660 réponses à ce sujet

[Jorina Leto]

dekkerd wrote...

http://penny-arcade.com/2012/02/17

You can get best possible outcome in the game by just playing single player if you want, as long as you are willing to do a lot of the side missions and content.

Wrong. It is not possible to get 4000 EMS.

[Robhuzz]

OrangeLazarus86 wrote...

This is not what we wanted. You never listened to us. You ignored us at every interval.

Congrats BioWare, you're the NEW Lionhead Studios. Casey Hudson is your Peter Molyneux. You went from gaining our trust and loyalty to now creating nothing, but lies and disbelief in your fans and consumers.

You never cared about your fans, otherwise we wouldn't have had this "Extended Cut" of the same ending we hated. Drew Karpyshyn should have stayed as lead writer, at least he'd keep Casey Hudson in check.

Thanks for making the amazing adventure meaningless and pointless within the 10min the game ended. If I had known this is what Casey Hudson wanted, I wouldn't have even bothered with ME at all.

Thanks for not listening to your fans. We'll still fight you btw, till we get our better ending.

Do you really think Casey had much say in the matter? From what I gathered, the original version of ME3 (the alpha version if you will) was a lot different from the version we received. EA just barged in and wanted it released earlier and ordered (yes, ordered, I doubt Casey had ANY say in the matter) BioWare to skip a lot of content and release it earlier so the profits from ME3 could still affect their 2011 financial year. Why is it so hard to understand that EA calls the shots and BioWare has to follow orders?

[dekkerd]

Jorina Leto wrote...

dekkerd wrote...

http://penny-arcade.com/2012/02/17

You can get best possible outcome in the game by just playing single player if you want, as long as you are willing to do a lot of the side missions and content.

Wrong. It is not possible to get 4000 EMS.

Bluntly, start paying attention. That was a quote from the article referenced, in a discussion about how it isn't possible. 

[iHorizons]

Maybe it's 1.9 GB because there is that rumored MP DLC in there

[Locutus_of_BORG]

Thanks, Bioware.

This whole ending affair has been very unfortunate. I really hope this 'clarification' will be enough.

[Anthadlas]

Blueprotoss wrote...

Wraith 02 wrote...

Quit spouting random articles as evidence, Links to these articles or i call bull ****

A bioware dev claimed that you could achieve over the 4000 EMS required with 50% Galactic Readiness
After this was proved impossible by dataminers this thread mysteriously disappeared
Chris has now confirmed that they have fixed the problem

 Yet you're the using opinion as fact, which shows how much you really know.

Yet thats a lie and Chris never mentioned the specifics.

OdanUrr wrote...

ps. Heres my article, wheres yours?
gamepolitics.com/2012/03/06/mass-effect-3039s-ending-tied-forced-multiplayer-participation

Yet you provided the same basic information, which makes you look like a hypocrite.

Link your articles or your just talking crap

[dekkerd]

Pretty sure the EMS ship has sailed for this thread.

[Shepard108278]

Siven80 wrote...

So June 26th is ME3 D-Day.

The fact they need an extended cut to explain the endings is a fail in itself.

Will have to play it and see it for myself to decide if its any good of course, i do hope though that the end makes some sense now though. Gotta admit my hopes arent high though.

IMO they didn't need it. Sure IMO there were a few issues nut not enough to do this. I am happy they are doing this and from what I've seen it will apease me.

[Squallypo]

Shepard108278 wrote...

Siven80 wrote...

So June 26th is ME3 D-Day.

The fact they need an extended cut to explain the endings is a fail in itself.

Will have to play it and see it for myself to decide if its any good of course, i do hope though that the end makes some sense now though. Gotta admit my hopes arent high though.

IMO they didn't need it. Sure IMO there were a few issues nut not enough to do this. I am happy they are doing this and from what I've seen it will apease me.

in your opinion they didnt needed to do what ? 

[Estelindis]

*is tentatively hopeful*

[BioFan (Official)]

 I've got all my fingers and toes crossed that this is what we all have been wishing for (to some extent). :innocent:

I just hope they added some stuff into the cerberus base mission so i don't feel like i'm completely replaying it. Also so i know i downloaded it correctly. 

