431 réponses à ce sujet

[Vazgen]

From the game codex (aka Mass Effect wiki because I'm at work).

Game codex

ME1-ME2

Spoiler

Mass relays are feats of Prothean engineering advanced far beyond the technology of any living species. They are enormous structures scattered throughout the stars, and can create corridors of virtually mass-free space allowing instantaneous transit between locations separated by years or even centuries of travel using conventional FTL drives.

 

Primary mass relays can propel ships thousands of light years, often from one spiral arm of the galaxy to another. However, they have fixed one-to-one connections: a primary relay connects to one other primary relay, and nowhere else. Secondary relays can only propel ships a few hundred light years, however they are omnidirectional: a secondary relay can send a ship to any other relay within its limited range.

 

There are many dormant primary relays whose corresponding twins have not yet been located. These are left inactive until their partner is charted, as established civilizations are unwilling to blindly open a passage that might connect them to a hostile species.

 

ME3

Spoiler

Once believed to be of Prothean origin, mass relays were in fact created by the Reapers using technology far beyond that of other living species. The enormous structures, scattered throughout the stars, create corridors of virtually mass-free space. This allows instantaneous transit between locations normally separated by years or even centuries using conventional FTL drives.

 

Primary mass relays can propel ships thousands of light-years. The flight path, however, is fixed to a single relay elsewhere in the galaxy. By contrast, secondary relays, while only capable of propelling ships a few hundred light-years, can reach any other relay within their limited range.

 

Many primary relays lie dormant, their destinations not yet known. These relays are often left inactive on purpose, as established civilizations are unwilling to blindly open a passage that might connect them to a new, hostile species. The Reapers do not share the same concern, and freely use the dormant relays.

 

Communications

Spoiler

Real-time communication is possible thanks to networks of expensive mass relay comm buoys that can daisy-chain a transmission via lasers.

 

Comm buoys are maintained in patterns built outward from each mass relay. The buoys are little more than a cluster of primitive, miniature mass relays. Each individual buoy is connected to a partner on another buoy in the network, forming a corridor of low-mass space. Tightbeam communications lasers are piped through these "tubes" of FTL space, allowing virtually instantaneous communication to anywhere on the network. The networks connect across regions by communications lasers through the mass relays.

 

With this system, the only delay is the light lag between the source or destination and the closest buoy. So long as all parties remain within half a light-second (150,000 km) of buoys, seamless real time communications are possible. Since buoys are maintained in all traveled areas, most enjoy unlimited instant communications. Ships only suffer communications lag when operating off established deep space routes, around uninhabited outer system gas giants, and other unsettled areas.

 

During wartime, comm buoy networks are the first target of an attack. Once the network is severed, it can take anywhere from weeks to years to get a message out of a contested system. In systems where a buoy network has not yet been built or has been destroyed, rapid communication means ferrying information through high-speed courier ships and unmanned data drones.

Can you link the source for 5x15 sizes?

[Quarian Master Race]

The ME2 mission was supposed to be over a year, I think. So there's time to screw around. Shepard is in action around early 2185, and Arrival (or the equivalent Alliance Bahak mission) happens early 2186.

 

I heard ME3 is only a few months or something. There might be something in the game itself indicating it... can't remember now.

In Tali's farewell at the firebase on Earth, Shepard makes an allusion to it being a few months if you take the upper right options.

[azarhal]

 

[snip]

 

Can you link the source for 5x15 sizes?

 

Ask who ever edited the Mass Relay page on the wiki, I was pretty sure it was from the codex: 

 

Mass relays consist of two fifteen-kilometer (or nine-mile) long curved metal arms surrounding a set of revolving, gyroscopic rings five-kilometers across.

[Vazgen]

Ask who ever edited the Mass Relay page on the wiki, I was pretty sure it was from the codex: 

 

Mass relays consist of two fifteen-kilometer (or nine-mile) long curved metal arms surrounding a set of revolving, gyroscopic rings five-kilometers across.

Uhm, it refers to the size of the relay itself. It doesn't move objects through itself, it creates a corridor and sends an object via that corridor. 

