1056 réponses à ce sujet

[Dean_the_Young]

AlanC9 wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Damn you, counting methods. Do you remember Star Ocean 3?

I actually don't.

Star Ocean: Till the End of Time was a game that let it's post-game epilogue reflect various permutations, primarily the the relative affection levels between the main character and the supporting cast. It had its own romance system (sort of) as well: not all the characters had romantic tension, but you could be closest with any one of the nine companions.

So the game's ending had variousshorts showing the transition for each of the main characters, as well as 9 'paired' endings for the main character and the closest companion. All total you could say there were 19 'short endings' to the epilogue.

And, really, the epilogue was all that changed. There was no branching narrative, past your final cast of companions (there were more potential companions than there were slots). But you got a different scene, so is that 19 endings?

Well, most people one Bioware would say that it was 1 ending, with 19 different epilogue pieces. But an 'ending state' often gets confused with 'endings', and so...


Star Ocean 2 (the one I was thinking of when I typed) was even more byzantium: it claims 86 endings and boasts hundreds of permuations, but a lot of them are just minor changes to the ending slides. Not even the difference between Tuchanka Destroyed and Tuchanka with the genophage cured, but just differences in text more akin to the the difference between the Control Shepard's speech in the various Paragon and Renegade outputs.

So, not really 'endings' as much as 'ending states.' But it's that common bluring that gets the whole 'Bioware (or someone) claimed tons of endings!'

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 22 janvier 2013 - 07:20 .

[Tootles FTW]

Personally, I'd suggest ignoring the Shepard trilogy as if it never happened. The world and the species within it are too interesting to let wallow in any of the endings, honestly, even Destroy as the Geth are "dead".

[silverexile17s]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

silverexile17s wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Why should ME4 even attempt to please everyone, a fool's notion if there ever was one? None of the other Bioware games ever had.

If ME4 is a sequel at all, and remember that it doesn't need to be, they can always cut the knot and choose a baseline continuation canon (the Crucible outcome of choice), while letting the Genophage/Rannoch subplots be little more than cameos along the lines of the Elf/Werewolf quest in DA2.

Still, look at what heppened with ME3.
It was never about being perfect. It was about measuring up to the first game. And the general opinion was that ME3 just didn't measure up compaired to the first one.

Uh... what does any of what you just said have to do with what you just quoted?

I never said anything about perfection. I was pointing out that all the games have always made choices that not everyone was going to be happy with. If you were a Renegade in ME1, ME2's carryover kind of sucked on a number of levels. If you had a Romance interest in ME1, ME2 was a dissapointment. Etc. We can also go back to ME1's multitude of flaws that were presented as a Big Deal at the time: inventory, combat system, the Mako, elevators, corny/fake dialogue choices, a lack of investigation into some things and half-baked quests.


The OP took a position in expecting Bioware to treat all choices equally, as if they had any pattern or history of doing so. That they don't, not perfection, was the point.

Attempting to please everyone is the same as trying to make it perfect.

But ME3 reversed the things that made ME1 lovable, in that it did a 180 in what it was best in. Vehichles were stripped completely instead of improved like in ME2. The inventory system was left bare-bones. All the missions were either camio levels, or fetch questing. And the combat gameplay was generally considered stronger then the story, which, while not really being a BAD plot, was exicuted poorly in comparison to ME1 & 2.

[AlanC9]

silverexile17s wrote...
But ME3 reversed the things that made ME1 lovable, in that it did a 180 in what it was best in. Vehichles were stripped completely instead of improved like in ME2. The inventory system was left bare-bones. All the missions were either camio levels, or fetch questing. And the combat gameplay was generally considered stronger then the story, which, while not really being a BAD plot, was exicuted poorly in comparison to ME1 & 2.

Wait... the vehicles and inventory are some of the things ME1 was best in?

[silverexile17s]

Sanunes wrote...

silverexile17s wrote...

Sanunes wrote...
*snip*

What eveyone praises ME1 for is the story, and all the variations it had. ME3 was a complete switch: better gameplay, lesser story.

