272 réponses à ce sujet

[MegaSovereign]

SpamBot2000 wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

SpamBot2000 wrote...

Daniel_N7 wrote...

And why doesn't BioWare takes all that they've learned in the process of making the Mass Effect trilogy and start a new Mass Effect trilogy?

Instead of coming up with shortcuts and apologies - things like "they've already made an epic trilogy" - how about embracing a damn big story in this universe, well thought of and planned, with a cohesive storyline, bigger worlds to explore and a cast of new and some of the old characters we've grown to love so much.

Because Drew Karpyshyn left. 

What does the departure of the guy who got them into that mess in the first place have to do with fixing that problem?

Who says he got them into that mess? Maybe he could have pulled it off. Certainly Mass Effect started sinking once he left. ME2 had that Terminator thing. Then Arrival. And then ME3.  

Y U hate on Drew K?

A couple things. Drew was still lead writer for ME2. And Arrival and most of ME3 had a better plot than ME2.

I've seen your posts SpamBot. I know what issues you have with ME3's endings. You should read up on what Drew was considering for ME3. It isn't all that different. You still talk to the Reaper King, and the Reapers are revealed to be a necessary evil. Oh and instead of synthetics being the token sacrifice, it's all of humanity. You get to choose between letting the Reapers harvest humanity in order to be closer to finding a solution to the Dark Energy issue, or destroy the Reapers and screw over the galaxy in the long term.

To say that he would have pulled off the ending better is speculation at best, but it appears that he would have gone with the same structure. In fact, the consequences pinned to each of ME3's endings seem a bit more tame.

Modifié par MegaSovereign, 18 mai 2013 - 06:34 .

[Arcian]

tickle267 wrote...

Homer = The BSN
Hedge = Ending threads
Backwards Movement = Time after ME3 release

[AresKeith]

MegaSovereign wrote...

A couple things. Drew was still lead writer for ME2. And Arrival and most of ME3 had a better plot than ME2.

I've seen your posts SpamBot. I know what issues you have with ME3's endings. You should read up on what Drew was considering for ME3. It isn't all that different. You still talk to the Reaper King, and the Reapers are revealed to be a necessary evil. Oh and instead of synthetics being the token sacrifice, it's all of humanity. You get to choose between letting the Reapers harvest humanity in order to be closer to finding a solution to the Dark Energy issue, or destroy the Reapers and screw over the galaxy in the long term.

To say that he would have pulled off the ending better is speculation at best, but it appears that he would have gone with the same structure. In fact, the consequences pinned to each of ME3's endings seem a bit more tame.

The reason he thinks Drew would've done better because the Dark Energy plot/ending was still an outline

[MegaSovereign]

AresKeith wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

A couple things. Drew was still lead writer for ME2. And Arrival and most of ME3 had a better plot than ME2.

I've seen your posts SpamBot. I know what issues you have with ME3's endings. You should read up on what Drew was considering for ME3. It isn't all that different. You still talk to the Reaper King, and the Reapers are revealed to be a necessary evil. Oh and instead of synthetics being the token sacrifice, it's all of humanity. You get to choose between letting the Reapers harvest humanity in order to be closer to finding a solution to the Dark Energy issue, or destroy the Reapers and screw over the galaxy in the long term.

To say that he would have pulled off the ending better is speculation at best, but it appears that he would have gone with the same structure. In fact, the consequences pinned to each of ME3's endings seem a bit more tame.

The reason he thinks Drew would've done better because the Dark Energy plot/ending was still an outline

For it to be dramatically different than the current structure of the ending, he would have had to scrap a lot of that outline.

Not that it means anything. He himself said that it was one of many plots he was considering.

[AresKeith]

MegaSovereign wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

A couple things. Drew was still lead writer for ME2. And Arrival and most of ME3 had a better plot than ME2.

I've seen your posts SpamBot. I know what issues you have with ME3's endings. You should read up on what Drew was considering for ME3. It isn't all that different. You still talk to the Reaper King, and the Reapers are revealed to be a necessary evil. Oh and instead of synthetics being the token sacrifice, it's all of humanity. You get to choose between letting the Reapers harvest humanity in order to be closer to finding a solution to the Dark Energy issue, or destroy the Reapers and screw over the galaxy in the long term.

To say that he would have pulled off the ending better is speculation at best, but it appears that he would have gone with the same structure. In fact, the consequences pinned to each of ME3's endings seem a bit more tame.

