1395 réponses à ce sujet

[Natureguy85]

Because Bioware has not been trending in good directions. I didn't play Inquisition, but DA2 and ME3 made me cast a very cautious eye at it. I have heard such mixed responses to it that I haven't bought it yet and it will be awhile before I do, if I do. When I hear that people responsible for the horror that was ME3's story and ending will have a hand in Andromeda, it's a big red flag.

 

Besides, considering Mass Effect was a character driven series, I'm concerned about the move to a different galaxy and wondering how much, or rather how little, of the galaxy I enjoyed will be coming with.

[Drone223]

Besides, considering Mass Effect was a character driven series, I'm concerned about the move to a different galaxy and wondering how much, or rather how little, of the galaxy I enjoyed will be coming with.

Most likely little to none unfortunately, the game may as well be a new IP instead.

[In Exile]

Only one option exterminates Humanity anyway, and it's a moot point there.

I'm not talking about the actual endings. I mean that idea of the reapers being justified. The task is to come up with a scenario where genocide is justifiable in the eyes of the player. That's what IMO is total crazy town.

[Mcfly616]

I thought his idea was that reapers need organic biotic space magic to stabilize the unverse because of nonsense sci-fi dark matter stuff. Thats why they need genetic material and build human reaper and stuff. 

 Essentially, yes, that was Drew's spitball Dark Energy plot in a nutshell (sort of). And it's not nonsense. One day the Andromeda galaxy will collide with ours due to dark energy and what not. Either way, in Drew's plot humanity was still "special". The Reapers were a synthetic race birthed from the unification of entire organic civilizations due to the fact that only organic beings have the ability to manipulate and control dark energy within the MEU. 

 

So, having an army full of skyscraper sized starships with the ability to manipulate Dark Energy on a large scale, the Reapers have finally found the one race that will save the galaxy: humanity (becuz "duh"). 

 

Shepard would still face a choice. Only we'd only have 2 options. Allow the Reapers to harvest the human race into Optimus Reaper, spearheading an armada of guardians against cosmic disaster. With the master-race human Reaper at the forefront, the Reapers would contain the spread of Dark Energy and prevent the death of the Milky Way.

 

OR

 

Shep could tell the Reapers to shove it, blow them all to hell, and leave an uncertain future looming.

 

 

 

The premise of the Reapers was mostly based on The Inhibitors of Alastair Reynolds Revelation Space novels. Why they do what they do and all that.

 

I don't think Drew's dark energy plot was ever anything more than an interesting half-baked idea that was never fully thought out. I mean, Reapers are supposed to stop dark energy but they also spread it with their technology. Kinda backwards. That being said, had Drew stayed on I think he could've worked out the kinks and come up with something even more epic than what we got (for the record, I do find the current endings to be epic in their own right)

[DesioPL]

One of these days maybe someone will finally explain to me which ME3 problems EA's responsible for.

 

Both ME3 and Kingdoms Of Amalur: Reckoning was released in 2012. But KOA:R was released month earlier than ME3 and guess what? EA was more focused in campaign for ME3 than KOA:R which in result, devs who maked Rise Of Nations and KOA:R are close thier studio, since EA politic is an pure bad.

 

What i mean? There is many reasons and many people who don't like and don't trust EA as company, if we look at Pandemic and Danger Close studios. i want only remind, that Pandemic was a creators of Star Wars Battlefront 2, which for many people is still one of best games in whole SW game list. New Battlefront is only an profanation.

 

What i mean again? If Bioware is going to make again mess and fail with ME:A. Is possible that they will end like Pandemic and Danger Close. Or even Westwood.

[Dantriges]

 Essentially, yes, that was Drew's spitball Dark Energy plot in a nutshell (sort of). And it's not nonsense. One day the Andromeda galaxy will collide with ours due to dark energy and what not. Either way, in Drew's plot humanity was still "special". The Reapers were a synthetic race birthed from the unification of entire organic civilizations due to the fact that only organic beings have the ability to manipulate and control dark energy within the MEU. 

 

...

 

I don't think Drew's dark energy plot was ever anything more than an interesting half-baked idea that was never fully thought out. I mean, Reapers are supposed to stop dark energy but they also spread it with their technology. Kinda backwards. That being said, had Drew stayed on I think he could've worked out the kinks and come up with something even more epic than what we got (for the record, I do find the current endings to be epic in their own right)

 

It still has its fair share of problems.

If the whole point of the harvest was creating Reapers to combat the threat that dark energy technology poses, a continous harvest would have been the better idea. Set yourself up as gods and demand the old, ill and infirm or take the more evil "the gods need sacrifices to make the sun show up every day."

 

Or well, paragon Reaper   would be: "Hi, new spacefaring species, you discovered dark energy manipulation and spaceflight. That´s a huge accomplishment but it will result in stars going supernova. We need your old and terminally ill people to combat that threat. Oh and they will become immortal and join in everlasting bliss. Here is the data."

Ok, quite a bit PR speech inside.   Throw in a "Do as we say or else" for people who don´t comply. You could offeran alternative like "if you build your technology around something else than dark energy manipulation, we leave you alone." Pollution control is much more effective when EPA has orbital guns bombing you into the stone age if you violate DE environmental standards.