[Sion1138]

Note that such urgency would be an illusion anyway, and not really coherent with the overall plot. While the Reaper war is urgent, the Crucible will nevertheless take months to build. Blowing off the side missions won't make that go any faster. The game structure obscures this because time only passes when you do a "Priority" mission, and since you get the next Priority mission as soon as you finish the one you're on, you can accelerate the clock at will. ME2's solution to the problem is somewhat superior, since any mission can cause time to pass. (The trick is to force Reaper IFF the moment it's available, and always do N7s if one comes up via scanning -- Normandy'd likely be dumping drive charge anyway, so Shepard might as well have a look while he waits.)

Ideally, I'd have a real clock with real travel times. A player would either use the system efficiently, or he wouldn't. (No, I'm not delusional -- I know this won't ever happen in an AAA release. That battle was lost long ago.)

 

Have you played Star Control 2?

 

In my one and only play-through of that game, I lost and the Ur-Quan wiped out everyone but it was a fantastic experience nonetheless.

 

Having broken the clock, you don't get a game over screen.

 

I just kept trying to win to the very last. I didn't know that I couldn't win. It was great

[Sanunes]

Old Bioware IS dead, and I'm pretty sure that's been the claim the whole time. There's a difference between being dead and being broke. Bioware isn't broke, but the Old Bioware that used to produce high quality RPGs that would live on as classics is more certainly dead. Was DA:I a good game? Yes it definitely was. Will it stand the test of time? No. Dragon Age Origins is still the best DA game, and The Witcher 3, no offense, destroyed DA:I in almost every department. Ok that part may be subjective, but let's all agree Witcher 3 was much better received both critically and commercially.

 

CDprojektRed hasn't been producing nearly as much AAA games has Bioware have. They're fairly new in that department. But despite that, TW3 sold 3-4 times the amount that DA:I in it's first two weeks, and it wasn't even on as many platforms as DA:I. So that's something to consider here.

I don't hate Bioware, I still really enjoy their games, and I'm very much looking forward to Mass Effect 4. But they don't crap gold anymore. I did enjoy DA:I a lot, but it wasn't as good as it could've been. I don't think it lived up to the hype.

 

That might be fine for how you feel, but honestly your sentiment has been around with each BioWare game released as long as I have been part of the community back with Mass Effect 1.  I personally don't like when people compare games for that is why we got some of the elements of Inquisition for people couldn't stop comparing Dragon Age 2 to Skryim.  Heck there were threads saying how BioWare should give the IP to Bethesda for they know how to make a medieval fantasy, now just replace Bethesda with CDPR and it feel about the same.

[ozthegweat]

Ideally, I'd have a real clock with real travel times. A player would either use the system efficiently, or he wouldn't. (No, I'm not delusional -- I know this won't ever happen in an AAA release. That battle was lost long ago.)

Lightning Returns: Final Fantasy XIII had that. You had 13 days (each day was about an hour of real time) and the clock stopped during cutscenes and fights. It was detrimental to my enjoyment. I like to soak in environments and take my time, but I felt I couldn't and had to rush through everything. I ended up completing every quest and sidequest waaay before the clock ran out and had to fast-forward the remaining time, because I didn't know that there would be plenty of time to do everything.

 

There is an argument to be made for "using the system efficiently": combine status effects and abilities to kill enemies faster, level up abilities in such a way that creates the most synergy, buy the equipment most appropriate to your playstyle and/or class.

 

Throwing time into that equation is very, very difficult to do right. You cross over from "fun challenge" to "frustrating limitation" really fast.

[Solace]

If Bioware was a sinking ship, EA would not hesitate to fire every single employee in Bioware. Business is Ruthless, and EA is full Renegade.

[AlanC9]

Have you played Star Control 2?
 
In my one and only play-through of that game, I lost and the Ur-Quan wiped out everyone but it was a fantastic experience nonetheless.
 
Having broken the clock, you don't get a game over screen.
 
