211 réponses à ce sujet

[Reznore57]

I didn't like EMS at all.
I still remember this quest I was given , save the elcors on their planet.
I thought 'Wow they have cannons on their backs , I have to do this , cooler quest ever".
Well it turns out it was some scanning , collect some EMS , and I never saw those cool elcor.

So yeah no number in DA:I , please.
Show the ressources we gather , If we have a castle , well fill up the castle with people , weapons whatever ...

[crimzontearz]

I don't have MUCH of a problem with it as long as the possible outcomes are not reduced to "we wanted to torch the franchise and run....enjoy the grimdarkness of it all"

in other words let there be an array of outcomes ala Dragon age Origin and WELL THOUGHT OUT epilogues and I will be fine with just metrics


if we can actually implement them game play wise that's gravy

[LinksOcarina]

crimzontearz wrote...

I don't have MUCH of a problem with it as long as the possible outcomes are not reduced to "we wanted to torch the franchise and run....enjoy the grimdarkness of it all"

in other words let there be an array of outcomes ala Dragon age Origin and WELL THOUGHT OUT epilogues and I will be fine with just metrics


if we can actually implement them game play wise that's gravy

You do realize any epilouge put in has little to no chance of being official canon at this point.

Its better to LEAVE them out like they did in Dragon Age II. It is also something that the EMS might not even affect much. 

[crimzontearz]

LinksOcarina wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

I don't have MUCH of a problem with it as long as the possible outcomes are not reduced to "we wanted to torch the franchise and run....enjoy the grimdarkness of it all"

in other words let there be an array of outcomes ala Dragon age Origin and WELL THOUGHT OUT epilogues and I will be fine with just metrics


if we can actually implement them game play wise that's gravy

You do realize any epilouge put in has little to no chance of being official canon at this point.

Its better to LEAVE them out like they did in Dragon Age II. It is also something that the EMS might not even affect much. 

well it is obvious Bioware rewrites canons as they see fit so at least let me enjoy those epilogues until the next game

[LinksOcarina]

crimzontearz wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

I don't have MUCH of a problem with it as long as the possible outcomes are not reduced to "we wanted to torch the franchise and run....enjoy the grimdarkness of it all"

in other words let there be an array of outcomes ala Dragon age Origin and WELL THOUGHT OUT epilogues and I will be fine with just metrics


if we can actually implement them game play wise that's gravy

You do realize any epilouge put in has little to no chance of being official canon at this point.

Its better to LEAVE them out like they did in Dragon Age II. It is also something that the EMS might not even affect much. 

well it is obvious Bioware rewrites canons as they see fit so at least let me enjoy those epilogues until the next game

Thats no excuse either. That is why its smarter to make it open-ended as a canon.

[crimzontearz]

LinksOcarina wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

I don't have MUCH of a problem with it as long as the possible outcomes are not reduced to "we wanted to torch the franchise and run....enjoy the grimdarkness of it all"

in other words let there be an array of outcomes ala Dragon age Origin and WELL THOUGHT OUT epilogues and I will be fine with just metrics


if we can actually implement them game play wise that's gravy

You do realize any epilouge put in has little to no chance of being official canon at this point.

Its better to LEAVE them out like they did in Dragon Age II. It is also something that the EMS might not even affect much. 

well it is obvious Bioware rewrites canons as they see fit so at least let me enjoy those epilogues until the next game

Thats no excuse either. That is why its smarter to make it open-ended as a canon.

Sure...as long as it is not stupidly open ended like the ending to ME3 (especially the breath scene and the subsequent trolling by bioware)....some open endedness? ok.....that much? no thanks

[LethesDeep]

The EMS system was a decent design decision, but the execution was lacking. These are the 5 points I and most people have issues with.

1: Don't make it a number's game. Two easy ways to fix this is to either not tell us the point value of the main plot's assets or to make their point value's equal. Of course, if one choice is supposed to be weaker than the other, then tying an optional mission to getting that asset that would bolster it would even it out. (example of this: Mages are 15 points weaker than Templars, but once you get the Mages asset you also get an optional mission that rewards another asset worth 15 points.)

2: If we have to see the numbers, tell us what they mean. Basically, explain why this character is worth 25 points while an army is worth 100. (example: Templars are worth 100 points. Varric is worth 25. This means that Varric is equal to a quarter of all the Templars in Thedas, right? Not really, since Varric's point value also takes his spy network into account which gives the Inquisition lots of information, while the Templars' only accounts for their army.

