Our lead animator chose to rig & animate the female player character 1st for our project. It made sense for us. #space
I guess this is in reference to the Ubisoft/AC Unity thing?
Makes me so thankful Bioware is committed to protagonist diversity as a matter of course, not something that's relegated to a "nice to have" list.
I guess this is in reference to the Ubisoft/AC Unity thing?
Makes me so thankful Bioware is committed to protagonist diversity as a matter of course, not something that's relegated to a "nice to have" list.
Let's hope the diversity extends to Multiple races.
Wonder if that means that marketing will also use the female first this time.
Casey already said they wouldn't set a canon.
This is just simply not going to happen. Period.
When did he say this and what exactly did he say?
When did he say this and what exactly did he say?
He and others have been saying it at least since ME2 9and maybe before)
"There is no canon but what you make for yourselves"
He and others have been saying it at least since ME2 9and maybe before)
"There is no canon but what you make for yourselves"
All of my choices that were rendered irrelevant would beg to differ.
He and others have been saying it at least since ME2 9and maybe before)
"There is no canon but what you make for yourselves"
If it has been said so many times give me one example via twitter or direct printed quote since ME3 DLC stopped ie since they started working on ME4.
Let's hope the diversity extends to Multiple races.
Indeed, and by "Multiple Races" I hope that includes non-humanoid, 'alien' aliens.
Don't get me wrong, I love the Asari, Turians, Krogen, Salarians, Drell, Batarians, Quarians, Geth, etc. but their animations are almost exactly the same as the human counter parts. Where are the Rachni, or Elcor?
Obviously, I don't expect them to make the next ME title soley about the adventures of a Rachni bounty hunter, but MP characters, or companion characters? Yes please.
Indeed, and by "Multiple Races" I hope that includes non-humanoid, 'alien' aliens.
Don't get me wrong, I love the Asari, Turians, Krogen, Salarians, Drell, Batarians, Quarians, Geth, etc. but their animations are almost exactly the same as the human counter parts. Where are the Rachni, or Elcor?
Obviously, I don't expect them to make the next ME title soley about the adventures of a Rachni bounty hunter, but MP characters, or companion characters? Yes please.
Races like Elcor, Hanar, Rachni won't be playable because they'd have to completely rework gameplay to suit them.
Races like Elcor, Hanar, Rachni won't be playable because they'd have to completely rework gameplay to suit them.
Can you imagine a Hanar firing a Claymore? Dat recoil 
All of my choices that were rendered irrelevant would beg to differ.
Hey, they may have been irrelevant, but they were still your canon choices 
But seriously, I'm with you on that sentiment. When you are railroad, it really matters little what "canon" is
If it has been said so many times give me one example via twitter or direct printed quote since ME3 DLC stopped ie since they started working on ME4.
Since ME4 started? No, I can't help you there. But during ME3, yes they made a big deal of it. Here's one example
http://www.joystiq.c...ffer-you-a-cho/
"We have a rule in our franchise that there is no canon."
Maybe that has changed. But if it has, then it's a policy shift, and a big one. We're supposed to have at least the illusion of choice.
@GambleMike at Fionn McCools - we are trying to raise funds to buy a tank that we can turn into a Mako - come on over!
Since ME4 started? No, I can't help you there. But during ME3, yes they made a big deal of it. Here's one example
http://www.joystiq.c...ffer-you-a-cho/
"We have a rule in our franchise that there is no canon."
Maybe that has changed. But if it has, then it's a policy shift, and a big one. We're supposed to have at least the illusion of choice.
Firstly kudos for finding that, it was a very interesting read. But I would still take that with a huge grain of salt.
Firstly expand out what he was actually saying and replying to.
For the action mode, do you have it set up so that it’s choosing specifically a paragon or a renegade path, or is it a mix of the two?
It’s a mix. It’s not canon. We have a rule in our franchise that there is no canon. You as a player decide what your story is. But we choose a default path that gives you access to a lot of cool things. It’s like how a character like Jack Bauer has to make some decisions where he feels empathy in one moment or feels particularly brutal in another moment. We weave you through a default path that switches between those.
So he is already clarifying about the difference between a "default path" and a canon. You could argue that choosing a vague outline to base the next game off by picking a few things like "destroy" is not setting a canon. It is not saying this is right or wrong. And it is not saying "this is what happened" but rather "If Shepard did this, then this is what happened".
But I admit, I am splitting hairs a bit. Saying "We have a rule in our franchise that there is no canon" is strong language and it was really quite unprompted even when discussing a completely different situation.
However he also says other things that you should consider
You’ve said very clearly that this is the end of this story arc and the end of Shepard’s story. Obviously Mass Effect as a franchise is popular at this point and very likely to continue from here. Would your expectation be more games with new player-created characters or side stories with established characters in the universe? Where do you envision the franchise moving from here?
On the one hand, it’s too early to say in the sense that we’ve got to finish Mass Effect 3, but it’s also more online than ever before. We’ve got multiplayer stuff, we’ve got DLC, we’ve got the larger galaxy at war stuff. We’ll be supporting that. We’ve got some really awesome DLC stuff that we’re doing. Our heads are still in that space.
One of the reasons that I wanted to do Mass Effect as a trilogy is that it seemed to make sense if we’ve been at this for however many years – it will have been eight years – at the end of that, people will want some kind of reimagination of what the experience will be for new systems and new tastes. To some degree, we need to see how people respond to Mass Effect 3 and what they’re hoping to see in the future.