The reason he thinks Drew would've done better because the Dark Energy plot/ending was still an outline

For it to be dramatically different than the current structure of the ending, he would have had to scrap a lot of that outline.

Not that it means anything. He himself said that it was one of many plots he was considering.

Exactly, while Dark Energy is the most known plot he probably wasn't even gonna go with it.

But me personally, I would've say bring Armando Trosis back and then maybe Drew

[Mathias]

Mac is just not cut out for leading writing. Yes he's a good character writer, but ME3 stands as a testimate the he shouldn't be given that responsibilty anymore. I haven't read his other works, but from what i've heard from multiple people, they're really not that good either. I can only hope that if Mac Walters is involved in the next Mass Effect, it isn't in the lead writer's chair. They should pass that on to somebody else.

I also want to mention that if you type in "Mac Walters" on Google, the first suggestion you get is "Mac Walters Fired."

I'm not gonna say anything on that matter, but I don't know how you can't take that as a sign that many people are frustrated with the way a lot of the writing has been handled.

Modifié par Mdoggy1214, 18 mai 2013 - 07:00 .

[dreamgazer]

What's become clear is that both Mac and Drew were focused on involving the Reapers, the relays, and a massive sacrifice in a harsh scenario that wasn't designed for uplifting, traditionally triumphant emotions. Also, they both seem to want to comment on our loose grip on technology.

[AresKeith]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

Mac is just not cut out for leading writing. Yes he's a good character writer, but ME3 stands as a testimate the he shouldn't be given that responsibilty anymore. I haven't read his other works, but from what i've heard from multiple people, they're really not that good either. I can only hope that if Mac Walters is involved in the next Mass Effect, it isn't in the lead writer's chair. They should pass that on to somebody else.

Some of his work is ok, but I agree he should stick to out things beside lead writing

I also want to mention that if you type in "Mac Walters" on Google, the first suggestion you get is "Mac Walters Fired."

I'm not gonna say anything on that matter, but I don't know how you can't take that as a sign that many people are frustrated with the way a lot of the writing has been handled.

I actually just saw that when I googled him

[SpamBot2000]

MegaSovereign wrote...

A couple things. Drew was still lead writer for ME2. And Arrival and most of ME3 had a better plot than ME2.

I've seen your posts SpamBot. I know what issues you have with ME3's endings. You should read up on what Drew was considering for ME3. It isn't all that different. You still talk to the Reaper King, and the Reapers are revealed to be a necessary evil. Oh and instead of synthetics being the token sacrifice, it's all of humanity. You get to choose between letting the Reapers harvest humanity in order to be closer to finding a solution to the Dark Energy issue, or destroy the Reapers and screw over the galaxy in the long term.

To say that he would have pulled off the ending better is speculation at best, but it appears that he would have gone with the same structure. In fact, the consequences pinned to each of ME3's endings seem a bit more tame.

Disagree on Arrival having better plot than ME2. And ME3 really. "The Crucible was in Liara's back pocket!" Yeah... The good parts are building on solid foundations in previous games.

Karpyshyn left before ME2 was completed. Maybe before the Baby Reaper? Speculation of course.

And I am very familiar with the admittedly bad Dark Energy idea. But that was just an early idea. It's hardly fair to judge him by what he didn't write, as opposed to what Mac Walters DID write. And refused to show the writing team for input. 

Oh, and of course I would have chosen to refuse to allow the Reapers to reap humans. The idea that liquidating humans would save the galaxy is ridiculous, really. Victory!

Modifié par SpamBot2000, 18 mai 2013 - 07:14 .

[Seboist]

MegaSovereign wrote...

A couple things. Drew was still lead writer for ME2. And Arrival and most of ME3 had a better plot than ME2.

Easy to do as ME2 largely didn't have any.

[TheChris92]

Lizardviking wrote...

And a game following Kai Leng? Haha, what a ****ing joke.

Mass Effect Rising: Revengeance

[MegaSovereign]

SpamBot2000 wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

A couple things. Drew was still lead writer for ME2. And Arrival and most of ME3 had a better plot than ME2.

I've seen your posts SpamBot. I know what issues you have with ME3's endings. You should read up on what Drew was considering for ME3. It isn't all that different. You still talk to the Reaper King, and the Reapers are revealed to be a necessary evil. Oh and instead of synthetics being the token sacrifice, it's all of humanity. You get to choose between letting the Reapers harvest humanity in order to be closer to finding a solution to the Dark Energy issue, or destroy the Reapers and screw over the galaxy in the long term.