I just kept trying to win to the very last. I didn't know that I couldn't win. It was great

Yeah, I played it some time ago. Great game once I got used to the combat. I found I was most comfortable using Fwiffo's Spathi ship until I upgraded the flagship a lot. Only the Spathi would build ships with just backward-firing weapons.

A lot of games of that era used such timers. I don't know when RPG players got too weak to accept them, but it must have been before the huge backlash to Fallout 1's timer, which resulted in a massive nerf.

[AlanC9]

Uhm, it refers to the size of the relay itself. It doesn't move objects through itself, it creates a corridor and sends an object via that corridor.

Right. Ships travel parallel to the relay, they don't fly through the rings.

[AlanC9]

Lightning Returns: Final Fantasy XIII had that. You had 13 days (each day was about an hour of real time) and the clock stopped during cutscenes and fights. It was detrimental to my enjoyment. I like to soak in environments and take my time, but I felt I couldn't and had to rush through everything. I ended up completing every quest and sidequest waaay before the clock ran out and had to fast-forward the remaining time, because I didn't know that there would be plenty of time to do everything.

I think that's a bad implementation of a clock system. Looking around the game map for ten minutes shouldn't mean that the PC has wasted six hours staring at stuff. The only game I can think of offhand that used such time compression well is MotB, where making the player feel oppressed by his curse is pretty much the whole point of the game. I don't know enough about FF XIII to propose a better solution, though

[Pasquale1234]

So the problem is not being able to save?

That's part of it.

The bigger problem is being railroaded through cutscene after cutscene after cutscene where the only control I have over my character is some occasional dialogue options.

I'm not sure how (or why) you're counting those save opportunities. In ME1, you could save before the optional conversation with Jenkins / Chakwas, then reload and try different options if you so desire. Ditto Pressly, and Nihlus / Anderson. You could do the same thing wrt meeting Ashley, 2 sets of civilians hiding out in shelters, and Powell, plus pretty much anyplace during the mission when you're not engaged in combat.

Indeed, even in ME3 you could save around optional conversations - but there were large, lengthy segments of cutscenes piled on top of each other where Shepard is whisked from place to place outside of player control and you cannot revisit one without going through all of them again. ME1 has a few places where Shepard is whisked into a comm room for a post-mission debriefing with the crew, but they are not nearly so voluminous or lengthy as they were in ME3. In ME1, once you've finished that debriefing, Shepard is back in your control. In ME3, you might be whisked into another cutscene or 10 after your debriefing with Hackett.
 

I'd say that the amount of content when you are not able to save in the opening of ME2 is almost the same as in ME3. You are not able to save through the whole Normandy destruction and Shepard's resurrection.

Agreed - but ME2 does not have a lot of other segments of cutscenes piled on top of cutscenes throughout like ME3 does. You have mission debriefings after many of the missions, but when they're done, Shepard is back under your control.

If your playtime is limited or interrupted, you might need to shutdown and walk away right in the middle of some lengthy segment where you cannot save. Where you pick it back up depends on the last time you were allowed to save. There's no rewind, only reload.
 

We can look at it in more detail. I listed long dialogues and cutscenes up until the end of a tutorial mission.

ME1's is roughly half as long as ME2&3's. No surprise there.

And I did initially cite the opening sequence as a problem, but that was intended only as an example. There are several other areas in ME3 where events are tightly scripted, and you end up in some fairly lengthy segments where your only control over your character may be a few dialogue choices.
 

Not sure what the full crew has to do with it. ME2 already shown that EDI can operate Normandy SR2 with only a handful of crew. And why should Shepard address the crew? He can even turn down the opportunity in ME1.

Not the point. The Normandy was in drydock, with retrofits underway - which is why (I assume) there is no doctor onboard. The people onboard were not prepared for or expecting to deploy. You can have conversations with Traynor about her adjustments to her new role.
 

And Shepard does not "twiddle his thumbs" He prepares for the mission, checks his gear, equips armor etc. It is even shown when he grabs a Predator and chest plate.

For the Mars mission, yes. But Shepard should have had some time to do other things during the journey to the Citadel, which I would expect would take longer.

