1428 réponses à ce sujet

[Budgier]

I read that this DLC might be the largest yet being priced at 2400 MSP.. lol. Any truth to this?

[Kabooooom]

After reading that dlc 'leak', I must say people's responses were hilarious. 'It sounds like it sucks! Why would Bioware send ME out with a whimper instead of a bang?'

Just to play devils advocate, I bet it is legit because that is EXACTLY the level of mediocrity that I am fully expecting from this dlc.

Modifié par Kabooooom, 16 février 2013 - 07:37 .

[2484Stryker]

abch4 wrote...

I liked Omega, didn't think it was aiming at the cod crowd whatsoever. Are you just saying that because it uses guns on a linear path "which every mass effect mission has done" or because you're butthurt?

Yes, because if I didn't like Omega then I'm butthurt, because BioWare is that awesome.

To me, Omega was essentially a large shooting gallery with minimal story & emotion, plus two temporary squadmates, one of which I couldn't care less about, while Aria wasn't nearly as badass as I thought she could be.

[Andrew Waples]

any chances this dlc getting annouced at the playstation event? I don't think it'll be all about the ps4 some ps3 titles might be talked about

[abch4]

2484Stryker wrote...

abch4 wrote...

I liked Omega, didn't think it was aiming at the cod crowd whatsoever. Are you just saying that because it uses guns on a linear path "which every mass effect mission has done" or because you're butthurt?

Yes, because if I didn't like Omega then I'm butthurt, because BioWare is that awesome.

To me, Omega was essentially a large shooting gallery with minimal story & emotion, plus two temporary squadmates, one of which I couldn't care less about, while Aria wasn't nearly as badass as I thought she could be.

No saying it's aimed at CoD crowd because your butthurt.

[warblewobble]

I'm cautiously optimistic about this DLC. I want it to be awesome and if it's great on its own merits I don't even care if it affects the endings. I hope it does, but I'd be happy with a stand-alone DLC that feels like it either adds to the story or fleshes out the characters or both. Replay value would be a plus. Fingers crossed, basically. I gave MP enough of a try and I'm not going back.

[IntelligentME3Fanboy]

Modifié par IntelligentME3Fanboy, 17 février 2013 - 01:06 .

[MegaSovereign]

The wait is seriously killing me. I think I'm more impatient over the fact that I can't accurately predict what the DLC will be about.

Hopefully next week we'll get some much needed intel.

[EnvyTB075]

abch4 wrote...

No saying it's aimed at CoD crowd because your butthurt.

....but it was.

[WindfishDude]

EnvyTB075 wrote...

abch4 wrote...

No saying it's aimed at CoD crowd because your butthurt.

....but it was.

It really was. Omega felt like the worst parts of ME3: run through this corridor, shoot many enemies, rince & repeat.

The people defending this style of gameplay obviously like it, and that's fine. But it's not what either ME1 or ME2 was about, and it's a damn shame that Bioware felt like ME3 had to be all about the running and the shooting many enemies.

[GoldenPersona]

WindfishDude wrote...

EnvyTB075 wrote...

abch4 wrote...

No saying it's aimed at CoD crowd because your butthurt.

....but it was.

It really was. Omega felt like the worst parts of ME3: run through this corridor, shoot many enemies, rince & repeat.

The people defending this style of gameplay obviously like it, and that's fine. But it's not what either ME1 or ME2 was about, and it's a damn shame that Bioware felt like ME3 had to be all about the running and the shooting many enemies.

Except that the entirety of Mass Effect 2 was literally running through beautiful corridors and shooting things. Mass Effect 1 is the exact same way, except with horrible planet navigation.

Try harder. Mass Effect 3 is still more of an RPG than Mass Effect 2 was, and it's RPG elements weren't nearly as useless as they were in Mass Effect 1. Mass Effect just doesn't work as an RPG shooter, it's a shooter with RPG elements at heart and it's Mass Effect 3 that highlights that the best.

[Reth Shepherd]

GoldenPersona wrote...

WindfishDude wrote...

EnvyTB075 wrote...

abch4 wrote...

No saying it's aimed at CoD crowd because your butthurt.

....but it was.

It really was. Omega felt like the worst parts of ME3: run through this corridor, shoot many enemies, rince & repeat.

The people defending this style of gameplay obviously like it, and that's fine. But it's not what either ME1 or ME2 was about, and it's a damn shame that Bioware felt like ME3 had to be all about the running and the shooting many enemies.

Except that the entirety of Mass Effect 2 was literally running through beautiful corridors and shooting things. Mass Effect 1 is the exact same way, except with horrible planet navigation.

Try harder. Mass Effect 3 is still more of an RPG than Mass Effect 2 was, and it's RPG elements weren't nearly as useless as they were in Mass Effect 1. Mass Effect just doesn't work as an RPG shooter, it's a shooter with RPG elements at heart and it's Mass Effect 3 that highlights that the best.

