One of the major complaints ME3's ending received was that players did not witness or get a chance to control all those multiple armies they were gathering to fight the Reapers in a similar fashion that the Warden united various races in Ferelden yet actively used those armies to fight the Archdemon and his minions.
I suspect that in addition to saving costs, part of the strategy not to let Shepard control armies of various races to say battle a final Reaper boss was not to blindly immitate DA:O's endgame.
In a sense, there is much wisdom from not aimlessly repeating oneself. A company can get blamed for lack of innovation, among other issues. However, when repetition is positive and constructive, BioWare should not be afraid of repeating structure of an end-game that WORKED WELL, especially if the theme leading up to the end is similar (unite vs Archdemon & unite vs Reapers).
Fans generally liked the fact that they could summon allies and see the fruit of their labor as more than EMS numbers on screen. It's a pleasant concept. Just like it is pleasant for Star Wars fans to see a Jedi duel at the end of each movie. Surely, let it not be identical - some variation is needed, but don't feel the need to exclude a mechanic based on fear of repetition.
Hopefully if DA3 happens to include a similar concept, you will consider not cutting it out. Fans like repetition, as long as it's good.
Don't be afraid of positive repetition
Débuté par
RussianSpy27
, juil. 10 2012 08:02
#1
Posté 10 juillet 2012 - 08:02
#2
Posté 10 juillet 2012 - 08:11
And fans like repetition, as long as its good, too.
#3
Posté 10 juillet 2012 - 08:22
but to be honest I really do not think ME3's endgame is bad except the illogical crucible plot which BioWare themselves can not explain. I do not want to compare it to DAO's ending since they are done by different people. the good thing about DAO is it explains every detail well so that players wouldnt get confused or shocked, however, this is something ME3 failed to deliver at the end.
#4
Posté 10 juillet 2012 - 08:29
I would also say that the beginings of DA2 and ME3 were quite bad and seemed rather rushed.
They both introduced characters you were ment to know with no introduction or explanation.
They both introduced characters you were ment to know with no introduction or explanation.
#5
Posté 10 juillet 2012 - 08:31
suntzuxi wrote...
but to be honest I really do not think ME3's endgame is bad except the illogical crucible plot which BioWare themselves can not explain. I do not want to compare it to DAO's ending since they are done by different people. the good thing about DAO is it explains every detail well so that players wouldnt get confused or shocked, however, this is something ME3 failed to deliver at the end.
Agreed though I don't want this thread to be about ME3's ending...I want to focus this thread on in-game mechanics, such as having in-game allies during end game from races gathered throughout the game that BioWare may have purposely decided not to repeat so as not to be looked at as losing innovation.
#6
Posté 10 juillet 2012 - 08:35
I really don't like having "Oh, it's that guy I've known for years!" dumped on me because I haven't known them for years. I've just met them.
Funnily, Anders was the other way around; I spent the whole game asking why he wasn't behaving normally, having spent all of Awakenings using him in my party.
Obviously, the character shoul have people he's met in the past, but as a player I don't like being hit with "Oh hey, do you remember all those adventures we had but the player never got to see? Those were awesome!"
Funnily, Anders was the other way around; I spent the whole game asking why he wasn't behaving normally, having spent all of Awakenings using him in my party.
Obviously, the character shoul have people he's met in the past, but as a player I don't like being hit with "Oh hey, do you remember all those adventures we had but the player never got to see? Those were awesome!"





Retour en haut