[AlanC9]

If your playtime is limited or interrupted, you might need to shutdown and walk away right in the middle of some lengthy segment where you cannot save. Where you pick it back up depends on the last time you were allowed to save.

In the case of ME3, it's likely that there's a more recent autosave.

[Pasquale1234]

In the case of ME3, it's likely that there's a more recent autosave.

Yes, if you use autosave - which I rarely do.

Autosave wrecked some important files for me just a couple of days ago. On PS3, it is not unusual for the system to freeze after a few hours of play. When that happens, the only solution is the off button. It typically locks up when I try to move Shepard, so I always keep Shepard still when manually saving.

I'd just returned from Sanctuary, did the debriefing with Hackett, started to walk to the War Room, and the game started autosave, then froze up. Some file(s) were damaged in the process.

Here's what I lost (that I know of at this point:
-- Readiness was reset to 50% (it was 100%)
-- All bonus powers gone. I'll have to unlock them again.
-- Some trophy data was reset. I did get the Insanity cheevo when I finished that playthrough, but Unwavering was reset and now shows only the missions I completed after the autosave problem. Some other trophies I had completed no longer show up as complete when I look at them via the Options menu in-game, though they are still complete on PSN.

So - not a big fan of autosave.

[Vazgen]

@Pasquale1234 

I can see where are you coming from but I want to point out that it is not exclusive to ME3. There are similar cutscenes after certain squadmates' recruitment and loyalty missions, forced cutscenes for plot missions. And they are not shorter than ME3 interactions. There are 5 such instances in ME3 IIRC, Shroud discovery, Reaper base discovery on Rannoch, geth dreadnought debriefing, rachni mission, turian platoon and Tuchanka bomb mission debriefings. In ME2 there are the squadmate conflicts, Jacob's LM aftermath, Reaper IFF aftermath, Grunt recruitment aftermath. There are probably others in both games that I forget.

ME3 was more cinematic, yes, but it is not as drastic as you say, especially compared to ME2.

 

Of course ME1 will have the shorter time. Consider when it was made and the amount of content in the game. ME1 is much shorter than either ME2 or ME3.

 

The problem you mention exists in ME2 as well. I might say that it is even more pronounced due to longer loading times.

 

I still don't understand the point of Normandy not being fully staffed. It wasn't. So what?

 

During the trip to the Citadel Shepard is checking on Ash/Kaidan and (maybe) James. He/she says it himself/herself  

[CronoDragoon]

I think that's a bad implementation of a clock system. Looking around the game map for ten minutes shouldn't mean that the PC has wasted six hours staring at stuff. The only game I can think of offhand that used such time compression well is MotB, where making the player feel oppressed by his curse is pretty much the whole point of the game. I don't know enough about FF XIII to propose a better solution, though

 

The better solution was already done by Square years ago with Valkyrie Profile. Undertaking quests and dungeons passes time, but running around the overworld doesn't, and neither does time spent once you initiate the time-taking task. In other words, all that exploration time has already been abstracted into the "time chunk"  - which is static - taken up by doing the activity. 5 points out of 25 for an era once you enter a dungeon, for example, and once you hit 25 the main story automatically progresses. This is similar to an ME2 system but with more "time chunk" restrictions.

[Linkenski]

People are short sighted, look no further than the whole Nintendoomed thing.

Although they don't seem to show any signs of improving so there is something to the statement. What does it matter that Nintendo has enough money to continue making new systems and games if they just keep repeating the same mistakes that plagued Wii U's (and not to forget 3DS's) launch and lifetime.

[Golden_Persona]

Old Bioware IS dead, and I'm pretty sure that's been the claim the whole time. There's a difference between being dead and being broke. Bioware isn't broke, but the Old Bioware that used to produce high quality RPGs that would live on as classics is more certainly dead. Was DA:I a good game? Yes it definitely was. Will it stand the test of time? No. Dragon Age Origins is still the best DA game, and The Witcher 3, no offense, destroyed DA:I in almost every department. Ok that part may be subjective, but let's all agree Witcher 3 was much better received both critically and commercially.