Modifié par Ericander77, 24 juin 2012 - 12:27 .

[Terror_K]

Blueprotoss wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

It's pretty damn clear from almost everything they've done in the past two years that they have. Or... at least with regards to a good portion of their long-time customers (some of which are now former customers). Dragon Age 2 and ME3 alone should be proof of that if nothing else. It's all about the mainstream gamer now. BioWare don't want to make proper RPGs any more. Heck... they don't even want players to be able to roleplay at all. They just want to make story-driven, cinematic action games. The amount of RPG features that have been dumbed down or simply removed to facilitate their cinematic storytelling that's oh-so-important now is proof of that.


It's not evolving when we're gradually giving up the very factors that make a rolepaying game what it is. RPGs being watered down to become cinematic action games for the sake of pandering to a mainstream audience is not evolution. Not every trend that gets followed is a positive one just because the majority lap it up. This is the same reason we get mindless action movies and "reality" shows more than we get high quality, intelligent entertainment. Saying that what BioWare are doing is a natural evolution and spinning it in a positive light like this would be like like saying it's a good thing to slowly eliminate quantum physics in favour of basic science because far too many common everyday people find it too complex.

It seems like you're trying to protest the modern RPG just like how people did with "pen and paper" play or the text based dungeon crawlers on the early PCs.  RPGs have been eveloving a lot over years like Fallout, Baldur's Gate, Diablo,  Ultima, Morrowind, FF7, Deus Ex, Everquest, Kingdom Hearts, KotOR, WoW, Fallout 3, Bioshock,  and ME1 are a few examples of that evolution.

While there's a certain degree in evolution in these games on different levels for different reasons, beyond the fact that they're all quite different in style, the main issue is that what BioWare are doing with their more recent efforts is taking things too far by removing and dumbing down a lot of the factors that players who got into their games in the first place loved the most. Like anything you can have too much of something to the point where it begins to overshadow and drown out the other factors, and then when this new thing becomes the head-honcho of the game, those factors go from taking a back seat to being watered down or being culled entirely.

BioWare obsession with making things more cinematic and wanting to grab an audience beyond their RPG crowd are an example of this: now we're losing key roleplaying factors because BioWare is more obsessed with not only appealing to those who normally wouldn't touch RPGs because they're too talky and complex, but also with making their games so cinematic, too many once standard RPG factors are getting gradually removed and even taken off BioWare's consideration lists entirely. The more cinematic direction games have taken lately has actually become a curse lately, especially for BioWare. Mass Effect 3 had almost no choices at all in it, and Dragon Age 2 greatly limited diversity as well compared to the original.

BioWare had already found the perfect balance with KotOR and DA:O, but now they want to tip things away from the RPG side and greatly in favour of the action side of things. Not because it's a "natural evolution" of the RPG, but because as gaming has become more mainstream, audiences have shifted away from the nerds who want complexity and depth and more to the casual, everyday man who just wants to run around and kill things with some friends. They're not doing it because that's where RPGs should go or to improve them, but because too many gamers these days want simpler action games over complex RPGs. Or, at least that's what BioWare thinks. I personally think the games industry as a whole has a misconception about what gamers really want simply because they keep seeing the latest CoD break sales records every year. But what it comes down to in the end is not quality, but profit and popularity.

Now let me add, I do believe there's a place for said games. The only thing is, a lot of other developers are already making them. Action games have been evolving, adding more depth, customisation, cinematic/narrative and RPG elements over the years. BioWare are doing the opposite: they're taking away depth, customisation and RPG elements to become cinematic action games, just like many of the others. Same destination, just coming from the opposite direction. I wouldn't mind if it so much if they still wanted to make proper, deep RPGs as well, but they clearly don't. And I wouldn't mind it so much if they didn't sabotage their existing IPs and gradually dumb them down with each version, but they are.

Overall there's a cancer in BioWare that this is the way to go, and it's no surprise that they've copped their greatest flak in the wake of Dragon Age 2 and Mass Effect 3: two games that have massively drifted away from their forefathers. And I mean their direct forefathers in ME1 and DAO, not merely BioWare's prior legacy.

