253 réponses à ce sujet

[Wulfram]

I can't really see much point in having a Mass Effect game with no Asari, Salarians, Krogan, Geth, Quarians etc. Just Humans and Turians, and maybe a volus auxiliary or two. And no biotics either, since humanity didn't know they existed.

I mean, what are you really getting out of the setting in that case?

[Jonata]

Highly unlikely. Fortunately, BioWare as a software house as a certain style that it never contradicts, and FPS are not in BioWare style.

[jstme]

Battlfield: Mass Effect. Lol. The only positive thing that i see in all this is that if it will be FPS prequel i will save money rather then spend it.
Good luck with that direction, Bioware. Watch out for medals of honor though .

[Usefull_idiot]

Enhanced wrote...

There are a few rumors about the next Mass Effect title that might illuminate the game some, however. Game Front commenter Sachel, who claims to be a BioWare insider, has said the next game will be called Mass Effect: Contact and that it will be a first-person shooter. He also has said that the game will be a prequel, taking place during the “First Contact War” — the conflict between humans and turians when humanity first discovered
the Charon Mass Relay.

http://www.gamefront...whole-universe/


If it's not true, it would still be a good plot for the film.

F**k that noise.  Prequels are completley pointless to me considering I already know the outcome.  I hope this quote is a hoax. 

[fizzypop]

SpamBot2000 wrote...

fizzypop wrote...

FPS screen makes you feel like you are playing yourself, it puts the player in the seat of the actual character. 

Well, that's the common theory yeah, but it's not necessarily 100% true. For one thing, the first person view tends to eliminate body awareness, since it's just a camera floating on air. We are normally aware of our bodies while moving around. So it can be argued that a third person view just substitutes one sense of body awareness for another, and thus feels more substantial and even "authentic". 

Ok? I was talking about why I and I'm sure others wouldn't want an FPS. I cannot play an FPS as an RPG it doesn't feel right.

[Jonata]

fizzypop wrote...

SpamBot2000 wrote...

fizzypop wrote...

FPS screen makes you feel like you are playing yourself, it puts the player in the seat of the actual character. 

Well, that's the common theory yeah, but it's not necessarily 100% true. For one thing, the first person view tends to eliminate body awareness, since it's just a camera floating on air. We are normally aware of our bodies while moving around. So it can be argued that a third person view just substitutes one sense of body awareness for another, and thus feels more substantial and even "authentic". 

Ok? I was talking about why I and I'm sure others wouldn't want an FPS. I cannot play an FPS as an RPG it doesn't feel right.

Well Deus Ex actually accomplished something with its hybrid version of an FPS/Stealth game. 

Mass Effect 4 will NOT be an FPS though. We still have to barely know anything about Dragon Age 3 and you think that some random commenter on a gaming site can have such a scoop about ME4? That's just outside the realm of possibilities. 

[Aravius]

Jonata wrote...

fizzypop wrote...

SpamBot2000 wrote...

fizzypop wrote...

FPS screen makes you feel like you are playing yourself, it puts the player in the seat of the actual character. 

Well, that's the common theory yeah, but it's not necessarily 100% true. For one thing, the first person view tends to eliminate body awareness, since it's just a camera floating on air. We are normally aware of our bodies while moving around. So it can be argued that a third person view just substitutes one sense of body awareness for another, and thus feels more substantial and even "authentic". 

Ok? I was talking about why I and I'm sure others wouldn't want an FPS. I cannot play an FPS as an RPG it doesn't feel right.

Well Deus Ex actually accomplished something with its hybrid version of an FPS/Stealth game. 

Mass Effect 4 will NOT be an FPS though. We still have to barely know anything about Dragon Age 3 and you think that some random commenter on a gaming site can have such a scoop about ME4? That's just outside the realm of possibilities. 

Agreed with the dislike of a FPS, without RPG elements. After the end of ME3, I'm still a little raw about the subject.

[kobayashi-maru]

Did the Yanik Roy at Montreal not state outright that all the usual RPG elements would still be there (after Omega worries of FPS game) ?

Anyways as I have said before on the forums no prequel. I love the Mass Effect universe but since we already know the new protaganist is human a prequel simply doesn't work. ME first contact doesn't have the same scope or mythos as the Babylon 5 Minbari conflict, nor does the human race have much of a history within the Universe even by ME3. Most of the possible prequel stories have already been filled out by the codex entries and the novels, there is simply no epic story to tell in the past. So please no prequel Shepard is created by space magic AKA Midi-chlorians.

The only way it would work is if it was set during the Reaper conflict with other characters and that won't happen due to people wanting Shepard cameo etc. And since outcome is set again pointless story unless done in a Halo ODST style - which Bioware would never do.

Forward not back....Isn't that an Obama quote or something? See even he agrees go later in timeline.

[Su37]

ruggly wrote...

The whole universe in Mass Effect goes beyond a very short 'war' and 500 casualties.

Exactly.

There is no point in making a game based on the First Contact War.

[Blehx26]

It's just a rumor, so I'm not putting much stock in it's validity. That said, IF this turns out to be true, so be it, I just won't be buying it. FPS really aren't my thing and I'm just not interested in the First Contact War. Those that do buy it, I hope they enjoy it, I'll spend my money on some other game that piques my interest instead.

[Argolas]

SU37 wrote...

ruggly wrote...

