257 réponses à ce sujet

[silverexile17s]

Blueprotoss wrote...

bleetman wrote...

That's fine and all (though frankly I don't agree at all. Action has taken a backseat? What? It was by far their main selling point by Mass Effect 3, and was hardly some secret side-addition spoken only of in hushed tones before that), but if you're going to have action sequences, they better damn well be up to scratch, because we're slogging through dozens of hours of the thing.

Priority Earth wasn't good enough. The setting was bland. The fights were tedious, frustrating, or both. And in probably the most important part of the game where your amassed assets and allies needed to be demonstrated and actually have a function, we got a few seconds of poorly rendered CGI. The entire sequence just stank of apathy, as though the people creating it had long since had enough and just wanted it done with.

Besides, it's a bit difficult to defend Priority Earth from a story perspective. It's a disasterous mess there, too.

I'm surprised by what some people say especially when Priority wouldn't be bashed without the Catalyst. I'm also surprised that some people also forget the rage that was associated with the final missions/endings of ME1 and ME2.

bleetman wrote...

Ah, 'art'. How quickly those who have exhausted their counter-arguments invoke that word.

This by itself is a red herring because Bioware hasn't changed much since Baldur's Gate was released.

1. The thing Priority:Earth NEEDED was a chance to bring Harbinger down. It would have been a MUCH more satisfying level then, because you feel like you actually ACOMPLISH something besides the good-byes to the squad and LI, or feeling like you did nothing beside escort a convoy through a heavaly defended zone, or shoot some missles and watch some destroyer I have no attachment to die.

2. It's true. GameFront had an entire article on how the Artistic Intregity was a BS excuse, and how it could have been BETTER if they HAD given more ending options in the EC.

[Blueprotoss]

silverexile17s wrote...

1. The thing Priority:Earth NEEDED was a chance to bring Harbinger down. It would have been a MUCH more satisfying level then, because you feel like you actually ACOMPLISH something besides the good-byes to the squad and LI, or feeling like you did nothing beside escort a convoy through a heavaly defended zone, or shoot some missles and watch some destroyer I have no attachment to die. 

Harbinger doesn't need to be directly defeated especially when Shepard didn't directly defeat Sovreign.  The only Reaper that Shepard directy defeated was the Proto Human Reaper at the end of ME2.  Btw Harbinger needing to be killed would be labeled as an opinion.

silverexile17s wrote...

2. It's true. GameFront had an entire article on how the Artistic Intregity was a BS excuse, and how it could have been BETTER if they HAD given more ending options in the EC.

Pandering for views isn't anything new for websites and if "art" was a real issue then Bioware wouldn't have lasted that long after Baldur's Gate 2.  Haters are still gonna hate because thats all they can do now is just hate.

[silverexile17s]

Blueprotoss wrote...

silverexile17s wrote...

1. The thing Priority:Earth NEEDED was a chance to bring Harbinger down. It would have been a MUCH more satisfying level then, because you feel like you actually ACOMPLISH something besides the good-byes to the squad and LI, or feeling like you did nothing beside escort a convoy through a heavaly defended zone, or shoot some missles and watch some destroyer I have no attachment to die. 

Harbinger doesn't need to be directly defeated especially when Shepard didn't directly defeat Sovreign.  The only Reaper that Shepard directy defeated was the Proto Human Reaper at the end of ME2.  Btw Harbinger needing to be killed would be labeled as an opinion.

silverexile17s wrote...

2. It's true. GameFront had an entire article on how the Artistic Intregity was a BS excuse, and how it could have been BETTER if they HAD given more ending options in the EC.

Pandering for views isn't anything new for websites and if "art" was a real issue then Bioware wouldn't have lasted that long after Baldur's Gate 2.  Haters are still gonna hate because thats all they can do now is just hate.

1. ...Of COURSE *that's* just an opinion. But I do think it's one that would have been for the better. Priority: Earth would have been more satisfying had Harbinger been brought down by Shepard's actions. That ALONE would have helped lessen the problem. We got to watch that arrogant Sovergien get what was comming to him in the course of the first game. Harbinger getting it in ME3 would have made MUCH MORE SENSE.

