[quote]Blueprotoss wrote...
[quote]silverexile17s wrote...
1. Shepard was the core of the series, bassically, Not haveing Shepard in the series is the epitimy of a fresh start for ME.
I'm simply saying that you cannot compare those games to ME3 when they were not designed with a save file transfer system.
Also, the way the Witcher and Witcher 2 work is arguably better then the choice and consiquence system in ME3.
And I havent played the .Hack trilogies, so I cannot comment on that.[/quote]I see how you avoid that ME is the only series to have import saves on this scale even when the Witcher and .Hack fail on that respect. Nothing is perfect hence why you sholdn''t expect perfection.[/quote]If thats the case then Shepard wouldn't be in a squad.
How is that when most of the choices in the Witcher including the endings don't transfer into the Witcher 2.
[quote]silverexile17s wrote...
2. I never argued that. And unlike many, I am one of the ones that think having a new protaganest in the next game is a good idea. I am just worried on how it will be pulled off. Just becasue I didn't like the ending of ME3 doesn't mean I don't like the series, or BioWare in general, or that I wish them ill.
I'm just commenting on how many don't seem to have high faith in BioWare anymore. Raging "BioWare deserves to close down for making a dissipointment like ME3" trolls like Maxstor_ are what worry me. BioWare isn't going to be in a good state if more fans don't give any actual constructive feedback to work off of, insetad of the butthurt trolling that Maxstor_ promotes.[/quote]If thats a bad idea then why complain this much and the person thats emotional here is definately you.
[quote]silverexile17s wrote...
3. I know that!
I'm just conserned. I don't think anyone is going to forget ME3s' ending, or how many considered it sucked. But in the end, we all have to move on, right?
The fan's don't seem to want to forgive BioWare, and the lack of positive feedback is just going to come back on them. I argued that any bad DLC released will be because they don't see the point in putting effort into something the fanbase is appairently no longer intrested in supporting. It's fine to list the cons of something, as long as you list all the pros to compare them to as well.[/quote]You're worrying way too much even when some people are mad over the same trival things from ME1 and ME2, which this is nothing new in franchises.
[quote]silverexile17s wrote...
4. Desmund is the one through which we see all this. He is the link to his family and history.
5. But we never miss the character of the past game, or complain when a new one comes along. They don't attach us too much to a spicific alien, predator, or marine to the point that fans will complain if a new one comes along.
6. But all of them maintain the same core characters, and their background stories. That's a stable background to build and innovate off of. It's hard to say "ever changing" when the characters and game mechanics don't drastically change from game to game.
7. The background lore does. But the game itself didn't end unless we deciede that we wanted it to. And there is never anything that really cannonizes a certin set of events in any of the games.
8. Still the same theme in every one, though.[/quote]How is that even with Desmond's father and Subject 16.
How is that when they all have their bakgrounds whether they're an Alien, Predator, or Maine while they don't need a detailed one.
How is that when Mortal Kombat (2010} changed the MK series as a whole.
The lore in general changes because you play as the unnamed hero lost to legend.
The theme doesn't drastically change but there are still different Links and Zeldas though.
[quote]silverexile17s wrote...
9. Actually, that is arguble, as we never see for sure what happened first. They end at the same time, and begin at the same time, so it's considered a parallel storyline.
10. But the overall theme never changes drastically. Modern War is a pretty constant theme.
11. What?? What does Fallout have to do in connceting to the Elder Scrolls? I think there was a typo there.
And they have the same concept: They do not cannonize anything that happened in previous games. They share lore, but are blank slates for the the story. Nothing in terms of previous characters are used, aside from some camios here and there.[/quote]How is that arguable when Death shows up on Earth and humanity is already gone, which that happens War sees that after his imprisonment.
Yet WW2, Korea, Vietnam, and 13 years into the future aren't modern.
As a series Fallout is pretty much another Elder Scrolls and thats nothing new.
[quote]silverexile17s wrote...