To say that he would have pulled off the ending better is speculation at best, but it appears that he would have gone with the same structure. In fact, the consequences pinned to each of ME3's endings seem a bit more tame.

Disagree on Arrival having better plot than ME2. And ME3 really. "The Crucible was in Liara's back pocket!" Yeah...
Karpyshyn left before ME2 was completed. Maybe before the Baby Reaper? Speculation of course.

By default, Arrival and ME3 had a better plot because of how damn near divorced ME2's plot was from the Reaper conflict. I liked ME2 for what it was. I think the silver lining to its weak plot was the focus on great characters and atmosphere.

The good parts are building on solid foundations in previous games.

If you're going to use that argument then you can't have double standards. Some of ME3's contrivances were a result of lackluster foundation in the previous games. Most of ME2's focus was on the Genophage and Geth/Quarian arcs. The fact that the writing team somehow found a way to connect the two subplots to the Reaper war in ME3 is no small feat.

And I am very familiar with the admittedly bad Dark Energy idea. But
that was just an early idea. It's hardly fair to judge him by what he didn't write, as opposed to what Mac Walters DID write. And refused to show the writing team for input. 

Ofcourse, but claiming that Drew would have done a better job is a baseless claim when the only time he's chimed in on the ME3 ending controversy was when he gave that Dark Energy pitch.

Modifié par MegaSovereign, 19 mai 2013 - 12:50 .

[HiddenInWar]

I read this issue today. I like their views on things like fan-fic but their opinions on a spin-off I don't think would do well.

Garrus is the closest character to do a spin-off successfully that I can imagine.

[SpamBot2000]

MegaSovereign wrote...

By default, Arrival and ME3 had a better plot because of how damn near divorced ME2's plot was from the Reaper conflict. I liked ME2 for what it was. I think the silver lining to its weak plot was the focus on great characters and atmosphere.

ME2's plot wasn't "divorced" from the Reaper conflict. The Collectors were abducting people for the Reapers. It was a solid plot: round up a posse and deal with the Reaper agents. What's wrong with that? Meanwhile, Arrival had Shepard railroaded to massacring 300,000 Batarians because the indoctrinated enemies, - who had no problem with shooting at Shepard with every intent to kill - just happened to capture Shepard and keep him alive until the crucial moment, conveniently unindoctrinated by Object Rho. To what possible end? And ME3... "We found these blueprints for a super anti-Reaper thing behind the sofa.... they were created over countless millenia by lots of different folks, and we have no idea what the thing does. But clearly it's the winning doodad." That's not weaker than ME2?

I'll give you the point that the Dark Energy ending was and remains a terrible idea. But Drew Karpyshyn has earned the benefit of doubt when it comes to what he would have finally come up for the ending, in consultation with the team. 

[TheProtheans]

Seboist wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

A couple things. Drew was still lead writer for ME2. And Arrival and most of ME3 had a better plot than ME2.

Easy to do as ME2 largely didn't have any.

Quite true, the Collectors were weak.
The plot to stop the Collectors in their mission that was flawed as it could never be completed until the Reapers arrived and it wasn't that powerful of a story.
The mystery and the execution we done much better though, you don't play ME2 and feel like giving up the trilogy.
I say the team had their heart in Mass effect 3, but it was just very poor.
Mass effect 2 was a filler so it's not very good when the conclusion is so poorly done where the only thing you can is that a filler had a weaker plot.

Modifié par TheProtheans, 19 mai 2013 - 07:59 .

[Mr.BlazenGlazen]

To be honest, I think Mass Effect is going to turn into the new Final Fantasy. And people like me would have to wait 5 years or more before we actually see something interesting, fresh, and somewhat original.

[Doctoglethorpe]

Prequels/sidequils are boring. Only thing I can see being good for the series is canonizing an ending and moving forward. Destroy's dark age would be a very interesting setting regardless of what you think about it in ME3's context.

[daaaav]

Bah.

Swallow their pride, handwave the effects of firing the crucible and move forward.

Reapers are gone, Shepard is gone, explore something new.

[agentN7]

Ninja Stan wrote...