2. Or, some site writers actually have a conscience. I've seen IGN give high-end reviews to games that sucked. And with your other arguement, That was back when BioWare was an independant compnay. Now, it's a division of EA.
Again, "Haters gonna Hate", but it's obvious that ME3 was considered a near-complete cop-out nonsensical rip-off of Deus Ex in it's original ending. The EC made them make SENSE, at least, but doesn't change the fact that they could have been MUCH better, and that they STILL end the series on a sour note, killing any momentum it had going.
And at this point, all I've seen you do is bicker with everyone else. I've NEVER seen you acknolodge any faluts the desingers had. And they HAVE had faults.
Are you on their payrole or something?

Modifié par silverexile17s, 31 octobre 2012 - 01:21 .

[Blueprotoss]

silverexile17s wrote...

1. ...Of COURSE *that's* just an opinion. But I do think it's one that would have been for the better. Priority: Earth would have been more satisfying had Harbinger been brought down by Shepard's actions. That ALONE would have helped lessen the problem. We got to watch that arrogant Sovergien get what was comming to him in the course of the first game. Harbinger getting it in ME3 would have made MUCH MORE SENSE.

Its obvious that was opinion like how its still an opinion.  The reason why Sovreign was arrrogant is that he underestimated the current cycle because of what Shepard did with the human race and Harbinger learned from Sovreign's mistakes.  Also Harbinger wanted to recruit Shepard instead of killing him/her.

silverexile17s wrote...

2. Or, some site writers actually have a conscience. I've seen IGN give high-end reviews to games that sucked. And with your other arguement, That was back when BioWare was an independant compnay. Now, it's a division of EA.

IGN really isn't that consistent to really have a conscience but one of the few consistencies that they have is the ME series.  Btw next time it would be a good idea not to contradict yourself on IGN because there's a constant rage on BSN based on Dianna Allers and one of the 72 perfect scores.  Bioware is still an independent company because they still have the controling rights for their IPs but to be fair everyone can't be as independent as Blizzard, Bethesda, and Valve.

silverexile17s wrote...

Again, "Haters gonna Hate", but it's obvious that ME3 was considered a near-complete cop-out nonsensical rip-off of Deus Ex in it's original ending. The EC made them make SENSE, at least, but doesn't change the fact that they could have been MUCH better, and that they STILL end the series on a sour note, killing any momentum it had going.

Yet ME3 is far from a cop out especially if you paid attention to ME as a whole and its funny that everything I knew what happened in ME3 before the EC was released.  Its not that hard to use common sense.

silverexile17s wrote...

And at this point, all I've seen you do is bicker with everyone else. I've NEVER seen you acknolodge any faluts the desingers had. And they HAVE had faults.
Are you on their payrole or something?

I'm not bickering with anyone especially when I'm not being petty and I'm not insulting people.

[silverexile17s]

Blueprotoss wrote...

silverexile17s wrote...

1. ...Of COURSE *that's* just an opinion. But I do think it's one that would have been for the better. Priority: Earth would have been more satisfying had Harbinger been brought down by Shepard's actions. That ALONE would have helped lessen the problem. We got to watch that arrogant Sovergien get what was comming to him in the course of the first game. Harbinger getting it in ME3 would have made MUCH MORE SENSE.

Its obvious that was opinion like how its still an opinion.  The reason why Sovreign was arrrogant is that he underestimated the current cycle because of what Shepard did with the human race and Harbinger learned from Sovreign's mistakes.  Also Harbinger wanted to recruit Shepard instead of killing him/her.

silverexile17s wrote...

2. Or, some site writers actually have a conscience. I've seen IGN give high-end reviews to games that sucked. And with your other arguement, That was back when BioWare was an independant compnay. Now, it's a division of EA.

IGN really isn't that consistent to really have a conscience but one of the few consistencies that they have is the ME series.  Btw next time it would be a good idea not to contradict yourself on IGN because there's a constant rage on BSN based on Dianna Allers and one of the 72 perfect scores.  Bioware is still an independent company because they still have the controling rights for their IPs but to be fair everyone can't be as independent as Blizzard, Bethesda, and Valve.

silverexile17s wrote...

Again, "Haters gonna Hate", but it's obvious that ME3 was considered a near-complete cop-out nonsensical rip-off of Deus Ex in it's original ending. The EC made them make SENSE, at least, but doesn't change the fact that they could have been MUCH better, and that they STILL end the series on a sour note, killing any momentum it had going.

Yet ME3 is far from a cop out especially if you paid attention to ME as a whole and its funny that everything I knew what happened in ME3 before the EC was released.  Its not that hard to use common sense.

silverexile17s wrote...

