Basically if you take ME2 with its story filled content as basis, remove the planet scanning minigame and instead add the actual exploration of ME1 you will got a darn good game right there... Can you do it?
I reckon ME2 has the weakest story. I think it was the squadmate missions people liked best, along with squad interactions. The actual story is pants.
I still can't really imagine how its going to play out. I have that terrible fear that its going to be like the "drive the Mako through 20 minutes of barren wasteland to reach destination" sections from ME1, I hated that.
Well, exploration implies that there is something to explore.
I reckon ME2 has the weakest story. I think it was the squadmate missions people liked best, along with squad interactions. The actual story is pants.
Yes, and it's worth noting that they were Excellently developed, each single one of them, despite the numerous Squadmates in just a single game.
Edit: Oh, and I want quality too Bioware. Plz
#QualityForME4BiowerPlz
Really, don't rush the product. And don't let the a person of the team take the single responsibility in doing something(You all know what I'm talking about here)... After all you're a team, eh? 
Yes, and it's worth noting that they were Excellently developed, each single one of them, despite the numerous Squadmates in just a single game.
True. Except, maybe Jacob 
From what I've seen DA:I does a great job with companions. It has the trademark approval system which I think is vastly better than ME adoring companions and it also has excellent voice acting and writing. Just check this out
There are things in DA:I that I don't want to see in next Mass Effect but companion writing is not one of them.
I'm surprised to hear people claim that the squad was well developed in ME2. Almost every time I went and talked to Garrus he was "calibrating." And it wasn't just Garrus. Miranda was constantly busy filing a report. Jacob wanted to talk another time. Legion was building a consensus. And the writers themselves recognized the thinness of character development in ME2. Why do you think we get all these "calibrating" references in ME3?
For me, ME3 has the best character development of all the games. Partially, no doubt, this was because we already were familiar with the characters. But is also is related to the much more extensive dialogue each one had.
And let's not pretend that you can have it all. Everything has a cost. More characters means more actors, means more money leaving less money for something else. When will gamers ever acknowledge there are a limited amount of resources to go around?
I'm surprised to hear people claim that the squad was well developed in ME2. Almost every time I went and talked to Garrus he was "calibrating." And it wasn't just Garrus. Miranda was constantly busy filing a report. Jacob wanted to talk another time. Legion was building a consensus. And the writers themselves recognized the thinness of character development in ME2. Why do you think we get all these "calibrating" references in ME3?
For me, ME3 has the best character development of all the games. Partially, no doubt, this was because we already were familiar with the characters. But is also is related to the much more extensive dialogue each one had.
And let's not pretend that you can have it all. Everything has a cost. More characters means more actors, means more money leaving less money for something else. When will gamers ever acknowledge there are a limited amount of resources to go around?
They had other things to say besides calibrating etc. Surely, ME3 got more dialogue but it capitalized on ME2 character writing. Garrus became player favorite vigilante in ME2, Liara became her hardened self, Tali was no longer a walking codex entry. All squadmates were fleshed-out well enough so people loved them and grew attached to them despite them being new to the series. I'd say that's excellent writing. Jack, Grunt, Mordin...
I'm surprised to hear people claim that the squad was well developed in ME2. Almost every time I went and talked to Garrus he was "calibrating." And it wasn't just Garrus. Miranda was constantly busy filing a report. Jacob wanted to talk another time. Legion was building a consensus. And the writers themselves recognized the thinness of character development in ME2. Why do you think we get all these "calibrating" references in ME3?
For me, ME3 has the best character development of all the games. Partially, no doubt, this was because we already were familiar with the characters. But is also is related to the much more extensive dialogue each one had.
And let's not pretend that you can have it all. Everything has a cost. More characters means more actors, means more money leaving less money for something else. When will gamers ever acknowledge there are a limited amount of resources to go around?
Mass 3 was a huge improvement to be sure and probably the best game in the series until Priority: Earth. Yet I think Mass 2's Recruitment and Loyalty missions are that game's best features and genuinely formed player attachment towards the team. So when people say they preferred ME 2 I can only assume this is the reason why because nothing else makes any sense.
Mass 3 was a huge improvement to be sure and probably the best game in the series until Priority: Earth. Yet I think Mass 2's Recruitment and Loyalty missions are that game's best features and genuinely formed player attachment towards the team. So when people say they preferred ME 2 I can only assume this is the reason why because nothing else makes any sense.
That may be part of the reason. For me, ME2 is my favorite because I feel the combat system, despite some hiccups, is at its best. ME3 brought some changes, but I do not feel that they all improved the combat. I feel some of the changes brought regression to the system and some were half-baked or poorly implemented.
I still enjoy ME3 (even more so in multiplayer with friends) but I did not get the same level of "wow" factor that I did with ME2. That includes both story and combat.
ME2's story may be the weakest, but I think it was structured the best. ME2's end game (suicide mission) may be 'urgent' but unlike ME1 or ME3, you never feel like the urgency is being sidetracked by all these secondary missions. Recruiting squadmates, gaining their loyalty, even completing optional missions like Overlord or Lair of the Shadow Broker felt important because it felt like it was all about preparing for the suicide mission, even if it was not.