See, the problem I have with ME1 I don't feel the story it has, for you mentioned variations and I don't remember that much variation in the story you have a bunch of unrelated side missions a few key missions, but except for one major choice at the end it works out the same with a couple of exceptions.  Even the major choices in ME1 don't have an impact after you make the choice for the Rachni situation ends after Noveria, Feros is never mentioned after your trip there, and even the Virmire Survivor/Sacrifice isn't mentioned in the game.  What really bothers me with ME1 is that there are several dialogue options in the game that if you pick something different in the dialogue wheel it was identical to the other ones (text and voice acted), to me it bothers me more then auto dialogue, for it appears there is a different dialogue, but there isn't.

Strange thing is that more people preferred that diolouge systme to autodiolouge. It was an extra level of personilization. Character reactions were one of the key elements of the game. Being able to have that level of control really made it seem like you were in the game making the choices.
Not to mention that kind of diolouge was almost native to RPG's.
And you can't critque ME1 for it. ALL RPG's have unrelated side-missions to immerse yourself in the mythos. That's the whole point side-qusets are MADE. ME2 was a MASSIVE SIDE QUEST, detached from the main "fight the Reapers" plot, but I didn't hear many complaints.
And just because the changes aren't shown doesn't mean they aren't important. And the Virmire survivor DOES play an important part, as the death of the others forms a bond between Shepard and the other survivor.

[silverexile17s]

AlanC9 wrote...

silverexile17s wrote...
But ME3 reversed the things that made ME1 lovable, in that it did a 180 in what it was best in. Vehichles were stripped completely instead of improved like in ME2. The inventory system was left bare-bones. All the missions were either camio levels, or fetch questing. And the combat gameplay was generally considered stronger then the story, which, while not really being a BAD plot, was exicuted poorly in comparison to ME1 & 2.

Wait... the vehicles and inventory are some of the things ME1 was best in?

No. I never said that. I said they were features that made the game unique, and removing them made ME closer to a generic game.
I said that people wanted them improved. And instead, they were removed completely.

[TurianRebel212]

ME4 will be completly different than the other 3 games. I'm predicting either a third person shooter like Gears of War or FPS to cater to the COD crowd. It will resemble nothing of ME1, 2 or 3. Don't beleive just look how ME3 drastically changed. It's basically a 3 person shooter with RPG elements, streamlined dialogue wheel, fetch quests, zero side missions, awesome shooting and combat mechanics- way better than ME1 and better than ME2, 1 hub world, the illusion of choice. And it sold way better than ME1 and a lot better than ME2. Expect more of the same.

P.S. I like Steak.

[PainCakesx]

Streamlining combat =/= removing RPG elements from it entirely.

I personally love the direction in the combat in the game, and this is coming from someone who loved ME1. That said, if they stripped the RPG elements entirely, I can see that ticking off a lot of fans, myself included. I'd hope they wouldn't be so dumb as to destroy what makes ME what it is. 

And having a good combat system and having a great story aren't mutually exclusive. 

With new writers and a new team doing ME4, I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt. 

Modifié par PainCakesx, 22 janvier 2013 - 08:01 .

[TurianRebel212]

PainCakesx wrote...

Streamlining combat =/= removing RPG elements from it entirely.

I personally love the direction in the combat in the game, and this is coming from someone who loved ME1. That said, if they stripped the RPG elements entirely, I can see that ticking off a lot of fans, myself included. I'd hope they wouldn't be so dumb as to destroy what makes ME what it is. 

And having a good combat system and having a great story aren't mutually exclusive. 

With new writers and a new team doing ME4, I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt. 

I agree with you. I love the combat of ME3 and the writing was high level for the majority of the game until the last 15 minutes then it not only fell of the cliff, but it fell of the cliff, hit a bunch of rocks, rollled 10 times and then exploded. As long as Hudson and Walters are leads in terms of writting expect more of the same. And I seriously doubt, that ME4 will resemble any RPG at all, maybe some divergent choices or customization or Armor and Weapons but that's it. 

Modifié par TurianRebel212, 22 janvier 2013 - 08:13 .