Some folks in this discussion are walking a fine line between allowable criticism and inappropriate comments towards developers. Let's keep it respectful and constructive, please. Thank you.

I think gamers who have spent money and attributed many hours to the Mass Effect franchise have every right to call for heads if the next game is a prequel or spin off. All of the warning signs are there. The prequel and spin off talk is going down like a led baloon amongst people who haven't given up on the game.

[Mathias]

agentN7 wrote...

Ninja Stan wrote...

Some folks in this discussion are walking a fine line between allowable criticism and inappropriate comments towards developers. Let's keep it respectful and constructive, please. Thank you.

I think gamers who have spent money and attributed many hours to the Mass Effect franchise have every right to call for heads if the next game is a prequel or spin off. All of the warning signs are there. The prequel and spin off talk is going down like a led baloon amongst people who haven't given up on the game.

I haven't given up on the Mass Effect franchise. Every instinct, every fiber of my being is telling me to give up on it. But i'm willing to hold on to it and hope Bioware does something amazing with the franchise. If they do go the prequel and spin off route then i'll give up. I have no interest whatesover in playing a 10 hour glorified codex entry. Move the franchise forward. They've got a great universe here, rich with lore and story potential. They better not squander it.

[MegaSovereign]

SpamBot2000 wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

By default, Arrival and ME3 had a better plot because of how damn near divorced ME2's plot was from the Reaper conflict. I liked ME2 for what it was. I think the silver lining to its weak plot was the focus on great characters and atmosphere.

ME2's plot wasn't "divorced" from the Reaper conflict. The Collectors were abducting people for the Reapers. It was a solid plot: round up a posse and deal with the Reaper agents. What's wrong with that? Meanwhile, Arrival had Shepard railroaded to massacring 300,000 Batarians because the indoctrinated enemies, - who had no problem with shooting at Shepard with every intent to kill - just happened to capture Shepard and keep him alive until the crucial moment, conveniently unindoctrinated by Object Rho. To what possible end? And ME3... "We found these blueprints for a super anti-Reaper thing behind the sofa.... they were created over countless millenia by lots of different folks, and we have no idea what the thing does. But clearly it's the winning doodad." That's not weaker than ME2?

I'll give you the point that the Dark Energy ending was and remains a terrible idea. But Drew Karpyshyn has earned the benefit of doubt when it comes to what he would have finally come up for the ending, in consultation with the team. 

Gather the Avengers! It was divorced from the Reaper conflict in a sense that it didn't build toward its resolution. There were only, what, two missions dealing with the Collectors before the Suicide Mission? The only major Reaper revelation in the 30+ hour was the fact that the Collectors were huskified Protheans...oh and apparently Harbinger has a thing for humanity. Arrival answers the question of "how were the Collectors planning to gather enough humans to complete the human Reaper" since it made it clear that the Reapers were going to use the Alpha relay to go to Earth. More importantly, the end of Arrival buys the plot a 6 month buffer period where the new Shadow Broker could look for a way to defeat the Reapers.

I think the Crucible's contrived introduction was a problem, but the concept was solid. I find it poetic that the Crucible represents each cycle's resistance to the harvest. It helps give the Reaper war a grandiose perspective.

[Karlone123]

Kai Leng would be really bad idea. Seeing as he was a bad character.

[Karlone123]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

Mac is just not cut out for leading writing. Yes he's a good character writer, but ME3 stands as a testimate the he shouldn't be given that responsibilty anymore. I haven't read his other works, but from what i've heard from multiple people, they're really not that good either. I can only hope that if Mac Walters is involved in the next Mass Effect, it isn't in the lead writer's chair. They should pass that on to somebody else.

I also want to mention that if you type in "Mac Walters" on Google, the first suggestion you get is "Mac Walters Fired."

I'm not gonna say anything on that matter, but I don't know how you can't take that as a sign that many people are frustrated with the way a lot of the writing has been handled.

I do not have a problem with Mac as a lead writer, or anyone really provided they have the skill to write. The main problem was the change in story twice over. All three games do not connect properly when it comes to the main story, such as the reason behind the Reapers was changed from Dark Energy to Creators vs Creation. That was done a little too late in the series for it to fit in as it was something strictly between the Quarians and the Geth, and it never involved the Reapers.

It should have been done a little earlier providing hints throughout ME2 that it was going to become a main story rather than a side story. Nothing was done in relating the Reapers to "Creations will always rebel". That's mainly my problem.