What is your definition of RPG elements? Because I think we're talking about two completely different things here.

[Adomas]

I personally wish this DLC would be good. But I have bigger concerns: If it turns out to be bad for most players, big chance it would put the last nail in ME3 "as it is" coffin.
If this DLC sales go high enough, it may give EA the idea "lets make some more".

In the end, while I would like this to be a good DLC, I still rather have a river of "meh" DLCs with our beloved characters and 50 more hours in game, than one last 5 hour dlc that is somewhat good. I never really accept the "Let's end it while its still good" thing, even though I see how it benefits the "brand".

Modifié par Adomas, 17 février 2013 - 05:42 .

[FOX216BC]

Reth Shepherd wrote...

GoldenPersona wrote...

WindfishDude wrote...

EnvyTB075 wrote...

abch4 wrote...

No saying it's aimed at CoD crowd because your butthurt.

....but it was.

It really was. Omega felt like the worst parts of ME3: run through this corridor, shoot many enemies, rince & repeat.

The people defending this style of gameplay obviously like it, and that's fine. But it's not what either ME1 or ME2 was about, and it's a damn shame that Bioware felt like ME3 had to be all about the running and the shooting many enemies.

Except that the entirety of Mass Effect 2 was literally running through beautiful corridors and shooting things. Mass Effect 1 is the exact same way, except with horrible planet navigation.

Try harder. Mass Effect 3 is still more of an RPG than Mass Effect 2 was, and it's RPG elements weren't nearly as useless as they were in Mass Effect 1. Mass Effect just doesn't work as an RPG shooter, it's a shooter with RPG elements at heart and it's Mass Effect 3 that highlights that the best.

What is your definition of RPG elements? Because I think we're talking about two completely different things here.

 

Modifié par FOX216BC, 17 février 2013 - 05:47 .

[abch4]

WindfishDude wrote...

EnvyTB075 wrote...

abch4 wrote...

No saying it's aimed at CoD crowd because your butthurt.

....but it was.

It really was. Omega felt like the worst parts of ME3: run through this corridor, shoot many enemies, rince & repeat.

The people defending this style of gameplay obviously like it, and that's fine. But it's not what either ME1 or ME2 was about, and it's a damn shame that Bioware felt like ME3 had to be all about the running and the shooting many enemies.

Wtf are you two smoking. You didn't like the ending Boohoo, but don't make out mass effect hasn't been a linear shooter throughout the series.

[Fixers0]

As far as i can recall, the original Mass Effect was the only game in the series which had non-linear level design.

Modifié par Fixers0, 17 février 2013 - 07:46 .

[dreamgazer]

Fixers0 wrote...

As far as i can recall, the original Mass Effect was the only game in the series which had non-linear level design.

... and only maybe half of the environments in that one had slight non-linear pathways. Depends on your definition and perspective of the word, but the more you broaden the meaning to fit ME1's designs, the more ME2's levels lack "linearity".

Modifié par dreamgazer, 17 février 2013 - 08:47 .

[Mcfly616]

ME2 had the most linear level design and the worst attributes/skills system in the entire series.


It's not even debatable.

[Fixers0]

dreamgazer wrote...
... and only maybe half of the environments in that one had slight non-linear pathways. Depends on your definition and perspective of the word, but the more you broaden the meaning to fit ME1's designs, the more ME2's levels lack "linearity".

Actually, no. Barring Hub worlds and Zaeed's loyalty mission, each mission in ME2 is one big linear walk from point A through point B withn and  the ocasional siderooms for loot.

On the other hand, Mass Effect 1 had a more open level design with sometimes options of parralel progression or alternate paths.

Modifié par Fixers0, 17 février 2013 - 10:31 .

[AlanC9]

Mcfly616 wrote...

ME2 had the most linear level design and the worst attributes/skills system in the entire series.


It's not even debatable.

I might want to debate that, but only because I found ME1's skills system pretty awful.

[Fixers0]

AlanC9 wrote...

I might want to debate that, but only because I found ME1's skills system pretty awful.

Actually no, Mass Effect's skill system was linear but by no means as simplistic or as empty as Mass Effect 2's.

[Dean_the_Young]

Fixers0 wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...
... and only maybe half of the environments in that one had slight non-linear pathways. Depends on your definition and perspective of the word, but the more you broaden the meaning to fit ME1's designs, the more ME2's levels lack "linearity".

Actually, no. Barring Hub worlds and Zaeed's loyalty mission, each mission in ME2 is one big linear walk from point A through point B withn and  the ocasional siderooms for loot.

On the other hand, Mass Effect 1 had a more open level design with sometimes options of parralel progression or alternate paths.

I'm just musing on how much parallel pathing there really was, and the difference it amounted to on the critical path.

Eden Prime is, in a word, linear. There is one winding path, but no divergences.

The Citadel is more or less a series of linked circles, but for the story-related missions there closest that could be claimed for a parallel path is the fact that Fist's bar takes up the middle of its room. It's also a pretty straight line back to Tali.