12. I point you to Jim Raynor, who was protagonest of all the games. As well as Sarha Kerrigan. And both will be in the upcomming Heart of the Swarm. According to the timeline, they all follow each-other, with Wings of Liberty indeed being a follow-up to Starcraft II, taking place 4 years later.
13. The point is that Resident Evil is more a mass of zombie shooting galleries then a coherent storyline. Same for the horrors of Silent Hill.[/quote]Jim Raynor and Sarah Kerrigan are far from the only charcaters hat Starcraft revolves around like how it also revolves around Mengsk, Tassadar, Zeratul, and the Overmind as a few examples.
[quote]silverexile17s wrote...
14. No. I'm concerned that others will act like that. Have you not seen the posts here saying that ME is not ME withou Shepard?
It's not my opinion. It's what I've observed others saying.
15. But Deus Ex stopped all that with it's self-contained prequel. It was a blank slate, and it worked beutifuly.
The only way to go from here is a blank slate for a sequel, or a self-contained prequel. That's the only direction it can go in now.
[/quote]If you weren't concerned at all then you wouldn't listen to opinion.
Human Revolution isn't a blank slate especially when it transitioned into Deus Ex with Denton just like Halo: Reach into Halo: Combat Evolved with Cheif and Cortana.
[/quote]
1. That's a good move. Don't make anything major from ME3 transfer into this next game. Make this next game self-contained, or stand-alone. Doing so makes sure that your playthrough and cannons from the trilogy stay intact. Therefore, no fan cdomplaints.
2. Again, it's not me. It how I fear others will react, if it's not pulled off well. It has nothing to do with me. It's about if fans will give the series any form of second chance without Shepard, unless the game is made a toatl blank slate.
3. Not like this. And complaints like that were far overshadowed by the ME3 endings.
From what I've seen, trust in BioWare's writing getting better is falling. They don't seem to believe that ME3 can survive past the endings, so I fear that the new game will fall flat to them no matter what the devs actually do with it.
4. Is he not the avatar that all this is seen through? Isn't all this ment to lead up to what he choses?
And in AvP, they all have backgrounds, but they never stay in a game long enough for us to develop a prefrence for a spicific one. And the storyline about every problem being the fault of Wayland-Yutani in one way or another also helps the story maintain a good level of fimilaraty, without binding it to a certin set of characters.
And yet MK's recent game still had the same core roster as the first three games.
(MK1) Jonnhy Cage, Sonya Blade, Scorpion, Sub-Zero, Liu Keng, Raiden, Kano.
(MK2) Reptile, Jax, Baraka, Kung Lao, Kitana, Shang Tsung, Mileena.
(MK3) Sheeva, Stryker, Nightwolf, Jade, Kabal, Ermac, Sektor, Sindel, Cyrax, Smoke.
All these charactersare still in the game MK (2010), as is the famed "Fatalities," and the "Stage Fatalities" seen in MK2. And the stages are the same design as the ones seen in the first game. Thats' not changed from the original formula at all. There are even camios from the characters of the other games, like Fujin, Bo Ri' Cho, Shinnok, and Havok. As well as other characters from the newer rosters to play as like Quan Chi, Kenshi (DLC) and Noob Saibot.
And the point is the overall theme doesn't change, so it's easy to jump into without skipping a beat over weather or not you played others.
5. Also, it is stated that the events of the Darksiders games take place parallel to each other.
No, but that isn't the focus. War is constant. It really doesn't change. Only the way it is waged is altered.
And nither cannonize anything from their previous entries. They leave everything ambiguas. That's the only way ME3 can go from here that allow the series to live, it seems: A blank slate.
6. They are the protaganests of the terren, and soon, the zerg. That's about as centeral to the story as you can get. Not one of the games hasn't had them in it.
7. The point is, it's the general opinion of the series' fate.
And Deus Ex: Human Revolution is indeed self-contained, as Adam Jenson's story is based 20+ years before the original, and is seperate from those events. The lore may not be blank, but the story and characters are. That's my point. It gives subtle hints to the original, but nothing substantial, really, until the very end.
Retour en haut