3: Make the assets more than just a number with a pretty picture and description. SHOW US THEM. "Oh, you used a few golem control rods to get a battalion of golems to fight for you in the final battle. We aren't gonna show them fighting, but they're there!" This. Does. Not. Fly. Show us that our choices had an impact. Even if this boils down to just having some blood-soaked golems getting blown up by Qunari cannons in the background, that's fine.

4: If you have to mix MP with a system like this, make the MP points really low. This is a BIG point. Now, in ME3 MP characters were worth the same amount as a ME2 squadmate (25 points). However, you also got 25 more points every time you promoted a MP character. This was bad for me since I promoted a class every time I got a new character for it (I prefer to level my characters). I eventually had to stop because I had promoted characters so much that I could play a trilogy run, make every worst possible decision, and still get the golden ending. So if you put in a MP and tie it to the system where the Inquisition levels, then add a promotion system into the MP on top of that, make the MP's affect on the SP really low, like 5 points or so. That allows us some breathing room. Or you could allow us to turn off the cross-over, so if we got 50 points from playing MP, but don't want more, then we have the option of cutting it off at the 50 points. However, if you make it a one-time only bonus, then whatever a companion is worth would be fine.

5: Don't have the EMS limit the ending choices, just their effectiveness. In ME3 low EMS resulted in the worst Destroy ending, medium EMS had a mildly better Destroy ending and added Control, and high EMS had the best Destroy ending, Control and added Synthesis. While this made sense in terms of the system, it also undermined the PC's beliefs. What if you where playing a Shepard whose beliefs were in line with TIM's but had low EMS? Sorry, you can't even attempt to control the Reapers, just destroy them (and everyone else). This was a bad move. Instead EMS should have affected Control's and Synthesis's effectiveness like it did with Destroy. Example: Low EMS with Control ending resulted in a partial success where Shepard only had control over some of the Reaper's systems and had to fight them to temporarily control the other systems. This allows a player to follow their set belief's about the game's setting, but also punishes them for screwing some things up.

If you could fix those problems most people probably wouldn't have an issue with an EMS system being in DA:I.

Modifié par LethesDeep, 11 août 2013 - 03:42 .

[ForgottenWarrior]

EMS only purpose was to justify all those promises they gave. You know, about affection of your decisions on the ending. And while formally they do really affected, i, and many more with me, was left decieved.

[rapscallioness]

stormhit13 wrote...

I actually thought the complete and total lack of on screen impact that the war assets had on the game was easily the most disappointing part of ME3. Rounding up assets was basically the entire point of the game, but in the end it was just an abstract number. And you really had to try hard to fail to even see how the number mattered.

I'm not really sure if I'm disagreeing or agreeing with you though. I had no problem with the concept of building up resources, but the execution where it mostly only paid off as an obscure number check was incredibly disappointing.

This. ME ems system was lame as hell.

[Shya]

I hated the EMS system. Ruined the single player of the game.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

 EMS was not all bad. It's only real failing was being too simplified, but it had potential.


What they could have done to make it work better would be: (1) divide assets into categories, based on each asset's role in the war -- making it one big resource-dump was rather cheap; (2) show us our assets in action -- we all wanted this.

So YES, ME3's EMS sucks, but it's not a dead-end. You can do stuff with that general idea if you've got some imagination.

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 11 août 2013 - 09:40 .

[rapscallioness]

Yeah, most of us do prefer to See our assets in action.

This actually may have had nothing to do w/the ems in ME. That might have been a simple running out of resources on the ME team's part.

At any rate, for Dragon Age: I liked the ems in ME as far as keeping me updated and organized abt what was going on. I liked opening it up and seeing the listings grow as I accrued resources. I liked seeing the lil background pieces and updates based on whatever I said or did recently.

Although, I could live w/out the meter telling me where I am in all this. I would prefer to have that mystery, that suspense. Did I get everything I could? Am I ready? Did I miss anything? Instead of a bar telling me I'm good to go, or not.

But then I'm not one to care for seeing all these approval/disapproval points accrue w/the companions. I'd rather figure that out thru snippets of dialogue, how they interact w/me, and just getting to know them and their concerns.These meters will always be running, sure, but I'd prefer they be in the background as a necessary mechanic, and not a part of the story itself.

The biggest thing ofc is Show don't Tell. As much as possible. We know you can't do that for everything,but it should definitely be a priority. The visual representation of these numbers. The story of them is much more interesting.