Liara's recruitment mission is linear, both in the mines and in the Mako. In fact, every story-related Mako section is pretty much linear: I suppose you could claim that Virmire has a point in which you have to drive left or right around round an eye-of-the-needle on the map, but that's so trivial I'm not sure I'd count it any more than I'd count going left or right around cover.

Feros is linear. It has a few dead-end-branches for the sidequests,  but these are like the loot-rooms we had in ME2. All the story developments happen along a linear route.

Noveria... Noveria is where the best claim for parallel paths comes in, though YMMV depending on definition. There are two of them: the labs, and the Garrage Pass. The labs allow you to approach the final boss via at least two different routes: fighting your way through the security drones, or make the cure to go around. It doesn't matter which you do, and I don't believe it makes a difference to the story (it certainly isn't reflected in the post-mission content), but you do have a parallel map path.

The Garrage Pass is a bit different: it's still a linear route from Normandy to the Garrage, with Port Hanson effectively having three side-rooms. What provides the parallel path, story-reflected in this case, is how you get the Garage Pass: there are four different ways to get the pass, with different amounts of moving around the side-rooms. Noveria still has pretty linear progression, story-wise, since how you get the key isn't a big impact on the plot, but it offers an illusion of parallel pathing between the key story bits (the security screening, the Garage, Benezia).

Virmire... Virmire's ground-section does have parallel paths, but it's really more like a series of 8's stacked end to end: you can go left or right here, but they'll bring you back to a choke point in which you can go left or right again, etc. Outside of the base they did let you shoot those targets to help the STG team, and inside the base you can enter from either of the two ends. Once inside the base, though, it gets pretty linear.

Illos is pretty linear. The courtyard does have a loop within it, but most of the pathing is sequential courtyards or halls. There is no story impact for what direction you approach the loop.

The Citadel has one section which could be called non-linear, I suppose: the final turret section. You can either advance over a field of turrets, or go along a parallel path of an elevator-tram-way.


Do these parallel linear hallways ever amount to much? I don't feel so: most are more akin to skirting the edge of a room more than parallel paths because of how quickly they join back up again: they weren't even on the level of the Zaeed Loyalty Mission, which at least re-cast the tone and environment of a largely linear design.

The ME1 part that comes closest to distinct parallel pathing is Noveria, and even that was minimal: the Port Hanshen garage pass did more by using an effectively linear map in a non-linear way than the Hot Labs did with actually different paths: to me that indicates that parallel dialogue paths and puzzle solutions are more important than parallel maps. Otherwise, tactical flexibility around a room is a good part of the physical non-linearity: allowing the player to flank from different directions might be enough.

[Dean_the_Young]

Fixers0 wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

I might want to debate that, but only because I found ME1's skills system pretty awful.

Actually no, Mass Effect's skill system was linear but by no means as simplistic or as empty as Mass Effect 2's.

It was pretty simple: you had had more powers to put points into, but the incrimentalism and lack of diversity within them was the bigger problem for some people. Marginal, almost imperceptable, improvements between the two upgrades was pretty empty for a lot of people, especially when most powers were pretty much spammable against enemies. It also didn't help that there were a few utterly dominant, broken powers: singularity, lift, immunity, and pistol marksman.

ME2's system at least had the virtue of allowing power branching and a more rock-paper-scissors defense-stripping mechanic as the combat re-balanced. Area-of-effect vs. more power branching, level 4 ammo divergence... there were still dominant powers for your difficulties or your missions, but it was a step up in complexity in the eyes of some.

[dreamgazer]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Fixers0 wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...
... and only maybe half of the environments in that one had slight non-linear pathways. Depends on your definition and perspective of the word, but the more you broaden the meaning to fit ME1's designs, the more ME2's levels lack "linearity".

Actually, no. Barring Hub worlds and Zaeed's loyalty mission, each mission in ME2 is one big linear walk from point A through point B withn and  the ocasional siderooms for loot.

On the other hand, Mass Effect 1 had a more open level design with sometimes options of parralel progression or alternate paths.

I'm just musing on how much parallel pathing there really was, and the difference it amounted to on the critical path.

-snip-

Do these parallel linear hallways ever amount to much? I don't feel so: most are more akin to skirting the edge of a room more than parallel paths because of how quickly they join back up again: they weren't even on the level of the Zaeed Loyalty Mission, which at least re-cast the tone and environment of a largely linear design.

The ME1 part that comes closest to distinct parallel pathing is Noveria, and even that was minimal: the Port Hanshen garage pass did more by using an effectively linear map in a non-linear way than the Hot Labs did with actually different paths: to me that indicates that parallel dialogue paths and puzzle solutions are more important than parallel maps. Otherwise, tactical flexibility around a room is a good part of the physical non-linearity: allowing the player to flank from different directions might be enough.

(thumbs up)

Glad you took the time to bang all that out.