 

CDprojektRed hasn't been producing nearly as much AAA games has Bioware have. They're fairly new in that department. But despite that, TW3 sold 3-4 times the amount that DA:I in it's first two weeks, and it wasn't even on as many platforms as DA:I. So that's something to consider here.

I don't hate Bioware, I still really enjoy their games, and I'm very much looking forward to Mass Effect 4. But they don't crap gold anymore. I did enjoy DA:I a lot, but it wasn't as good as it could've been. I don't think it lived up to the hype.

 

I really don't understand how people can think DA:O will stand the test of time. The characters are mostly bland and add absolutely nothing to the game, sans Leliana, Alistair and Morrigan. Sten spent the whole game doubting my every decision, even fought me once, and most of the time I forgot Win, Ohgren and Zevran were even in my party. Maybe their characterizations were better in the books, but they felt like they were just there to fill in class slots. Heck, from what I remember Sten, Leliana, Zevran and Win were all optional, and nothing is changed in the story whether you recruit them or not. Until DA2 where they brought back Leliana even if you decapitated her.

 

The main plot is pretty bland and cliche, even if the mini plots for each main mission were decent... and don't even get me started on gameplay. Slow, boring and floaty gameplay, where you're stuck watching recycled animation after recycled animation. Most of the upgrade trees were downright useless, no crafting whatsoever to speak of, mostly junk loot... what exactly do people see in that game? I always get confused how people complain that DA:I's combat is boring because all you have to do is hold down R2 or right trigger to kill everything... except in Origins you don't have to hold down a button at all. Just let the computer auto attack for you... that is if the game doesn't become dysfunctional because it can't find a path to the enemy you're targeting... when you're 3 feet away from them.

 

I always hear how Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire and KOTOR are amazing RPG masterpieces... but if they play anything like DA:O and ME:1 then I say the change was definitely a good thing. Maybe the stories were better told back then, but the gameplay sounds pretty atrocious. Being old, and being an RPG doesn't make the game inherently better. DA has always been behind the times when it came to RPGs imo.

[Golden_Persona]

I think you are selling DA O short
Sure its not perfect, the gameplay is too slow and the story is your typical saving the world story but it was executed well and the characters are easily DA's best (bland what?)

If anything DA I will not stand the test of time: its bad and lifeless open world and crazy amount of fetch quests, the lackluster short story (basically a rehash of DA O only rushed), the dumbed down gameplay, the boring and bland protag etc.
I'm not sure what people see in this terrible game

How can your average save the world plot NOT be handled well by even the least talented writing teams? Evil creatures born from people appear, heroes arise to kill them. Not complicated. How are the characters not bland? As I said Sten spent the whole game hating everything I did. Win, Ogren and Zevran were just there to fill class slots. I admit to liking Shale a lot, but aside from maybe 4 characters the rest were just sort of... there.

 

I never said Inquisition would stand the test of time so I don't know what you're arguing here. Calling it a terrible game is silly though. Not liking a game and a game being terrible are two totally different things. I like to think that being terrible is objective, not subjective. Notice how I never said Origins was a bad game, just behind the times I feel. I for one hate the Jak and Daxter games, but I recognize them as solid games. Bubsy 3D is an example of an objectively terrible game. The controls made the game unplayable and the level design wasn't even finished. Inquisition is far from that.

[Golden_Persona]

Wynne is there to give you the Circle perspective (especially since you'd only get it from being a Circle mage yourself). Zevran and Oghren aren't just filling class slots, but race slots. Token City Elf. Token Dwarf warrior. Also, the Dwarf is Steve Blum... who's awesome. He played Grunt, Wolverine, and Spike Spiegel. Come on.

 

I give Ogren points for being voiced by Steve Blum then lol. Also I played as a circle mage and when Wynne came up I barely remembered who she was. Once I completed the circle quest, arguably the worst main quest Bioware has ever designed, she became a part of my party and that was it. I was too smitten with Morrigan to give Wynne a fair shot I guess.

[Golden_Persona]

If I recall, the mage tower quest is so disliked by people that there's actually a PC mod that lets people skip it. That says a lot.