And at this point, all I've seen you do is bicker with everyone else. I've NEVER seen you acknolodge any faluts the desingers had. And they HAVE had faults.
Are you on their payrole or something?

I'm not bickering with anyone especially when I'm not being petty and I'm not insulting people.

1. ....Yes. I said that particuler statment was an opinion of mine. Woop-de-flippin-doo. Break out the booze and the roll out the red carpet. Back to the matter at HAND...
"If I must destroy you Shepard, I will."
I seem to remember Harbinger saying that several dozen times in ME2. Along with "Preserve Shepard's body if possible." Since the Collectors KILLED him before, and didn't hesitate to try again in ME2, it's obvious that Harbinger considers a LIVING Shepard too much trouble, and that he doesn't need to be alive for ther purposes. Remember, that line of thinking led to the Indoctrination Theory that I'm sure you have no love for.   Also, I remember that Vigil stated that Sovergien was isolated from the other Reapers, hence why it had to figure out the problem itself, instead of just contacting the other Reapers. Meaning that Harbinger likely has NONE of the experences that Sovergien had. And from what is shown in the games, Harbinger is more arrogant the Sovergien EVER was.

2. IGN is almost a "sell-out reviews to the highest bidder' site. Like how that "Night at the Museum" game rated higher then Assasin's Creed. They have near-ALWAYS given good scores to games backed by EA.

3. THEN USE IT.
I NEVER SAID that the ENTIRE GAME was a cop-out. JUST the endings. And it's hard to pay attention to the series as a whole, when you no longer NEED to play from the first game anymore. It feels like there is NO REASON to go through the first two games unless you are an OCD completionest. Just buy ME3 and done! NO reason to get the other two games. And after finishing ME3, you probably will have little to no desire to play through even THAT again. You've seen it. Nothing is going to change by playing from ME1 again.  That basically KILLS any desire to play again.

4. LOOK at all these posts on the forms! All you've DONE is be petty and insult people. You've insulted their intelligence, by criticizing them for treating the Dictoionary as a reliable source of information. You've always called them liers in all but name, with "Strawmen, red herrings, hatters gonna hate, to be fair" & "that's ironic." You accuse them of contridicting themselves while you blatently do it in front of them. And you ignore any question of presentation of PROOF to back your clames, or just any question period, by constantly assualting and debating the logic of the question.
Which reminds me: You STILL didn't answer MY question.
Are you on the payroll here, or not?

[Blueprotoss]

silverexile17s wrote...

1. ....Yes. I said that particuler statment was an opinion of mine. Woop-de-flippin-doo. Break out the booze and the roll out the red carpet. Back to the matter at HAND...
"If I must destroy you Shepard, I will."
I seem to remember Harbinger saying that several dozen times in ME2. Along with "Preserve Shepard's body if possible." Since the Collectors KILLED him before, and didn't hesitate to try again in ME2, it's obvious that Harbinger considers a LIVING Shepard too much trouble, and that he doesn't need to be alive for ther purposes. Remember, that line of thinking led to the Indoctrination Theory that I'm sure you have no love for.   Also, I remember that Vigil stated that Sovergien was isolated from the other Reapers, hence why it had to figure out the problem itself, instead of just contacting the other Reapers. Meaning that Harbinger likely has NONE of the experences that Sovergien had. And from what is shown in the games, Harbinger is more arrogant the Sovergien EVER was.

ironically all of your comments that I have seen are opinion not fact.  Harbinger considered Shepard along with humanity a threat after the surpising death of Sovreign hence why Harbinger got the Collectors to create a Reaper Capital ship made from humans.

silverexile17s wrote...

2. IGN is almost a "sell-out reviews to the highest bidder' site. Like how that "Night at the Museum" game rated higher then Assasin's Creed. They have near-ALWAYS given good scores to games backed by EA.

Yet you seem to forget what an opinion is even when critics provide us with opinions.

silverexile17s wrote...

3. THEN USE IT.
I NEVER SAID that the ENTIRE GAME was a cop-out. JUST the endings. And it's hard to pay attention to the series as a whole, when you no longer NEED to play from the first game anymore. It feels like there is NO REASON to go through the first two games unless you are an OCD completionest. Just buy ME3 and done! NO reason to get the other two games. And after finishing ME3, you probably will have little to no desire to play through even THAT again. You've seen it. Nothing is going to change by playing from ME1 again.  That basically KILLS any desire to play again.