In ME1 you had to stop Saren. The main story missions leading up to stopping Saren (Feros, Noveria, Therum, Virmire) set the right tone for the story. But all the other side missions just felt like filler/XP grinds since they did not even have a tenuous connection to the main story, so it felt like the story was sidetracked and the sense of urgency was lost.
And In ME3, the individual story arcs felt like they fit in the whole of the story, but a lot of the DLC and half the side content, despite being strong, just did not evoke the same sense that they connected.
But those are just my personal feelings on the matter. Not everyone feels the same way I do.
And for the record, I like Priority:Earth, even though I do not think that the game should have ended on Earth -- or even allowed us to go to Earth at all. Priority: Earth could maybe have been a bit better if you fought Reapers and Cerberus and Geth all at once, like the Reapers were throwing all they had at you to get to the beam. (And by Priority: Earth, I mean No Man's Land and the Missile Battery. The Hades Cannon mission can go straight to development hell.)
That may be part of the reason. For me, ME2 is my favorite because I feel the combat system, despite some hiccups, is at its best. ME3 brought some changes, but I do not feel that they all improved the combat. I feel some of the changes brought regression to the system and some were half-baked or poorly implemented.
<snip>
The Hades Cannon mission can go straight to development hell.)
This isn't something I hear that often. Normally when people talk about ME2 being the better game they are referring to the character interactions not the gameplay, so it's nice to read a new perspective on the matter.
I think combat in ME 2 is showing it's age a bit now. The battles are still good but the weight, feel and sound of the guns feels a bit dated. Insanity still feels harder than ME 3's though which is a bonus.
I think in each Mass Effect game character interaction and dialogue improved. Mass Effect 3 was better than Mass Effect 2 which was better than Mass Effect 1. Hopefully that trend continues into the next game.
I'm surprised to hear people claim that the squad was well developed in ME2. Almost every time I went and talked to Garrus he was "calibrating." And it wasn't just Garrus. Miranda was constantly busy filing a report. Jacob wanted to talk another time. Legion was building a consensus. And the writers themselves recognized the thinness of character development in ME2. Why do you think we get all these "calibrating" references in ME3?
For me, ME3 has the best character development of all the games. Partially, no doubt, this was because we already were familiar with the characters. But is also is related to the much more extensive dialogue each one had.
And let's not pretend that you can have it all. Everything has a cost. More characters means more actors, means more money leaving less money for something else. When will gamers ever acknowledge there are a limited amount of resources to go around?
I think in each Mass Effect game character interaction and dialogue improved. Mass Effect 3 was better than Mass Effect 2 which was better than Mass Effect 1. Hopefully that trend continues into the next game.
Yes, exactly this. See, Mass Effect 2 had good character writing, but it wasn't as good as it was implemented in ME3. See for example, the Loyalty Missions + Those Minor Conversations after them/Before them that "introduced you" (in a certain way) to those squadmates. That alone made up for the minor bits of conversation, IMO. And to me, Bioware did deliver the Proper Squadmate Interaction in the Ship in ME2. They delivered quantity, but also quality.
I think in each Mass Effect game character interaction and dialogue improved. Mass Effect 3 was better than Mass Effect 2 which was better than Mass Effect 1. Hopefully that trend continues into the next game.
Reasons that I started to worry for ME4 after I played DAI either:
1. Open world is something new, yes, but it's dam borring with all of those side quests... They are sooo boring, even no ambient awesome music, just silent and super rare squad comments.
2. So few cutsceens after previous parts. I did not feel that I was involved... I was expecting emotions, not customizations.
3. Poor story, imo. Buying DAI I was expecting emotional opera in best Bioware traditions, not another Skyrim clone, no offence.
Result: I would prefer "corridor shooter" in ME4 but with STORY in best Bioware traditions than this openworld borring game.
Suggestion: Do not make many-voices and many-races options if it will cut the story. Remind your self why ME games were so popular, espesially remind your self why ME2 got best metascore and ME3 did not. And if you want your gamer been involved - make more cutsceens with epic music and drama moments
I will tottaly love it if become more like DA:I, the callof duty thing gets boring so fast for me.
Geez quit complaining and get a life. i understand its any amazing story that draws you in and cant help but become a nerd about it but all i ever hear from you fans is complaints. you hate it so much then don't get the new one, just shut the heck up and go away. Unless you have something you would like to see in the next one or something you would like taken out no one wants to comb through thousands of blogs bitching to find some cool stuff
It's release time, meaning that all the butthurt, entitled idiots surface.
The things I've seen in DA:I forums, lol.
Stop using words you obviously don't understand the meaning of.
I think if you like Bioware games and you like Skyrim then you will like DAI. I however do not like Skyrim and I was deeply disappointed with DAI, and I now worry about the ME Next.