If BioWare can honestly say that when they were first developing the Mass Effect and Dragon Age IPs that this is where they had intended to go from the start and keep a straight face, then... well... they've gotten far too used to deception lately.

Terror_K wrote... 
No, what BioWare are doing is a devolution of the genre, not an evolution. If anybody is evolving it's those actually adding more complexity, customisation, choice, depth and roleplaying elements to the action genre in original ways... not BioWare with it's watering the genre down for the sake of mass appeal and/or being "more cinematic" with everything. Being "more cinematic" and action-oriented is responsible for most of what's wrong with Dragon Age 2, and it's pretty clear from comments from the dev team that they haven't learned a damn thing and are just going to make the same mistakes with DA3. Their blind stubbornness on the voiced protagonist issue illustrates that by itself.

Thats a lie while I see that you don't like your RPGs changing, which makes you show a lot of bias.

I'm no more bias than anybody else. I could say that you're bias as a BioWare defender, and that you'll always back them up just as much as I'll always decry the direction they've taken. Such claims get us nowhere though.

No, what I said isn't a lie at all. How have Dragon Age 2 and Mass Effect 3 "evolved the RPG" exactly? What have they brought to the table that we haven't had before, and are you honestly saying that they haven't sacrificed more than we've been given in the process? About the only thing that I see commonly praised about ME3 amongst most fans is its improved combat, but if you look at it it's essentially just TPS combat, which is a purely Action and Shooter game element, not an RPG one. Aside from the fact there's powers you level up, there's almost no RPG to the combat of ME3 at all. How is that an evolution? How is removing dialogue choices and evolution? How is autodialogue an evolution? How is making the mission structure completely linear an evolution? How is reducing the entirety of the statistical RPG elements to combat and combat alone evolution?

Overall, how is reducing RPG elements and replacing them with action and shooter game ones evolution? How is disconnecting the player from the character they are playing evolution?

If you really were any kind of fan then you would provide contructive crtiticism wheter you liked or hated something, which makes you should like a casual gamer that the people that you seem to hate for no real reason.

I have. They haven't listened. Their attitudes in the wake of both DA2 and ME3 shows they haven't. In fact, ME3 as a whole shows they haven't listened after concrit from ME2. The fact that this Extended Cut retains the endings but essentially just lengthens them when it should be a complete redux shows they haven't listened. Multiplayer shows they haven't listened. What they've said about going forward with Dragon Age 3 shows they haven't listened. It all shows they no longer want to make RPGs, but just cinematic action games, and that they're more concerned about rushing out these bastardised half-breeds to try and appeal to the masses for dosh than making a quality product that's unique and different.

And no, I don't hate the casual gamer themselves. What I hate is almost everybody pandering towards them. There are exceptions, and BioWare used to be one of them. No longer it seems... not since EA that's for sure.

Modifié par Terror_K, 24 juin 2012 - 12:56 .

[Shepard108278]

Squallypo wrote...

Shepard108278 wrote...

Siven80 wrote...

So June 26th is ME3 D-Day.

The fact they need an extended cut to explain the endings is a fail in itself.

Will have to play it and see it for myself to decide if its any good of course, i do hope though that the end makes some sense now though. Gotta admit my hopes arent high though.

IMO they didn't need it. Sure IMO there were a few issues nut not enough to do this. I am happy they are doing this and from what I've seen it will apease me.

in your opinion they didnt needed to do what ? 

The EC. IMO it was fine as is with only a few minor gripes.

[Linkforlife]

I wonder if Harby will make another appearance in the EC scenes ...

[GenericEnemy]

This...and Dawnguard...on the same day...

[Shepard108278]

@Terror
I don't want to quote such a long post but I don't agree with your sentiment at all. IMO Bioware did listen just not to your satisfaction and others. However what they listened to was my complaint they are adressing my concerns so they are listening. I do not agree that they didn't listen to the complaints of ME 2 they did change most for the better other than the journal and your gripe of no choices is incorrect IMO. They are not IMO abandoning their fan base and they are as much of an RPG developer as they always have been.

[NOD-INFORMER37]

iHorizons wrote...

Maybe it's 1.9 GB because there is that rumored MP DLC in there

God I hope not. 