The whole universe in Mass Effect goes beyond a very short 'war' and 500 casualties.

Exactly.

There is no point in making a game based on the First Contact War.

As I said before, it makes NO sense for a Mass Effect game as we know it to happen on one single frickin colony. Traveling around space was always a huge part of the game. Also, your group would only be humans in a FCW scenario, and you would never be able to talk to any alien except maybe a few hostile turians.

You CAN make a FPS that happens on one single colony though... let's best not think about it.

[AshenShug4r]

hope to god it isn't a prequel

[sunnydxmen]

No way i rather get shot i hate first person games.

[Alien Number Six]

I don't want a prequel. I don't want a spin off. I don't want a game done in the first person. I don't want player versus player. I don't want Call of Duty: Mass Effect. I don't want Halo: Mass Effect. I want a sequel. I want Call of Duty/Halo/Battlefield players to leave my favorite game alone and stop posting unconfirmed rumors.

[LoneWolf3905]

Alien Number Six wrote...

I don't want a prequel. I don't want a spin off. I don't want a game done in the first person. I don't want player versus player. I don't want Call of Duty: Mass Effect. I don't want Halo: Mass Effect. I want a sequel. I want Call of Duty/Halo/Battlefield players to leave my favorite game alone and stop posting unconfirmed rumors.

^^ What he said.

[shodiswe]

I don't think so,

The only explanation would be if we were playing a Turian like Victus who was there during the first Contact war and the first Contact war is merely the beginning of his "adventure"... Like an intro.
We get to see the rise of humanity from the Turian side, dirty backroom deals.
I just hope they don't destroy the RPG element of the game if they would somehow go for this.
Probably wouldn't be Victus though, since he becomes a leader of the Turian people and had far too many dealing with Shepard in ME3 unless Victus story ends Before the ME3 timeline.

I just hope they arn't creating a new game universe because they killed of an old one.

But, tbh, I think there are a lot of errors in this article, the Engine isn't Frostbite 2 but 3 I think. This is probably one of those people who knows nothing but atempts to sell an article on what people don't know nothing about but would like to know more about because it's like a fabled beast like Bigfoot or something..

The thing is, though, that the rise of humanity has already been told as a story. Humanity became a major finanicial, merchantile, political and (in a limited fashion) military superpower even thoguh the population was much smaller than that of the major empires. Then the Reapers hit and now the Citadel is above Earth which in a way sugests galactic politics and policy makign will be done from Earth orbit possibly makign Earth the political and economic center of the galaxy, like Corussant in Starwars... Which is likely the future of Earth, a huge crowded cityplanet that the whole galaxy is crowding to get a piece of the action.

Modifié par shodiswe, 19 avril 2013 - 06:49 .

[Hey]

No.

[SpamBot2000]

fizzypop wrote...

SpamBot2000 wrote...

fizzypop wrote...

FPS screen makes you feel like you are playing yourself, it puts the player in the seat of the actual character. 

Well, that's the common theory yeah, but it's not necessarily 100% true. For one thing, the first person view tends to eliminate body awareness, since it's just a camera floating on air. We are normally aware of our bodies while moving around. So it can be argued that a third person view just substitutes one sense of body awareness for another, and thus feels more substantial and even "authentic". 

Ok? I was talking about why I and I'm sure others wouldn't want an FPS. I cannot play an FPS as an RPG it doesn't feel right.

Yeah, I know. I read your post. I was just commenting on this part of it, because that's a common argument when it comes to "immersiveness" and such, and it seems to me most people just take it for granted. 

[Indy_S]

LineHolder wrote...

Presentation of FPS games is outdated and stupid.

Seriously, a floating gun and two hands.

I disagree.

FPS could work for Mass Effect, but I doubt it would. A prequel just seems like a terrible idea, though, unless the developers really want to stick to the theme of fatalism that was unintentionally created by the makers of ME3.

[voteDC]

I've never understood the popularity of the first person perspective in gaming. It is like playing as a cyclops, wearing blinkers, who has a completely numb body.

Real people have peripheral vision, depth perception and sensory awareness of the environment. Something the first person view in games simply doesn't provide.

Of course the third person view is hardly realistic, we don't see ourselves with a camera behind our heads after all but it does replicate those things I mentioned.

The ability to see at a wider angle replicates peripheral vision and awareness of the environment. Being able to judge the height of your character against objects replicates depth perception.

If the next Mass Effect is to be a shooter then make it a third person one.

[SiriusXI]

Something fresh and new! Of course: FPS-Prequal... has never been done before.

[Jonata]

LineHolder wrote...

Presentation of FPS games is outdated and stupid.

Seriously, a floating gun and two hands.

It may be stupid, but you can't call something outdated when 80% of the big budget games market is still entirely composed of sold out FPS games. 

The gaming business is not original nor a nice place to produce. But BioWare has a style and I'm not seeing them drop that for a couple of bucks and two floating hands.

[Enhanced]

SU37 wrote...

ruggly wrote...

The whole universe in Mass Effect goes beyond a very short 'war' and 500 casualties.

Exactly.

There is no point in making a game based on the First Contact War.

That's alot for a fps game. Besides,  it doesn't have to end there. There is about 25 years between that war and Mass Effect 1. Alot could have happened while humans expanded throughout the galaxy.

Modifié par Enhanced, 19 avril 2013 - 05:00 .