The DA team was already going in that direction in DAO. I remember gathering allies, traveling and being jumped only to find the Circle Mages, or Eamon's ppl fighting. At the end of the fight they mentioned they were marching w/the Warden...sumthing like that. But yes. That was a nice touch.

There are a few practicing in Eamon's courtyard from the diff factions. At the end you could get help from them in situations. That was the right direction. That was a great effort to show us our assets working. With the FB3 engine I'm hoping for that to continue and expand. More of that plz. Visual representation is important. Narrative representation. Numbers only is a dry, soulless thing.

So, I liked the codex nature of the EMS abt groups you accrued. Also the lil updates. Nice touch. However, that system will never be a replacement for seeing these things play out in game. It is merely a helpmeet.

Also, while I personally like a lil co-op/mp w/my game, do not ever do what the mass effect team did with mp/sp. Never again from BW. Whether it was premeditated, or plain negligence. The way sp was saddled w/mp. The way we were "coerced"...it was a very dirty trick.

My advice, fwiw, would be--if you do plan on implementing a co-op/mp--go out of your way to distance yourselves from the way the ME team did it.

[Commander Michael]

I didn't even notice this "EMS" thing in ME3... It certainly didn't affect ANY choice I made. I also completed the game 100% so I'm a completionist but I never even looked at my EMS...

I guess the issue is that completionists like myself want 100% EMS so they pick the choices that give more of it. Well I didn't necessarily take all the EMS-effective choices but I still got access to all the endings... I think this issue is more for people who rush through the game and want to get a "perfect" ending...

Well guess what, if you want a perfect ending you have to spend more time doing side quests.

[AlanC9]

LinksOcarina wrote...
EMS is a mechanical stat at best. There is no reason to see them in action that way. Logistically it would be difficult to convey it with so many instances involved.

So long as everyone understands that this is a mechanic and not a cinematic barometer that needs to be measured, there should be no problem with EMS as a feature. That is simply number crunching on the outside. 

I see two problems with this.

First, the ME3 EMS application meant that most of us never saw the mechanics have any effect. Without skipping content you automatically get to a high-EMS state (Except possibly in the case of a really bad ME2 import or no import in a no-DLC game). It's difficult to avoid this without making sidequests and exploration irrelevant for EMS.

Second, there's a weird psychological effect we see with some ME3 gameplay elements, and I believe with some DA2 elements as well. If an item suggests that more content could have been there than actually , then some players feel that more content should have been there, and Bio must have cut something or gotten lazy. For instance, the one-liner squadmate remarks on the Normandy fool some players into thinking that the squadmates have less dialogue than they did in ME2, even though the opposite is true; the single line feels like a cut rather than an addition. A lot of EMS items work like this, I think.

I'm not susceptible to this thinking myself, and I suspect you aren't either. But I've seen too many aggrieved posts to deny that the effect is real.

I don't know what this means for DAI. Maybe they should go back to the DAO system and have the Inquisitor always get to the endgame with more-or-less the same assets?

[AlanC9]

Commander Michael wrote...

I guess the issue is that completionists like myself want 100% EMS so they pick the choices that give more of it. Well I didn't necessarily take all the EMS-effective choices but I still got access to all the endings... I think this issue is more for people who rush through the game and want to get a "perfect" ending...

I think this gets it a little backwards. Completionists get all the EMS they want whatever their choices were, yes. That's a problem if you want the choices to matter for EMS.

If you're OK with the choices only having the effects that they have --- if the quarians are destroyed at Rannoch that's a big change in the endings even though it doesn't kill your EMS  -- it's not a big deal. This sort of thing didn't bother people in KotOR, or DA:O, or most other RPGs. But it did bother them in ME3. Maybe it's because of ME2's SM?

Modifié par AlanC9, 11 août 2013 - 06:03 .

[esper]

The problem with an ems system as in ME3 was that it made any choice into a numbers game.

If choice A is worth 10 points and choice B is worth 15 points and there is a clearly 'best ending' that requires maximum points, the game is basically telling me the right choice to make.

It is like paragon and renegade in Me 2. I remember legion's recruitment situation, my paragon shephard wanted to kill those other geths because she thought that brainwashing 'people' and essentially killing their mind was a far worse thing to do than killing their body. However the game decided that killing their body was renegade thus my paragon would be punished with for taking that choice. Basically my choice was made by the game.