In this bit he he not only is not thinking beyond ME3 but that they will listen to fans and see what was well received in ME3 and what they want. I would say the endings were not well received, particularly synthesis, so getting rid of that would be plausible. I would also point out the majority of fans want a sequel. It also makes me think that any of their ideas about the development of ME would be up for review at the end.
With the ending in Mass Effect 2, there were so many different variables and possibilities for the outcome and what could happen. As players reached the end, they started comparing notes and trying to figure out how it worked. A few months after it came out, we ran a chart in the magazine that showed the layout of how to get the different endings and how things happened. Is that same type of complexity built into the ending of Mass Effect 3?
Yeah, and I’d say much more so, because we have the ability to build the endings out in a way that we don’t have to worry about eventually tying them back together somewhere. This story arc is coming to an end with this game. That means the endings can be a lot more different. At this point we’re taking into account so many decisions that you’ve made as a player and reflecting a lot of that stuff. It’s not even in any way like the traditional game endings, where you can say how many endings there are or whether you got ending A, B, or C.
It’s more like there are some really obvious things that are different and then lots and lots of smaller things, lots of things about who lives and who dies, civilizations that rose and fell, all the way down to individual characters. That becomes the state of where you left your galaxy. The endings have a lot more sophistication and variety in them
This bit indicates that back before ME3 was released he was not intending to worry about the endings and a new possible game in any way and even do things which he didn't consider sensible if he was worrying about it. Now that time has passed they HAVE to worry about it. Whether it is simply to ignore it, work around it or whatever, the situation is different than when he gave this interview.
That's basically why I asked for a more recent quote. I don't think its fair to any developer to hold to a design principle they made years ago in a different game under a different situation under a different design team. If he or another ME dev came out and said that now I would accept it, but it doesn't convince me that ME will never go with a "canon" choice and base the next game on fewer than all of the possible endings.
I guess this is in reference to the Ubisoft/AC Unity thing?
Makes me so thankful Bioware is committed to protagonist diversity as a matter of course, not something that's relegated to a "nice to have" list.
Obvious Assassin Unity reference, saw a lot of them from various developers from different studios in twitter. Nice and all and some of these devs indeed do diversify their lineup of playable characters. That being said, white dudes still dominate game box arts and trailers (Sheploo being right there) so yeah, not exactly "everyone else is doing it perfectly and only Ubisoft doesn't".
Hey if a Volus can do it, anything's fair game.
I'm ashamed to say I've never thought of doing that during the entire year I spent playing ME3's MP... I have to fix that ASAP.
With the ending in Mass Effect 2, there were so many different variables and possibilities for the outcome and what could happen. As players reached the end, they started comparing notes and trying to figure out how it worked. A few months after it came out, we ran a chart in the magazine that showed the layout of how to get the different endings and how things happened. Is that same type of complexity built into the ending of Mass Effect 3?Yeah, and I’d say much more so, because we have the ability to build the endings out in a way that we don’t have to worry about eventually tying them back together somewhere. This story arc is coming to an end with this game. That means the endings can be a lot more different. At this point we’re taking into account so many decisions that you’ve made as a player and reflecting a lot of that stuff. It’s not even in any way like the traditional game endings, where you can say how many endings there are or whether you got ending A, B, or C.
Whoa. Sounds like someone changed his mind.
If it has been said so many times give me one example via twitter or direct printed quote since ME3 DLC stopped ie since they started working on ME4.
My gut says the "ark" style concept is indeed the direction they're going in, but I really must disagree with fixation on wishy washy statements by directors and PR departments months/years before actual reality of the project and what it entails is made official. For better or worse, to agree or disagree with either direction, that stuff just doesn't hold any water to me. Contradictions and errors have been made by every publisher and developer in existence. BioWare and EA included. And while Casey might say "no guys there really is no Shepard trilogy canon, just your own!" and that might be 100% truthful at the time of saying it, I'm not going to hold him to that statement years later for the future of the franchise which isn't directly referencing what he was talking about. Even if you want it, it's cherry picking. Mass Effect 4 will be Mass Effect 4 as the developers see it, whatever that happens to be.
Let's hope the diversity extends to Multiple races.
In the entire trilogy, there was only one race, and that was Race Against Time, the mission at the end of ME1. In ME2 or ME3: nothing!
I really, really, really hope Mass Effect: Dentist contains multiple (b)races.
Let's hope the diversity extends to Multiple races.
That is far less important.
My gut says the "ark" style concept is indeed the direction they're going in
I despise the "ark concept" and my gut says nobody at Bioware is stupid enough to even consider doing it.
Let's hope the diversity extends to Multiple races.
As long as it doesn't hurt the story. I don't want a completely identityless protagonist just to enable multiple playable races.
I despise the "ark concept" and my gut says nobody at Bioware is stupid enough to even consider doing it.
I think the concept could work if they really want to leave behind everything we know. I just hope it'll be something like going through a disabled Relay (desperation and fear of the Reapers overriding the law against opening unknown Relays) and not going to a whole new galaxy.
While I believe it will take place on another galaxy. The only way I can see the "ark" working is if they do the same thing as the Reapers and shoot them to Dark Space using a Mass Relay (To reduce travel time to a manageable size)... Even with that, we don't know how far the Relay can go and if someone on the galaxy knows enough about them to do it.
The idea sounds a bit impossible.
Retour en haut
