, and so on. Faces and personalities you will never see or hear of. Posting style is just typically ranting. Could be young, could be older. The advent of twitter and the garbage some developers, journos, and average joes spew on there has taught me that even grown adults are often incapable of sounding their age and maturity

So yeah. Your scepticism is warranted, but to me does read a little bit like "I don't want it to be true, so it's not". I don't necessarily believe Sachel's claims that he works or worked for BioWare, and pessimisticly subscribe to the belief he just knows someone who does (friend, father, uncle who works at Nintendo, whatever). If he does work at BioWare, or did, he may have had a low level position, worked in QA, or who knows.

What I do know is that his Citadel DLC was a factually accurate leak impossible to guess, which gives his information merit. And in addition to this, he makes claims about Montreal's project before the Citadel DLC leak, indicating he was at least in an earlier position to know what was going on, either first hand or second hand. I find it hard to believe he would make fairly concise, direct claims of a project's content that are actually lies, trolls, or whatever, and then follow this up only a couple of months later with claims on another project that are the exact opposite: absolute truths. It's an inconsistency, unsupported by Occam's Razor.

But whatever. End of the day, you and I will never truly know, so who knows? Maybe he's full of it, maybe he's truthful. Maybe Montreal started work on one project that became another. Maybe their Mass Effect is a trading card dating sim to be announced at E3. It's a mystery to everyone

[bayofangels]

It's hard to discount Sachel's level of prescience and I'm inclined to believe his earlier report of what was planned next - although as a separate entity to a full RPG (which would come further down the line). It's easy to imagine such a spin-off was deemed too risky a venture after the backlash of the ME3 ending - EA/BioWare would need fans to be behind the product and the core series to be stable.

Another factor for the shooter spin-off's cancellation might lie in exactly who was developing it. I'd be interested to know who - Visceral springs to mind, for some reason. EA's Star Wars deal might also have sucked resources elsewhere.

Everything BioWare has done since the release of ME3 (Extended Cut, Leviathan, Citadel) has been about mitigating the ending controversy through retcons, deeper lore explanations and a focus on fan-favourite characters (with the exception of Omega, which was pre-planned and to at least some degree built, so canning or changing that too much was unlikely).

The positive to take from all this is that BioWare appears focused on doing what it can to reinforce the core series as fans want - and early snippets from MENext seem to agree (planetary exploration, deeper RPG stuff, new races) while distancing itself from the Shepard arc. I too believe we'll get a new story set an indeterminate time after the Reaper war where its effects will be largely nullified.

Modifié par bayofangels, 20 janvier 2014 - 02:03 .

[ElitePinecone]

bayofangels wrote...

The positive to take from all this is that BioWare appears focused on doing what it can to reinforce the core series as fans want - and early snippets from MENext seem to agree (planetary exploration, deeper RPG stuff, new races) while distancing itself from the Shepard arc.

This is very true, though I'm always wary of taking "the fans" as some kind of hive-mind - there's danger in assuming a consensus flows out of a comparatively tiny number of die-hard people. We can't discount the fact that there seems to be a market for deeper, more exploratory games (hello, Skyrim, Far Cry 3) which EA is trying to tap into, and Montreal themselves could have ideas that neatly happen to align with what you or I find appealing. 

That said, if the early plans *were* changed from a first-person (?!) shooter with reduced RPG elements (!?) and a focus on competitive multiplayer (?!?), that seems like a very good thing. I still don't have much faith in what this person is saying, but I suppose we'll find out sooner or later. 

(Hopefully sooner.)

[SwobyJ]

Just popping in to say that Q1-Q1 2015 is quite possible but I'd imagine that to more be the hype cycle for ME4 instead of the launch itself.

Q3-Q4 2015 seems more likely. I don't agree with those who say 2016 is definitely when the game will come out, or Maker forbid, 2017 (WTF?).

Q1 or maybe even Q2 2016 is possible but I'd think those to more be the dates that would happen if ME4 is pushed back, not when it is 'set' for. *shrug*

We got 1-2 years left, basically. Bioware needs to finish and promote Dragon Age: Inquisition, tease Mass Effect 4 (yes I know we don't know the real title), release DAI, then finish and promote ME4, and release that.
(not to mention whatever that 'new IP' is...)

[SNascimento]

All I know is that ME'4' will certainly have been announced by the time E3 ends.

Release date? Between Q2-2015 and the end.