Basically numbers game such as this have to be either hidden or easily understanable for a player.

For example say we have defense point for a castle. It is logical enough for most players that with a too low defense point the castle will fall. It is also logical enough that we get defense point by say by investing money into strengthening the walls. (Think Awakening). It is not logical why giving a random the kid in another village a doll strenghten the number, if the kid is no way related to the siege at all. (Think ME3).

Such if you must have a number game hide the numbers and make the the consequences of the number logical.

Modifié par esper, 11 août 2013 - 06:04 .

[AlanC9]

esper wrote...

The problem with an ems system as in ME3 was that it made any choice into a numbers game.

If choice A is worth 10 points and choice B is worth 15 points and there is a clearly 'best ending' that requires maximum points, the game is basically telling me the right choice to make.

Unless you think that some things are worth sacrificing for. Though that's a difficult case to make in ME3, RP-wise; winning against the Reapers isn't everything, it's the only thing.

I don't see this as being a huge problem for DAI. Many players had no trouble siding with Caridin in DAO even though golems would have been helpful.

It is like paragon and renegade in Me 2. I remember legion's recruitment situation, my paragon shephard wanted to kill those other geths because she thought that brainwashing 'people' and essentially killing their mind was a far worse thing to do than killing their body. However the game decided that killing their body was renegade thus my paragon would be punished with for taking that choice. Basically my choice was made by the game.

What I take away from this is that you shouldn't outsource your decisions to the P/R meter. And yes, ME2 does punish you for not doing that, but you should suck it up. Fortunately, this isn't something we need to worry about in a DA game.

Modifié par AlanC9, 11 août 2013 - 06:08 .

[esper]

AlanC9 wrote...

esper wrote...

The problem with an ems system as in ME3 was that it made any choice into a numbers game.

If choice A is worth 10 points and choice B is worth 15 points and there is a clearly 'best ending' that requires maximum points, the game is basically telling me the right choice to make.

Unless you think that some things are worth sacrificing for. Though that's a difficult case to make in ME3, RP-wise; winning against the Reapers isn't everything, it's the only thing.

I don't see this as being a huge problem. Many players had no trouble siding with Caridin in DAO even though golems would have been helpful.

It is like paragon and renegade in Me 2. I remember legion's recruitment situation, my paragon shephard wanted to kill those other geths because she thought that brainwashing 'people' and essentially killing their mind was a far worse thing to do than killing their body. However the game decided that killing their body was renegade thus my paragon would be punished with for taking that choice. Basically my choice was made by the game.

What I take away from this is that you shouldn't outsource your decisions to the P/R meter. And yes, ME2 does punish you for not doing that, but you should suck it up. Fortunately, this isn't something we need to worry about in a DA game.

But see the thing with the golems was that was always going to get the dwarves. I don't remember if the Golem's overrode the dwarves or if you got both, but both thing was usable in the final fights. Sure the golems might be those 5 points more usual in term of statistics, but you still:
1. Get something out of both decision decision.
2. Are not told about those 5 points. Just as both thing made the 'best' ending possible, it just varied how difficult achiving that ending would be. (Ie. How difficult the final fight)

If it worked as in ME3:
1. You would not get something else for making the Cairidan choice. You would just lose those five points.
2. It would mean that say the alienage was always lost without explanation, because these five points were now gone.


The problem is that any kind of karma meter (Which the EMS actually is, just for a different kind of karma) tells me that the game developer wants to push their morality down my troat. This thing is the pramagtic thing to do, this is the idealistic. (Karma meter).  This thing is the most effective to do. (Ems). You have to play the game this way if you play that kind of character or be punished. I know a computer needs numbers to calculate, but if the game developers care about the narrative, they attempt to hide it. (Like the Branka/Golem man choice.) or if they can't hide it, have it make sense, such as strengthening your keep in Awakening.

[Eralrik]

As Vigil on Ilos said: "In the end what does it matter" the Bioware Dev team will probably put in a modified EMS system to along with the Multiplayer part of the game. As EA stated all new games will ship with MP as it is a successful format they will capitalize on. So it only makes sense that we will see a modified EMS system in DA:I.

Sadly the EMS system detracted from my fun and enjoyment and made it feel more like a job rather than a game to get away from the real world. I've only finished ME3 twice once before the extended cut and once after and chose option 4 and felt saddened that it basically spanked the fans for questioning Bioware's decision <but that's in the past>.