Yet thats opinion not fact but its okay to not like something.

silverexile17s wrote...

4. LOOK at all these posts on the forms! All you've DONE is be petty and insult people. You've insulted their intelligence, by criticizing them for treating the Dictoionary as a reliable source of information. You've always called them liers in all but name, with "Strawmen, red herrings, hatters gonna hate, to be fair" & "that's ironic." You accuse them of contridicting themselves while you blatently do it in front of them. And you ignore any question of presentation of PROOF to back your clames, or just any question period, by constantly assualting and debating the logic of the question.
Which reminds me: You STILL didn't answer MY question.
Are you on the payroll here, or not?

We must have switched bodies then since I haven't insulted anyone or acted petty.  Its not my fault that I'm a man of logic.

[BSpud]

Blueprotoss wrote...
Its not my fault that I'm a man of logic.

Sig-worthy.

[Baihu1983]

Rachni Queen VS Harbinger.


That is all.

[silverexile17s]

Blueprotoss wrote...

silverexile17s wrote...

1. ....Yes. I said that particuler statment was an opinion of mine. Woop-de-flippin-doo. Break out the booze and the roll out the red carpet. Back to the matter at HAND...
"If I must destroy you Shepard, I will."
I seem to remember Harbinger saying that several dozen times in ME2. Along with "Preserve Shepard's body if possible." Since the Collectors KILLED him before, and didn't hesitate to try again in ME2, it's obvious that Harbinger considers a LIVING Shepard too much trouble, and that he doesn't need to be alive for ther purposes. Remember, that line of thinking led to the Indoctrination Theory that I'm sure you have no love for.   Also, I remember that Vigil stated that Sovergien was isolated from the other Reapers, hence why it had to figure out the problem itself, instead of just contacting the other Reapers. Meaning that Harbinger likely has NONE of the experences that Sovergien had. And from what is shown in the games, Harbinger is more arrogant the Sovergien EVER was.

ironically all of your comments that I have seen are opinion not fact.  Harbinger considered Shepard along with humanity a threat after the surpising death of Sovreign hence why Harbinger got the Collectors to create a Reaper Capital ship made from humans.

silverexile17s wrote...

2. IGN is almost a "sell-out reviews to the highest bidder' site. Like how that "Night at the Museum" game rated higher then Assasin's Creed. They have near-ALWAYS given good scores to games backed by EA.

Yet you seem to forget what an opinion is even when critics provide us with opinions.

silverexile17s wrote...

3. THEN USE IT.
I NEVER SAID that the ENTIRE GAME was a cop-out. JUST the endings. And it's hard to pay attention to the series as a whole, when you no longer NEED to play from the first game anymore. It feels like there is NO REASON to go through the first two games unless you are an OCD completionest. Just buy ME3 and done! NO reason to get the other two games. And after finishing ME3, you probably will have little to no desire to play through even THAT again. You've seen it. Nothing is going to change by playing from ME1 again.  That basically KILLS any desire to play again.

Yet thats opinion not fact but its okay to not like something.

silverexile17s wrote...

4. LOOK at all these posts on the forms! All you've DONE is be petty and insult people. You've insulted their intelligence, by criticizing them for treating the Dictoionary as a reliable source of information. You've always called them liers in all but name, with "Strawmen, red herrings, hatters gonna hate, to be fair" & "that's ironic." You accuse them of contridicting themselves while you blatently do it in front of them. And you ignore any question of presentation of PROOF to back your clames, or just any question period, by constantly assualting and debating the logic of the question.
Which reminds me: You STILL didn't answer MY question.
Are you on the payroll here, or not?

We must have switched bodies then since I haven't insulted anyone or acted petty.  Its not my fault that I'm a man of logic.

1. Did you not say in the previous comments that Harbinger wanted to recrut Shepard? Besides, It seems that Harbinger straight up thought that human were the only race that held the genetic diversity to become a Reaper.