Not that I'm against MP DLC, but that would be a really crappy way to get ppl to accept the EC lmao.

I hope all 1.9 GB of the EC is focused on the ending, maybe they'll pleasently surprise us by including the IT or something.  

[Shepard108278]

NOD-INFORMER37 wrote...


maybe they'll pleasently surprise us by including the IT or something.  

If they do count me on the "jumping ship" bandwagon.

[Terror_K]

Shepard108278 wrote...

@Terror
I don't want to quote such a long post but I don't agree with your sentiment at all. IMO Bioware did listen just not to your satisfaction and others. However what they listened to was my complaint they are adressing my concerns so they are listening. I do not agree that they didn't listen to the complaints of ME 2 they did change most for the better other than the journal and your gripe of no choices is incorrect IMO. They are not IMO abandoning their fan base and they are as much of an RPG developer as they always have been.

How are they listening? Most fans felt the ending was bad. Adding more to it and condescending us with this silly "it wasn't bad, you just didn't get it so we'll explain it more" EC is just an insult more than anything. That's the same BS I heard from the people behind the third Matrix film. Yes... I did get it, thank you very much. It's just bad writing, so stop being pretentious about it, BioWare.

And again, so you defend BioWare and say all this stuff, but you merely saying it doesn't make it so. How did our choices matter in ME3? How did the game provide as much as the previous two given it's autodialogue, long periods of cutscenes with no interaction, as many Charm/Indimidate opportunities in the entire game as ME1 had in Port Hanshan alone, and only two dialogue choices most of the time? How are they as much an RPG developer as ever when the games they are producing now have far less choice, customisation, variety, scope and length, dialogue, and non-combat abilities? How were pathetic side-quests that were either repetitive listen-in fetch quests or repurposed multiplayer maps where you just fight hordes of Cerberus troopers better? How was turning our companions into what so many complained about with Zaeed and Kasumi 90% of the time better? How was making all our decisions irrelevant by railroading us at every turn an improvement, be it the Rachni Queen or  Council decisions, or simply who lived and died on the Suicide Mission? How was keeping the VS out of half the game just so they didn't have to deal with writing for them too much a good thing? How was forcing us to do each main quest in the same exact order as opposed to the open galactic freedom of ME1 and ME2 better?

Honestly... what did ME3 actually improve aside from combat and a few things ME2 removed from ME1 that never should have gone in the first place, like weapon-modding, progressive XP, etc?

How can you not see that at this rate, BioWare's future games will just be clones of Assassin's Creed, Uncharted and the Batman Arkham games in a year or so? ME3 is basically Gears of War with Metal Gear Solid/Final Fantasy XIII over-cutscene syndrome. You people keep saying "Bioware are evolving RPGs, not killing them" or "BioWare are as strong as ever at making RPGs" or "BioWare aren't abandoning their old fans" but provide no actual concrete argument to back it up. You just state it as if a fact, despite all the evidence that is shoved in your faces.

Modifié par Terror_K, 24 juin 2012 - 02:57 .

[Kuro.Ookami]

Robhuzz wrote...

OrangeLazarus86 wrote...

This is not what we wanted. You never listened to us. You ignored us at every interval.

Congrats BioWare, you're the NEW Lionhead Studios. Casey Hudson is your Peter Molyneux. You went from gaining our trust and loyalty to now creating nothing, but lies and disbelief in your fans and consumers.

You never cared about your fans, otherwise we wouldn't have had this "Extended Cut" of the same ending we hated. Drew Karpyshyn should have stayed as lead writer, at least he'd keep Casey Hudson in check.

Thanks for making the amazing adventure meaningless and pointless within the 10min the game ended. If I had known this is what Casey Hudson wanted, I wouldn't have even bothered with ME at all.

Thanks for not listening to your fans. We'll still fight you btw, till we get our better ending.

Do you really think Casey had much say in the matter? From what I gathered, the original version of ME3 (the alpha version if you will) was a lot different from the version we received. EA just barged in and wanted it released earlier and ordered (yes, ordered, I doubt Casey had ANY say in the matter) BioWare to skip a lot of content and release it earlier so the profits from ME3 could still affect their 2011 financial year. Why is it so hard to understand that EA calls the shots and BioWare has to follow orders?

