252 réponses à ce sujet

[MegaSovereign]

Misleading title. No it won't.

[Uncle Jo]

I really don't understand this self-inflicted torture. BW has now a solid reputation of never confirming or denying anything at best, blatantly lying not having a good PR service at worst. Wouldn't be better to wait until the DLC comes out?

Modifié par Uncle Jo, 06 février 2013 - 10:10 .

[Xellith]

GenRtin wrote...


2. Chris Priestly had said numerous times that the theory is false.  It's a good theory, but if it's true, then once again Bioware left out information on purpose.  Refer to point 1 on why that's a bad idea.

Yeah.. because Chris Priestly is a fountain of accurate information.  If its not on the dev blog, posted by a dev, or on the official Bioware website then its not to be taken as fact.

Modifié par Xellith, 06 février 2013 - 10:11 .

[Applepie_Svk]

Sauruz wrote...

Seival wrote...
Refusal was a bug fix, nothing more.

Entirely new dialogue and cutscenes are a bug fix? How stupid are you?
There were three ways to finish the game. Now there are four. That's the way it is.

There are two infinite things and these are human stupidity and space, but Einstein wasn´t sure about second one...

[Wayning_Star]

everything is ending related, take the example of when the Mods see this OP...

[Smeffects]

When the DLC come out and suck ass like omega... will it stop or will some people still blindly grab more invisible straw.

When ever Christ P. always say everything is fake, doesent mean when he says something is fake is real. Otherwise if something is fake, he would say its real? Its just down to dont listen the guy and think for yourself, doesent matter what ever you guys are right or wrong,he will say its fake. His words are just as much to discredite true things or false things. The real answer is, ending DLC will be a waste and its not happening. You will see that by the end of this month and then perhaps people will shut up already.

Modifié par Smeffects, 06 février 2013 - 10:19 .

[M Hedonist]

Seival wrote...

You know too little about game development... And care too much about pathetic surrender called Refusal.

Oh? We talking about game development and your expertise therein? As far as I can remember, in the past, you've predicted that all singleplayer DLC for ME3 will be free like the multiplayer DLC... unable to grasp the concept of how microtransactions can turn a profit. But let's not dwell on the past anymore.
Tell me about game development, Seival, tell me how game developers pointlessly waste money on writing new dialogue, recording new lines, adding new dialogue to the game, creating new soundtracks and creating new cutscenes, just to fix a bug.
Oh - and which, just by the way was not a bug? There was no "blocker". See for yourself - you could already fail the game if you waited too long on the crucible.

Modifié par Sauruz, 06 février 2013 - 10:15 .

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

Imagine the Indoctrination Theory was correct.

Oh how I'd laugh, mostly at myself because I think the Indoctrination Theory is absurd. Still it was better than what we got.

[Applepie_Svk]

DinoSteve wrote...

Imagine the Indoctrination Theory was correct.

Oh how I'd laugh, mostly at myself because I think the Indoctrination Theory is absurd. Still it was better than what we got.

no big deal for destroy supporters, as you :happy:

[frostajulie]

CPTHughJardon wrote...

adam32867 wrote...

CPTHughJardon wrote...

Sion1138 wrote...

Now you will be insulted multiple times by a bunch of a-holes.

very true

and its usually by the same people who complain about how hostile bsn is...

im glad im not the only one to notice that.

[magikbbg]

OP you're telling me - that to get FULL experience of a video game I NEED to buy DLC ? I thought DLC by definition were just extra content not pertaining to the actual game story. They could co exist with the story but not change the story... If you really mean to say now I need to pay $60 to buy HALF a game and then get strung along for a year and pay installments of $10 or whatever, to get the full story... No way any company is that nefarious or that this is sound business practice.

Oh wait this is EA/Bioware with day ONE DLC (that is integral to story line).

I rescind my comment. I would not be shocked if you are correct that we need to pay an additional $10 to get the full game content. So what's it cost ? $100 to understand what happened in ME3? Lol. Why not just charge $100 to start with and give full content or at least be upfront and honest with your customers that its gonna cost $100 to play this game?

[TurianRebel212]

No, it will not be ending related. It's just more pre-ending DLC, just like Omega and Leviathan. More branching story and war assets, probably some new weapons and mods, that's it.