Harbinger Responds to each squad mate about their species viabilaty for conversion in ME2

“Turian; you are considered...too primitive.”(Garrus)
“Drell; useless, insufficient numbers.”(Thane)
“Quarian; considered due to cybernetic augmentation, weakened immune system too debilitating.”(Tali)
“Asari; reliance upon alien species for reproduction shows genetic weakness.”(Samara)
“Krogan; sterilised race, potential wasted.”(Grunt)
“Geth; an annoyance, limited utility.” (Legion)
“Salarian; insufficient lifespan, fragile genetic structure.”(Mordin)
“Human; viable possibility, impressive technical potential.”(Kasumi)
“Human; viable possibility, if emotional drives are subjugated.”(Jacob)
“Human; viable possibility, great biotic potential.” (Jack)
“Human; viable possibility, aggression factor useful if controlled.” (Zaeed)
“Human; viable possibility, impressive genetic malleability.” (Miranda)

It's not  Shepard. Humans in GENERAL are Harbingers targets.

2. You are the one who was defending their opinions.

3. It's called "General Consensis." No one seems to play more then once, according to BioWare's own RECORDS, posted live to show that ME3 was not as popular as ME2.

4. Reverse logic.
Denying that Dictionaries are a credible source of factual information, yet saying that literature is, when the two are the same, doesn't really constitute your claim of "Man of Logic."
The post I put above MORE then proves you ar petty and insulting to others.
And again, you dodged the question. Are you on the Bloody payroll here, or not?

Modifié par silverexile17s, 02 novembre 2012 - 09:05 .

[brummyuk19]

Come on guys, no arguements please, otherwise it'll get locked!

Modifié par brummyuk19, 07 novembre 2012 - 12:54 .

[The_Other_M]

Hell yeah I support that.
Will it ever happen? Nope

[Stella-Arc]

I support a revamp Priority: Earth.

Not going to happen because of "Artistic Integrity". lol

[KieranW]

Love the idea. It really can't hurt to add more to it. Even if you already like the mission. It would be Priority: Earth+

I seriously hope someone, somewhere takes note of this thread.

[silverexile17s]

I think that if Priority: Earth had been structured so that everything that happened was based on not just how many war assets you had, but which ones. Say you have Wrex. Frontlines are tearing through Reaper fronts via turian/krogan coordination. Or if Mordin is alive, his mastery of biotech allows him to develop a retrovirus that affects the physiology of husks and other Reaper creations.

Also, if Harbinger had been a boss fight, along with making the war assets WORTH something, it would have made Priority: Earth truly feel worthwhile.

[string3r]

silverexile17s wrote...

I think that if Priority: Earth had been structured so that everything that happened was based on not just how many war assets you had, but which ones. Say you have Wrex. Frontlines are tearing through Reaper fronts via turian/krogan coordination. Or if Mordin is alive, his mastery of biotech allows him to develop a retrovirus that affects the physiology of husks and other Reaper creations.

Also, if Harbinger had been a boss fight, along with making the war assets WORTH something, it would have made Priority: Earth truly feel worthwhile.

They could have done it like Dragon Age Origins.

[Maxster_]

string3r wrote...

silverexile17s wrote...

I think that if Priority: Earth had been structured so that everything that happened was based on not just how many war assets you had, but which ones. Say you have Wrex. Frontlines are tearing through Reaper fronts via turian/krogan coordination. Or if Mordin is alive, his mastery of biotech allows him to develop a retrovirus that affects the physiology of husks and other Reaper creations.

Also, if Harbinger had been a boss fight, along with making the war assets WORTH something, it would have made Priority: Earth truly feel worthwhile.

They could have done it like Dragon Age Origins.

This is impossible, because EMS is designed to shoehorn multiplayer into singleplayer. EMS is meaningless, there is no difference between krogans(ground forces) and salarians(fleets) gameplay-wise.

[silverexile17s]

Maxster_ wrote...

string3r wrote...

silverexile17s wrote...

I think that if Priority: Earth had been structured so that everything that happened was based on not just how many war assets you had, but which ones. Say you have Wrex. Frontlines are tearing through Reaper fronts via turian/krogan coordination. Or if Mordin is alive, his mastery of biotech allows him to develop a retrovirus that affects the physiology of husks and other Reaper creations.

Also, if Harbinger had been a boss fight, along with making the war assets WORTH something, it would have made Priority: Earth truly feel worthwhile.

They could have done it like Dragon Age Origins.

This is impossible, because EMS is designed to shoehorn multiplayer into singleplayer. EMS is meaningless, there is no difference between krogans(ground forces) and salarians(fleets) gameplay-wise.