In my opinion the complaint about filler content and 'fetch' quests is right but kind of misses the point slightly. If you like rich story telling then in DAI you are going to spend 70% of your time not doing that. I really enjoyed the main quest line (even if the plot has some issues), but when I was in the open areas all the quest felt completely disconnected to any plot. Even the actual plots of the side quests where extremely 'thin' or badly presented (reading rather than cinematics). I ended up not using the journal and just opening the map and going to the next plot marker without really knowing why... because I hadn't been given any reason to care why. I will probably play the game again but next time I will leave out 50% of the content (which says a lot). I'm sure ME Next will have open world type spaces but lets hope they can manage to fill them with some plot rather than just a large number of unrewarding quests.
One big plus for Dragon Age Inquisition - Bioware devs didn't lose their touch for revealing your headquarters. I was a bit worried about it after ME3
ME4 devs said they will take some mechanics from it and now many DAI devs are getting into ME4. This makes me worried since Im a huge Mass Effect fan and feel disappointed in Dragon Age Inquisition. Its just clunky and filled with filler content thats is not interesting at all.
Casey, if you hear me, please dont turn Mass Effect Next into something like that. Where you run across planets doing bland filler stuff, collect ore just to get more playtime. We want quality content. Amazing stories. Fans point out Mass Effect 2 as the best game in series, so take it as a basis and improve upon it. Id much more prefer to see 30 hours epic adventure then 150 hours bore train.
Oh yes, i second this with my soul.
Evethough i would disagree about inquisition being not interesting, but its defenite even more mainstream than DA2.
About ME4, what i would wish for:
Take the charismatic characters of ME2 together with it's presentation, then combine it with some deeper ME1-like RPG-System (i want to customise my party, see many different looking armors and some more sci-fi-like weapons and a deeper skilltree).
Throw out this paragon-renegade-system (too restrictiv. your actions should be reflected by the reactions of your environment and not by filling a bar), open up the levels, add more variety in enemies (some wild xeno-beasts for example) and give us some new feature (i would love some space-fighter-combat, but i seem to be in the minority).
Pull all that together with a decent story (concluded wih a bossfight) and it would be a sure 9/10.
Geez quit complaining and get a life. i understand its any amazing story that draws you in and cant help but become a nerd about it but all i ever hear from you fans is complaints. you hate it so much then don't get the new one, just shut the heck up and go away. Unless you have something you would like to see in the next one or something you would like taken out no one wants to comb through thousands of blogs bitching to find some cool stuff
"quit complaining and get a life"..Pretty sure it's a contradiction to complain about others complaining. You're pretty much trying to tell people that they shouldn't voice their opinions unless it's positive or in support of the game. Games will never get better if there isn't any negative feedback or criticism to know what goes wrong and what goes right. If you don't like it then don't read the threads. Nobody forces you to read them nor do they force you to respond. How about you take your own advice and go away since your comment obviously has no relevance to it.
Anyways as for the thread, my fear is how the story and ending will turn out. Words can't describe how disappointing ME 3's endings were and DA I's ending isn't completely terrible but it's not very good either. It's..rushed I guess. With how much they hyped up the game and all, guess one expected a better finale than what they gave us. One of DA I's problems imo is that it tried to be too much like Skyrim. There's just too many dull quests in DA I compared to what there were in Origins and 2. As for the next ME, I strongly disagree with JCFR about removing the paragon/renegade system. That system is pretty much the persuade/intimidate system for Mass Effect. Toss it out and you lose a lot of Shep's dialogue choices and things that kind of defined his, or her, personality as to whether they were the more heroic and kind hearted paragon or the more bad attitude and fierce renegade. Then again that system dealt with Shepard. Since we're not going to be playing as Shepard anymore, perhaps they will implement something new with whoever our new character shall be
Casey Hudson is no longer the director of Mass Effect, he left BioWare
.
50% of Dragon Age: Inquisition is boring, I felt somewhat ambivalent about it.
P.S. I want the new Mass Effect to be more like ME1 not ME2
Fixed. Now I agree with you. Get rid of at least half of those boring MMO quests. I love the collectibles but I hate talking to NPCs who constantly tell me to just go out and find their lost animals or husband's rings (don't jerk me around in a response, you know what I'm talking about here). Remove 50% of quests and make the rest more drawn out and memorable with good characters in them just like all other Bioware games minus Mass Effect 3.
And also, if ME4 has the same little amount of main quests that are 2-3 hours long it's just way too short of a main quest. DA:O's main quest was probably 30-40 hours long, as was ME3's and ME2's (Loyalty quests are not side quests neither in DA:I or ME. I count them in). It's like if Feros and Noveria were just two linear 2-hour missions of guns blazing and a couple of confrontations here and there in ME1. It might be a fun ride, but it doesn't feel as expansive and it lacks the player agency of having hubs to explore and side-quests that are memorable within the main missions, like all the branching paths on how to find a pass to the Hot Labs in ME1. DA:I just doesn't have this flexibility in its main quests and it's even inferior to ME3 in the sense that ME3 had a much larger sum of action-based main quests.
What is there, 7 actual main quests in inquisition, each being around 1-3 hours? That's approx. 15 hours main quest. Okay, maybe it is 25-30 with all the companion conversations and romances but still, that's only 30 hours out of 80 total -- and not even all of that was fun or even well-written --, so I've spent 50 hours doing side-content, the main bulk of the game and I'd say at least half of those hours I was bored out of my mind.
Torna su