NO MORE ENDING DLC. Get over it. And move on already. Seriously, Enjoy the game. I played the multiplayer for first time in 6 months on the 360, and I loved it. So fun. Also, I've started my femshep playthrough on insanity. So I'm enjoying the game. Just enjoy it. Or get over it and move on to another dev and game series.

[Seival]

Sauruz wrote...

Seival wrote...

You know too little about game development... And care too much about pathetic surrender called Refusal.

Oh? We talking about game development and your expertise therein? As far as I can remember, in the past, you've predicted that all singleplayer DLC for ME3 will be free like the multiplayer DLC... unable to grasp the concept of how microtransactions can turn a profit. But let's not dwell on the past anymore.
Tell me about game development, Seival, tell me how game developers pointlessly waste money on writing new dialogue, recording new lines, adding new dialogue to the game, creating new soundtracks and creating new cutscenes, just to fix a bug.
Oh - and which, just by the way was not a bug? There was no "blocker". See for yourself - you could already fail the game if you waited too long on the crucible.

Do you know the difference between "critical mission failure" and "ultimate mission failure"? I suppose you don't.

The difference is the same as between "game over" and "game ending". First one will not allow you to finish the game and see the titles. In original ME3, if you failed by just waiting for Crucible's destruction - you had to load the last save and choose one of the endings, or get the same "game over" again. You had no way to finish the game if you didn't want to choose a victory. This is endless waiting.

They decided to fill EC with many details. And that fix required more details as well. It wouldn't look well if refusers just get titles after that option. They had to see the ultimate failure as ultimate failure.

As for free SP DLCs - that is quite valid option, if MP packs are good money makers (I already told you about that). But looks like too few people buy them. So, devs decided to make SP DLC paid.

Modifié par Seival, 06 février 2013 - 10:38 .

[phillip100]

The next DLC will not be ending related.

[Applepie_Svk]

magikbbg wrote...


I rescind my comment. I would not be shocked if you are correct that we need to pay an additional $10 to get the full game content. So what's it cost ? $100 to understand what happened in ME3? Lol. Why not just charge $100 to start with and give full content or at least be upfront and honest with your customers that its gonna cost $100 to play this game?

Look at SC3... 

[TurianRebel212]

Seival wrote...

Sauruz wrote...

Seival wrote...

You know too little about game development... And care too much about pathetic surrender called Refusal.

Oh? We talking about game development and your expertise therein? As far as I can remember, in the past, you've predicted that all singleplayer DLC for ME3 will be free like the multiplayer DLC... unable to grasp the concept of how microtransactions can turn a profit. But let's not dwell on the past anymore.
Tell me about game development, Seival, tell me how game developers pointlessly waste money on writing new dialogue, recording new lines, adding new dialogue to the game, creating new soundtracks and creating new cutscenes, just to fix a bug.
Oh - and which, just by the way was not a bug? There was no "blocker". See for yourself - you could already fail the game if you waited too long on the crucible.

Do you know the difference between "critical mission failure" and "ultimate mission failure"? I suppose you don't.

The difference is the same as between "game over" and "game ending". First one will not allow you to finish the game and see the titles. In original ME3, if you failed by just waiting for Crucible's destruction - you had to load the last save and choose one of the endings, or get the same "game over" again. You had no way to finish the game if you didn't want to choose a victory. This is endless waiting.

They decided to fill EC with many details. And that fix required more details as well. It wouldn't look well if refusers just get titles after that option. They had to see the ultimate failure as ultimate failure.

As for free SP DLCs - that is quite valid option, if MP packs are good money makers (I already told you about that). But looks like too few people buy them. So, devs decided to make SP DLC paid.

"If MP pack are good money makers"

Yeah, cause Call of duty, Battlefield 3 and Halo 4 don't have payed MP that aren't huge and make tons of money right?






Right. 



Microtransactions, look it up it's kinda a big deal. 

[Applepie_Svk]

Seival wrote...



Do you know the difference between "critical mission failure" and "ultimate mission failure"? I suppose you don't.

Do you know what´s the difference between bugfix and expanding ? I suppose you don´t - you ultimate ...

[GreyLycanTrope]

Seival wrote...
I know too little about game development... And care too much about pathetic surrender called Synthesis.