But it should have been. That's what should have been done. Make there be a difference between what happens if you have a salarian fleet, and what happens if you have heavy krogan support.
That would have been a key part in making Priority: Earth a much better experance.

[Maxster_]

silverexile17s wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

string3r wrote...

silverexile17s wrote...

I think that if Priority: Earth had been structured so that everything that happened was based on not just how many war assets you had, but which ones. Say you have Wrex. Frontlines are tearing through Reaper fronts via turian/krogan coordination. Or if Mordin is alive, his mastery of biotech allows him to develop a retrovirus that affects the physiology of husks and other Reaper creations.

Also, if Harbinger had been a boss fight, along with making the war assets WORTH something, it would have made Priority: Earth truly feel worthwhile.

They could have done it like Dragon Age Origins.

This is impossible, because EMS is designed to shoehorn multiplayer into singleplayer. EMS is meaningless, there is no difference between krogans(ground forces) and salarians(fleets) gameplay-wise.

But it should have been. That's what should have been done. Make there be a difference between what happens if you have a salarian fleet, and what happens if you have heavy krogan support.
That would have been a key part in making Priority: Earth a much better experance.

You need to redesign entire game for that. And this will never happen.
Game was designed with meaningless EMS. It was decision of EAWare direction.

[Xellith]

I still find it disgusting that Bioware turned what could have been the most epic ending ever into a "whatever bro" battle.

[Nitrocuban]

Maybe they include the Collectors as Harbingers Republican Guard or something?

[Dubozz]

Priority Earth is one of my main complains about ME3.

[silverexile17s]

Maxster_ wrote...

silverexile17s wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

string3r wrote...

silverexile17s wrote...

I think that if Priority: Earth had been structured so that everything that happened was based on not just how many war assets you had, but which ones. Say you have Wrex. Frontlines are tearing through Reaper fronts via turian/krogan coordination. Or if Mordin is alive, his mastery of biotech allows him to develop a retrovirus that affects the physiology of husks and other Reaper creations.

Also, if Harbinger had been a boss fight, along with making the war assets WORTH something, it would have made Priority: Earth truly feel worthwhile.

They could have done it like Dragon Age Origins.

This is impossible, because EMS is designed to shoehorn multiplayer into singleplayer. EMS is meaningless, there is no difference between krogans(ground forces) and salarians(fleets) gameplay-wise.

But it should have been. That's what should have been done. Make there be a difference between what happens if you have a salarian fleet, and what happens if you have heavy krogan support.
That would have been a key part in making Priority: Earth a much better experance.

You need to redesign entire game for that. And this will never happen.
Game was designed with meaningless EMS. It was decision of EAWare direction.

I don't think re-deigning of the entire game is nessessary at all. Just an expansion. A large one, like 3-4 GB. But it would be something that fans would receve well.

[Maxster_]

silverexile17s wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

silverexile17s wrote...
But it should have been. That's what should have been done. Make there be a difference between what happens if you have a salarian fleet, and what happens if you have heavy krogan support.
That would have been a key part in making Priority: Earth a much better experance.

You need to redesign entire game for that. And this will never happen.
Game was designed with meaningless EMS. It was decision of EAWare direction.

I
don't think re-deigning of the entire game is nessessary at all. Just
an expansion. A large one, like 3-4 GB. But it would be something that
fans would receve well.

There are reasons.
1. EMS are meaningless. What is 1 EMS? Nothing, undefined.
2. EMS are uncategorized(to be precise - categories are meaningless) and unbalanced. Crucible category - meaningless, Crucible always built. Citadel category - meaningless, Citadel always captured.
3. Choices are unbalanced and there is no difference for different categories. Like for choice between krogan(ground forces) and salarians(fleets).

So, to make EMS meaningful gameplay-wise - you need.
1. Completely separate multiplayer EMS. Throw them away.
They have no meaning in-universe.
2. Define meaningful and structured categories for EMS.
3. Define what 1 EMS is gameplay-wise.
4. Balance choices like krogan-salarian.

And only then you could start designing final mission(missions).

It is just impossible.

[silverexile17s]

Maxster_ wrote...

silverexile17s wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

silverexile17s wrote...
But it should have been. That's what should have been done. Make there be a difference between what happens if you have a salarian fleet, and what happens if you have heavy krogan support.
That would have been a key part in making Priority: Earth a much better experance.

You need to redesign entire game for that. And this will never happen.
Game was designed with meaningless EMS. It was decision of EAWare direction.