[PainCakesx]

I believe that BioWare Montreal has already said that they're keeping the RPG elements in tact, insofar as character interactions and a "choose your adventure" type approach to it. In terms of combat, I'm not sure what changes they'll make. The formula is already a winning one, I hope they don't alter it too much. It as of now has a very good balance of TPS / RPG elements.

Removing all RPG elements would be like turning CoD into an RTS. It would alienate so many people it wouldn't even be funny. 

Modifié par PainCakesx, 22 janvier 2013 - 08:19 .

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

How will they keep everyone happy? I agree with Hale on this.... Shepard.

[Yate]

TurianRebel212 wrote...

ME4 will be completly different than the other 3 games. I'm predicting either a third person shooter like Gears of War or FPS to cater to the COD crowd. It will resemble nothing of ME1, 2 or 3. Don't beleive just look how ME3 drastically changed. It's basically a 3 person shooter with RPG elements, streamlined dialogue wheel, fetch quests, zero side missions, awesome shooting and combat mechanics- way better than ME1 and better than ME2, 1 hub world, the illusion of choice. And it sold way better than ME1 and a lot better than ME2. Expect more of the same.

P.S. I like Steak.

lol

well if it gets people like you away from BSN, I'll welcome it.

[Yate]

and frankly I prefer fetch quests to most of the crappy sidequests in ME1

like the freakin' space monkeys

or the consort

or Haliat, aka RIDICULOUSLY OVER THE TOP VILLAIN MUAHAHAHAHA

or 'random hacking program becomes sentient'

[TurianRebel212]

Yate wrote...

TurianRebel212 wrote...

ME4 will be completly different than the other 3 games. I'm predicting either a third person shooter like Gears of War or FPS to cater to the COD crowd. It will resemble nothing of ME1, 2 or 3. Don't beleive just look how ME3 drastically changed. It's basically a 3 person shooter with RPG elements, streamlined dialogue wheel, fetch quests, zero side missions, awesome shooting and combat mechanics- way better than ME1 and better than ME2, 1 hub world, the illusion of choice. And it sold way better than ME1 and a lot better than ME2. Expect more of the same.

P.S. I like Steak.

lol

well if it gets people like you away from BSN, I'll welcome it.

Why? What did I do to offend you? It's a question thread and asking for opinions. I gave my opinion. You don't like it. Too bad. Don't respond or read them. I love ME. But ME3 has some serious issues Apart from the ending. Issues that bioware doesn't seem to mind. If you think it's a perfect game and doesn't need critism, then good for you. Everyone is entitled to their opinions. Don't like it. Move along. 

P.S.S I really do like Steak. 

Modifié par TurianRebel212, 22 janvier 2013 - 08:33 .

[CronoDragoon]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Well, most people one Bioware would say that it was 1 ending, with 19 different epilogue pieces. But an 'ending state' often gets confused with 'endings', and so...

I'm inclined to believe that what people wanted was 1. visual confirmation during Priority Earth of the choices you made (short scene of Rachni, etc) and short scenes that played highlighting the different states of the galaxy/characters. Which means that I believe people were not really after unique endings in the way that Control/Destroy/Synthesis are unique but rather unique meaning personalized. In short, I believe what people wanted were different ending states.

Modifié par CronoDragoon, 22 janvier 2013 - 08:32 .

[Epic777]

Ithurael wrote...

How do we know that the next ME game will be a sequel?

My bet is that they really will make a prequel or a midquel.

How does that work when it is obvious that people want a sequel

[silverexile17s]

Epic777 wrote...

Ithurael wrote...

How do we know that the next ME game will be a sequel?

My bet is that they really will make a prequel or a midquel.

How does that work when it is obvious that people want a sequel

What no one seams to realize is that making a sequal means cannonizing one of the endings.
Do that, and the final choice between endings was worthless. You won't even have the choice between which sub-par ending you get. The final choice having a cannon outcome will render the entire series worthless, since it has a cannon ending. THEN people will complain why adding NEW endings was so horrible for BioWare, when they were going to cannonize the ending anyway. And then it will all snowball from there.

[frostajulie]

I think Bioware has already proven they don't give a crap about who is happy and who is not. They have a story to tell and thats what they are going to do. They have been making themselves crystal clear that any misconception about this being a collaboration between writers and fans in creating shepard's journey was clearly a mistake of gargantuan proportion on the part of the stupid players.