[Jadebaby]

TheRealJayDee wrote...

Jadebaby wrote...
love this.,

Allow me to explain;

people see what they want to see.

If you'd like me to elaborate more on that, I'd be happy too.

[Fredvdp]

4stringwizard wrote...

1.  There are still unanswered questions.  For example: we still don't know where the crucible came from, how it works, etc.  You could say it's lazy writing, but I believe it was kept vague on purpose.  I believe the Crucible itself is more than we were led to believe, whether it's a Reaper trap, etc.  These questions will be clarified.

They left out information about the Crucible's origins because it's irrelevant. Would things be much different if the Catalyst had told you that an alien race called snarguls created the first Crucible?

What does interest me, however, is that previous cycles had no way of connecting the Crucible to the Citadel during Reaper cycles because the Reapers cut off the mass relays during these cycles (according to vigil), which is something they can't do anymore because of the prothean's hack of the systems responding to the Reaper signal to the keepers. I want to learn why previous generations bothered building the Crucible if they knew they couldn't deploy it, or even build it, since everyone was isolated. That is, of course, with the Crucible that was designed to incorporate the Citadel in its design. I have no idea what they were planning to do with all that energy before they decided to hook it up to the Citadel.

It is, however, possible that some civilizations knew of the Reapers in advance and started construction of the Crucible prior to the invasion, and then were unable to use the Crucible because it turns out the Reapers came through the Citadel and were able to destroy the Crucible instantly. Still, more clarity on the issue would be appreciated.

[Jadebaby]

Seival wrote...

Jadebaby wrote...

Seival wrote...

Oh really?

In game development any endless waiting or game crash with high probability is called Blocker. Original ending had situation with endless waiting - if player didn't want to choose Control, Synthesis or Destroy, but still wanted to finish the game.

Refusal was a bug fix, nothing more.

Seival, your quality is slipping..

And so are your pants.. Might want to pull up that human disguise, your troll fat is showing...

You know too little about game development... And care too much about pathetic surrender called Refusal.

Shepard's refuse speech invalidate your interpretation.

Oh and do you know the other way to trigger refuse? You SHOOT the catalyst.

It's defiance, and defiance is the OPPOSITE of surrender! You incompetent fool.

[Haargel]

Not going to happen.

Let´s wait and see.

[AlanC9]

Fredvdp wrote...
What does interest me, however, is that previous cycles had no way of connecting the Crucible to the Citadel during Reaper cycles because the Reapers cut off the mass relays during these cycles (according to vigil), which is something they can't do anymore because of the prothean's hack of the systems responding to the Reaper signal to the keepers. I want to learn why previous generations bothered building the Crucible if they knew they couldn't deploy it, or even build it, since everyone was isolated. 

Depends on where you're building the thing. If the contruction site's only a couple of hundred l.y. from the Citadel, then you can bring it there via standard FTL in a matter of days.

[shnig_1]

Although almost everyone is saying "facepalm" "no it wont", etc. I really do hope it is ending related or some sort of bridge dlc to whatever new game theyre making. Wishful thinking though

[Seival]

Jadebaby wrote...

Seival wrote...

Jadebaby wrote...

Seival wrote...

Oh really?

In game development any endless waiting or game crash with high probability is called Blocker. Original ending had situation with endless waiting - if player didn't want to choose Control, Synthesis or Destroy, but still wanted to finish the game.

Refusal was a bug fix, nothing more.

Seival, your quality is slipping..

And so are your pants.. Might want to pull up that human disguise, your troll fat is showing...

You know too little about game development... And care too much about pathetic surrender called Refusal.

Shepard's refuse speech invalidate your interpretation.

Oh and do you know the other way to trigger refuse? You SHOOT the catalyst.

It's defiance, and defiance is the OPPOSITE of surrender! You incompetent fool.

I talk about what I see in game, and it's not an interpretation.

Puzzle Theory is an interpretation, the one looks like IT or SaveThane, and №2 to be moved to groups.

You can't get game final and titles by shooting the hologram/vision forever.

Refusal speech is a speech of scared and selfish person, who wants to prove someone that he is "not scared" and "not selfish" by killing trillions of people. In other words - Refusal is the most pathetic ultimate mission failure in game development history.

Modifié par Seival, 06 février 2013 - 10:57 .