I
don't think re-deigning of the entire game is nessessary at all. Just
an expansion. A large one, like 3-4 GB. But it would be something that
fans would receve well.

There are reasons.
1. EMS are meaningless. What is 1 EMS? Nothing, undefined.
2. EMS are uncategorized(to be precise - categories are meaningless) and unbalanced. Crucible category - meaningless, Crucible always built. Citadel category - meaningless, Citadel always captured.
3. Choices are unbalanced and there is no difference for different categories. Like for choice between krogan(ground forces) and salarians(fleets).

So, to make EMS meaningful gameplay-wise - you need.
1. Completely separate multiplayer EMS. Throw them away.
They have no meaning in-universe.
2. Define meaningful and structured categories for EMS.
3. Define what 1 EMS is gameplay-wise.
4. Balance choices like krogan-salarian.

And only then you could start designing final mission(missions).

It is just impossible.

Not true at all. Absolutly not.

1. The number of EMS needs to matter. More EMS, easier time on Earth: Fix.

2-A. I said nothing about there being individual consiquences for all the war assets. Just the major ones, like the squad members, (Grunt, Jacob, Kasumi, Zaeed, Mordin, Miranda, Jack, Wrex, Ashley/Kaiden, Samara) or the krogan/salarian, and the rachni, and the quarian/geth, and the Leviathans: Fix.

2-B. And there can be edits to show how much of the Citadel is evacuated during the attack, or if no one were attacked. Have Baily contact you at some point saying the Councilors got out safe if the Citadel was maxed out on prep: Fix.

2-C. Edit to that only spicific options can be used. Say, if you don't max the Crucible, you still get the bad endings where Earth is damaged or destroyed: Fix.

3. Make it that way. All you would need are a few cut scenes for the salarian space fleet, and a scene of krogan plowing through Reaper forces for the ground fight. Same for the others, like the rachni, and the quarian/geth: Fix.

4. Not true. Multiplayer does not need to be thrown out at all. There can be a report on a terminal about how N7 Special Forces are holding the line. Not even a cut scene. Just a series of messages, depending on how many imports you made: Fix.

5. It doesn't have to be that way. Just have the fleet get reinforecd by how many ships survived the Citadel for the citadel force asset, and the Crucible's best options be avalible for how many Crucible assets were collected. Those are the ones that need fixing the most: Fix.

6. Defining every single War Asset like tha is both messy and unessessary. Just group them up, and have a few diolouge lines, or communication messages, or cut scenes at the best, showing how each group (turian, asari, krogan) fairs depending on how built up it was: Fix.

7. Like I said in 3, a few diolouge options, comm messages, or cut scenes at the best, would be all that is needed to do that, aside from lessening the enemies based on how many ground forces are recruted: Fix.

It is nowhere near impossible. An expansion, in the style of Dragon Age: Awakening, could easily patch this all in, and still have room for more.

[Maxster_]

[quote]silverexile17s wrote...

[quote]Maxster_ wrote...

[quote]silverexile17s wrote...

[quote]Maxster_ wrote...

[quote]silverexile17s wrote...
But it should have been. That's what should have been done. Make there be a difference between what happens if you have a salarian fleet, and what happens if you have heavy krogan support.
That would have been a key part in making Priority: Earth a much better experance.

[/quote]
You need to redesign entire game for that. And this will never happen.
Game was designed with meaningless EMS. It was decision of EAWare direction.

[/quote]
I
don't think re-deigning of the entire game is nessessary at all. Just
an expansion. A large one, like 3-4 GB. But it would be something that
fans would receve well.

[/quote]
There are reasons.
1. EMS are meaningless. What is 1 EMS? Nothing, undefined.
2. EMS are uncategorized(to be precise - categories are meaningless) and unbalanced. Crucible category - meaningless, Crucible always built. Citadel category - meaningless, Citadel always captured.
3. Choices are unbalanced and there is no difference for different categories. Like for choice between krogan(ground forces) and salarians(fleets).

So, to make EMS meaningful gameplay-wise - you need.
1. Completely separate multiplayer EMS. Throw them away.
They have no meaning in-universe.
2. Define meaningful and structured categories for EMS.
3. Define what 1 EMS is gameplay-wise.
4. Balance choices like krogan-salarian.

And only then you could start designing final mission(missions).

It is just impossible.

[/quote]
Not true at all. Absolutly not.