Some guy posted this picture.

http://cloud.steampo...E5C7312A91BE8B/

Modifié par Kuro.Ookami, 24 juin 2012 - 03:44 .

[Dusen]

Robhuzz wrote...

OrangeLazarus86 wrote...

This is not what we wanted. You never listened to us. You ignored us at every interval.

Congrats BioWare, you're the NEW Lionhead Studios. Casey Hudson is your Peter Molyneux. You went from gaining our trust and loyalty to now creating nothing, but lies and disbelief in your fans and consumers.

You never cared about your fans, otherwise we wouldn't have had this "Extended Cut" of the same ending we hated. Drew Karpyshyn should have stayed as lead writer, at least he'd keep Casey Hudson in check.

Thanks for making the amazing adventure meaningless and pointless within the 10min the game ended. If I had known this is what Casey Hudson wanted, I wouldn't have even bothered with ME at all.

Thanks for not listening to your fans. We'll still fight you btw, till we get our better ending.

Do you really think Casey had much say in the matter? From what I gathered, the original version of ME3 (the alpha version if you will) was a lot different from the version we received. EA just barged in and wanted it released earlier and ordered (yes, ordered, I doubt Casey had ANY say in the matter) BioWare to skip a lot of content and release it earlier so the profits from ME3 could still affect their 2011 financial year. Why is it so hard to understand that EA calls the shots and BioWare has to follow orders?

How were you able to determine this? From everything I've seen, including the early leaks last fall (that I just recently checked out to see if they made any massive changes) the game was always destined to be similiar to what we got.

[BioFan (Official)]

mauro2222 wrote...

BrentjeNL wrote...

Did anyone also notice that Tali isn't wearing her mask in the picture

I doubt that she's Tali, but nice catch regardless.

Even if it isn't Tali, I'LL TAKE IT!!!!

[TGSP]

Terror_K wrote...
How are they listening? Most fans felt the ending was bad. Adding more to it and condescending us with this silly "it wasn't bad, you just didn't get it so we'll explain it more" EC is just an insult more than anything. That's the same BS I heard from the people behind the third Matrix film. Yes... I did get it, thank you very much. It's just bad writing, so stop being pretentious about it, BioWare.

I'm not going to pretend I've seen all the discussions about the ending, but my understanding of major complaints for the ending, putting aside the space magic, is that none of the choices made through the three games had any affect on the ending. So the EC is adding in the affect of the actions taken to get to the ending. As for the space magic, I didn't like it but am happy BW decided not to change it, though I still feel the whole artistic integrity excuse could could have been skipped.

Terror_K wrote...
How have Dragon Age 2 and Mass Effect 3 "evolved the RPG" exactly? What
have they brought to the table that we haven't had before, and are you
honestly saying that they haven't sacrificed more than we've been given
in the process? About the only thing that I see commonly praised about
ME3 amongst most fans is its improved combat, but if you look at it it's
essentially just TPS combat, which is a purely Action and Shooter game
element, not an RPG one. Aside from the fact there's powers you level
up, there's almost no RPG to the combat of ME3 at all. How is that an
evolution? How is removing dialogue choices and evolution? How is
autodialogue an evolution? How is making the mission structure
completely linear an evolution? How is reducing the entirety of the
statistical RPG elements to combat and combat alone evolution?

Overall,
how is reducing RPG elements and replacing them with action and shooter
game ones evolution? How is disconnecting the player from the character
they are playing evolution?

This I do agree whith fully, don't even know why they're still being labeled RPGs anymore. There is the excuse that the attributes section was removed because it didn't have any actual affect, I can name a few hugely successful games where this was true and they are often mentioned in the argument for it's removal but a few big games getting the balance wrong doesn't mean no-one likes it or that it's a waste of effort to include it in a game.

It's fast approaching the point where if you look at a list of features, without looking at the title or genre and you won't be able to tell what type of game it's meant to be

[Belhawk]

I didn't like any part of the ending! I found it too depressing.
So, I play the game thru Horizon & stop before going after the Illusive Man.
I will pick a player to do the EC ending, and that will be my 2nd complete play thru. AND I do NOT intend to any more endings after that.