Message received.

[SpamBot2000]

Maybe they are counting on the entertainment value of the desperate attempts to make sense of the universe after the catalyst broke it.

Modifié par SpamBot2000, 23 janvier 2013 - 07:18 .

[k.lalh]

silverexile17s wrote...

Epic777 wrote...

Ithurael wrote...

How do we know that the next ME game will be a sequel?

My bet is that they really will make a prequel or a midquel.

How does that work when it is obvious that people want a sequel

What no one seams to realize is that making a sequal means cannonizing one of the endings.
Do that, and the final choice between endings was worthless. You won't even have the choice between which sub-par ending you get. The final choice having a cannon outcome will render the entire series worthless, since it has a cannon ending. THEN people will complain why adding NEW endings was so horrible for BioWare, when they were going to cannonize the ending anyway. And then it will all snowball from there.

You could make ME 4 a save game import, that would not force bioware to canonize the endings, but, more likely than not, the player will not be Shepard.

Unless they pull something like they did in ME 2, where Shep has to live in order to import save, but since that's only possible in High EMS destroy, or really sketchily (not sure if that's a word) by making RoboShep in Control, or CloneShep in Synthesis.
 
More likely than not, ME4 wont cannonize the endings, but there will be no Shepard.

[Mercedes-Benz]

They won't, they will just pick an canon ending and go along with it.

[GiarcYekrub]

LucasShark wrote...

GiarcYekrub wrote...

LucasShark wrote...

GiarcYekrub wrote...

The original endings were obviously designed to be very similar so ME4 could continue, the EC which they were forced to do by some of more the rabid parts of the fanbase seems on the surface to make it a harder task to take choices into account, but not impossible.

Only... they weren't?

Cosmetically and functionally similar are entirely different things.  The original endings were the former, not the latter.

The relays were destroyed/disabled, the Reapers were stopped, Shepard was dead, Normandy was crashed on Eden planet, the rest was left to your own imagination which would of allowed the ME4 writers alot of freedom going forward, EC will need some more additional handwaving IMO to explain
 

Except for:
- The utter destruction of the Reapers
- Reapers under new management
- Perminant fusion of all organic and synthetic life

So... the bits which actually matter and cause problems for writing a consistant universe there-after.

The Reapers leaving in Scenarios 2 & 3 make it mostly cosistent with Scenario 1.
Perminant fusion of all organic and synthetic life is barely explained, I say give a new biotic abilty or something and make AI character more friendly, the after glow can fade or be an optional choice

[The Night Mammoth]

GiarcYekrub wrote...

LucasShark wrote...

GiarcYekrub wrote...

LucasShark wrote...

GiarcYekrub wrote...

The original endings were obviously designed to be very similar so ME4 could continue, the EC which they were forced to do by some of more the rabid parts of the fanbase seems on the surface to make it a harder task to take choices into account, but not impossible.

Only... they weren't?

Cosmetically and functionally similar are entirely different things.  The original endings were the former, not the latter.

The relays were destroyed/disabled, the Reapers were stopped, Shepard was dead, Normandy was crashed on Eden planet, the rest was left to your own imagination which would of allowed the ME4 writers alot of freedom going forward, EC will need some more additional handwaving IMO to explain
 

Except for:
- The utter destruction of the Reapers
- Reapers under new management
- Perminant fusion of all organic and synthetic life

So... the bits which actually matter and cause problems for writing a consistant universe there-after.

The Reapers leaving in Scenarios 2 & 3 make it mostly cosistent with Scenario 1.
Perminant fusion of all organic and synthetic life is barely explained, I say give a new biotic abilty or something and make AI character more friendly, the after glow can fade or be an optional choice

So you support trivializing this massively important decision? 

You're BioWare's target audience.

[chidingewe8036]

meh

[Methaluan_Sylver]

The physical copy brings a cookie and the digital copy a picture of a cat with a tiny hat. Maybe...

Well, a commnity as big as this, someone will not be happy no matter how its done just the way it is.