1. The number of EMS needs to matter. More EMS, easier time on Earth: Fix.
[/quote]
EMS is undefined. Tell me, why Sanders EMS value is half of the entire fleet? It makes no sense.
What is 1 EMS? What we are gaining with 1 EMS? How much EMS we need to down 1 destroyer?
1/30 of Kahlee Sanders? 1/5 of Diana Allers? 1/10 of Khalisah?
1/60 of fleet?
[quote]
2-A. I said nothing about there being individual consiquences for all the war assets. Just the major ones, like the squad members, (Grunt, Jacob, Kasumi, Zaeed, Mordin, Miranda, Jack, Wrex, Ashley/Kaiden, Samara) or the krogan/salarian, and the rachni, and the quarian/geth, and the Leviathans: Fix.
[/quote]
It is meaningless. Grunt is 40% of alliance fleet.
This is just nonsense. It can not be added as gameplay element without redesign.
[quote]
2-B. And there can be edits to show how much of the Citadel is evacuated during the attack, or if no one were attacked. Have Baily contact you at some point saying the Councilors got out safe if the Citadel was maxed out on prep: Fix.
[/quote]
it is not a gameplay element.
[quote]
2-C. Edit to that only spicific options can be used. Say, if you don't max the Crucible, you still get the bad endings where Earth is damaged or destroyed: Fix.
[/quote]
And this requires to redesign of the game. Look at Crucible assets - most of it from garbage minigame(scanning). And choices are - will you scan or not.
Also, you are narrowing endings to Crucible category - thus makes other categories even more meaningless than they are now. Crucible is only way of victory ME3 have - and you just nullified all other EMS.
[quote]
3. Make it that way. All you would need are a few cut scenes for the salarian space fleet, and a scene of krogan plowing through Reaper forces for the ground fight. Same for the others, like the rachni, and the quarian/geth: Fix.
[/quote]
It is not a gameplay element.
Also, in current circumstances it would make even less sense than current mission. Especially priority:earth ground assault being completely unneeded.
What difference between krogan ground forces fighting for unneeded ground - and salarian fleets beating some reapers, helping Crucible to be delivered?
So, you choose krogans - how it will affect fleets operations? It doesn't.
So, you choose salarians - how it will affect ground operations? It doesn't.
You are still end up with burned armor and beam - regardless of what you do. And all you get is pointless cutscenes with completely no effect on outcome.
[quote]
4. Not true. Multiplayer does not need to be thrown out at all. There can be a report on a terminal about how N7 Special Forces are holding the line. Not even a cut scene. Just a series of messages, depending on how many imports you made: Fix.
[/quote]
Lol. So, you narrowed EMS to only Crucible category - cutting out multiplayer EMS completely - and now you are telling that multiplayer EMS will affect something? And that something being what, exactly?
Also, not a gameplay element.
[quote]
5. It doesn't have to be that way. Just have the fleet get reinforecd by how many ships survived the Citadel for the citadel force asset, and the Crucible's best options be avalible for how many Crucible assets were collected. Those are the ones that need fixing the most: Fix.
[/quote]
And this completely unaffects gameplay.
[quote]
6. Defining every single War Asset like tha is both messy and unessessary. Just group them up, and have a few diolouge lines, or communication messages, or cut scenes at the best, showing how each group (turian, asari, krogan) fairs depending on how built up it was: Fix.
[/quote]
Those are not a gameplay elements.
[quote]
7. Like I said in 3, a few diolouge options, comm messages, or cut scenes at the best, would be all that is needed to do that, aside from lessening the enemies based on how many ground forces are recruted: Fix.
[/quote]
Also not a gameplay elements.
[quote]
It is nowhere near impossible. An expansion, in the style of Dragon Age: Awakening, could easily patch this all in, and still have room for more.
[/quote]
It will never be done, even in your shortened version.
First, everything you stated are not a gameplay elements.
Second, adding EMS as gameplay elements to current system is impossible.
Third, does it matter if you get more pointless and nonsensical cutscenes, if you still can't win?

And main point - it will cost too much even in your shortened version. Well, actually not, it should be done from start of ME3 development cycle - but if you adding war assets as gameplay elements - you need to throw out multiplayer, and to make EMS meaningful. And EAWare being too greedy - it will never happens. It is not a CD Project RED.

And if adding them just as cutscenes - you still get same garbage in the end.