I've always enjoyed Bioware games still have Shattered Steel on 3 1/2 floppy's think I have the box somewhere also but they usually learn and reinvent fun so I'm very hopeful for DA:I if not the fans will speak out here on the forum's just like ME3.

[satunnainen]

Maybe the problem was that the system was too one dimensional. One number, get over some number, X happens, a bit higher and Y happens, and so on. Not too many things to tune the outcome besides the magic number. Add other variables that make some, sometimes significant changes. For example:

destroy ending, higher ems. If shep found some protean relic in me2 or 1 (one of the sidequests), it turns out to be extremely well protected datastorage. In some conditions EDI gets it and makes a backup of herself, just in case. So that when the dust settles and some computer hw gets fixed, EDI can be restored.

Maybe this leads to lots more work for game designers but the system they used in me3 was too simple. Or maybe too obviously simple

Modifié par satunnainen, 11 août 2013 - 06:48 .

[mannitt]

(Some bits may be repeats of others comments, but this is my thoughts)
When I first played ME3 I actually thought the EMS was cool. After every mission I'd go and look through all the names and numbers. I did use it as a goal line. I had no idea what the numbers meant but it was getting me closer to my goal. But then London and all I saw were humans. Nothing else. Sure at first no big deal. Then at the base you got to have few lines with past squadmates. Yadda yadda you know the rest.
I'm more of a film geek then really a game geek. So in film there is a rule of thumb, (granted not all), show don't tell. Basically rather then have a character tell you, show it.
I would've loved to see something similar to the fight against Meredith. One by one your team shows up until eventually they're all there. Just imagine when your waiting by that damn car and after every wave a group of rachni show up. Then geth fall from the sky. Then a herd of Krogan run in. I think you get it. They could still tell (numbers) and show. Still had to deal with the ending, but it would've been a little less sour.
I think all in all telling us we're getting there is not better then showing us we're there.

[TheRealJayDee]

Narrow Margin wrote...

On paper EMS doesn't seem like such a bad idea.

bleetman wrote...

The whole implementation of it was just a massive disjointed mess.

Pretty much this. The idea behind the EMS system wasn't too bad by itself, but the way it was implemented into the game was about the worst I can imagine (of course I'm aware they could have done it even worse, but you know what I mean). Instead of a satisfying "Suicide Mission meets Battle of Denerim" finale it lead to... nothing palpable, nothing that felt rewarding.

It was simply a number's game, with numbers that felt mostly arbitrary, and that ultimately had no tangible pay-off (instead we got to experience the "there's content you can't experience if you didn't play multiplayer, but we tell you it ain't so" scenario, which was a debacle of it's own).

Long story short: I would definitely feel more confident about DA:I if I knew there weren't plans for a system too similar to ME3's EMS.

Modifié par TheRealJayDee, 11 août 2013 - 09:17 .

[AlanC9]

esper wrote...

If it worked as in ME3:
1. You would not get something else for making the Cairidan choice. You would just lose those five points.

No -- you'd get the dwarf points both ways, and you'd get the golem points for siding with Branka. That's how ME3 handled similar choies-- you always came away with some points, but some choices gave you more points than others.

2. It would mean that say the alienage was always lost without explanation, because these five points were now gone.

Only if losing those points put you under some threshold.

The problem is that any kind of karma meter (Which the EMS actually is, just for a different kind of karma) tells me that the game developer wants to push their morality down my troat. This thing is the pramagtic thing to do, this is the idealistic. (Karma meter).  This thing is the most effective to do. (Ems). You have to play the game this way if you play that kind of character or be punished. I know a computer needs numbers to calculate, but if the game developers care about the narrative, they attempt to hide it. (Like the Branka/Golem man choice.) or if they can't hide it, have it make sense, such as strengthening your keep in Awakening.

Wait... they have to hide consequences from the player or it will interfere with the role-playing?

[David7204]

This is ultimately the core of the issue, I think. Or at least one issue. The very absurd idea that any meaningful message within a video game is 'shoved down your throat.' The idea that a developer must not be put any meaningful themes within a story, because that's 'shoving them down your throat.'

Modifié par David7204, 11 août 2013 - 09:46 .

[AresKeith]

David7204 wrote...

This is ultimately the core of the issue, I think. Or at least one issue. The very absurd idea that any meaningful message within a video game is 'shoved down your throat.' The idea that a developer must not be put any meaningful themes within a story, because that's 'shoving them down your throat.'

What are you talking about?