 

And well, there was this stumbling block that humanity is a weak biotic race if you wanted to make it about the humans and it doesn´t have the same impact to feed the asari into the gaping reaper maw.

 

Oh and the problem that the choice humanity as a reaper or hoping you have a solution in a few hundred years is a rather stupid one. You get more people in a few hundred years than in one sweeping killing spree if the species in question agrees to turn over people who are dying anyways.  Forced body donation is better than extinction. Ok it´s rather abstract for war generation humans but krogans or asari could experience the galaxy going kaboom in their lifetime.

 

Got a question too. Isn´t Andromeda colliding with the Milky Way in a few billion years  because they are both moving objects who pass through the same place billions of years in the future, not because of dark energy?

[IMNOTCRAZYiminsane]

Both ME3 and Kingdoms Of Amalur: Reckoning was released in 2012. But KOA:R was released month earlier than ME3 and guess what? EA was more focused in campaign for ME3 than KOA:R which in result, devs who maked Rise Of Nations and KOA:R are close thier studio, since EA politic is an pure bad.

 

What i mean? There is many reasons and many people who don't like and don't trust EA as company, if we look at Pandemic and Danger Close studios. i want only remind, that Pandemic was a creators of Star Wars Battlefront 2, which for many people is still one of best games in whole SW game list. New Battlefront is only an profanation.

 

What i mean again? If Bioware is going to make again mess and fail with ME:A. Is possible that they will end like Pandemic and Danger Close. Or even Westwood.

Correct me if i'm Wrong but EA wasnt the sole publisher for KOA:R there was also Big Huge Games, who took out a loan that fucked them over big time. KOA:R Failed because it just had to be born a few months after Skyrim. Not only that but their was barely any advertisements out for it. I didnt find out about it until i was able to get it for free on my psplus on PS3

 

I understand you hate EA, but don't say everything is their fault. Bioware is doing just fine there are a lot of Fans who love their games enough to clearly make them successful 

 

Btw Im not saying for people to trust EA, I for one don't really care as long as they keep publishing games that I want,  just getting annoyed at people riding the hate train with EA when everything wrong with a video game isnt 100% their fault. 

[DesioPL]

Correct me if i'm Wrong but EA wasnt the sole publisher for KOA:R there was also Big Huge Games, who took out a loan that fucked them over big time. KOA:R Failed because it just had to be born a few months after Skyrim. Not only that but their was barely any advertisements out for it. I didnt find out about it until i was able to get it for free on my psplus on PS3

 

I understand you hate EA, but don't say everything is their fault. Bioware is doing just fine there are a lot of Fans who love their games enough to clearly make them successful 

 

Btw Im not saying for people to trust EA, I for one don't really care as long as they keep publishing games that I want,  just getting annoyed at people riding the hate train with EA when everything wrong with a video game isnt 100% their fault. 

I think we got diffrent definition for hate. I do not hate EA, but we can blame them for fails. Pushing devs by publishers to release earlier games isin't good, best example you got Gothic 3. Jowood vs Piranhna Bytes conflict. Also remind me, but when is really good NFS game released? And about KOA:R. As i said. KOA:R was released month earlier than ME3, but EA was focused mainly in campaign ME3, in result KOA:R was not sold as was excepted and Big Huge Games was closed.

[Sartoz]

So you're saying EA made a mistake by giving a game developer freedom to develop the game?

                                                                                      <<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>

 

My understanding is that Casey Hudson wanted more time but was pressured to finish the game.

 

Nevertheless, the freedom here is the freedom of game directors/producers/executives to say whatever they feel is necessary to sell the game. For example: here is a partial quote from a PC Gamer interview with Hudson:

 

"...If you really build a lot of stuff and bring people to your side and rally the entire galaxy around you, and you come into the end game with that, then you'll get an amazing, very definitive ending...."

 

And that ending was truly an unexpected tri-coloured choice... eh?

From a PC Gamer article titled : bioware-on-how-your-choices-determine-mass-effect-3s-ending

source: http://www.pcgamer.c...ed_fragment_=#!

 

Gamers educating themselves about the "sales pitch"  which includes representative game video cinematics vs actual game content is the best way to keep a game company honest.

[Torgette]

                                                                                      <<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>

 

My understanding is that Casey Hudson wanted more time but was pressured to finish the game.

 

Nevertheless, the freedom here is the freedom of game directors/producers/executives to say whatever they feel is necessary to sell the game. For example: here is a partial quote from a PC Gamer interview with Hudson:

 

"...If you really build a lot of stuff and bring people to your side and rally the entire galaxy around you, and you come into the end game with that, then you'll get an amazing, very definitive ending...."

 

And that ending was truly an unexpected tri-coloured choice... eh?

From a PC Gamer article titled : bioware-on-how-your-choices-determine-mass-effect-3s-ending

source: http://www.pcgamer.c...ed_fragment_=#!

 

Gamers educating themselves about the "sales pitch"  which includes representative game video cinematics vs actual game content is the best way to keep a game company honest.

 

Destroy ending confirmed as definitive ending.

[DesioPL]

                                                                                      <<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>

 

My understanding is that Casey Hudson wanted more time but was pressured to finish the game.

 

Nevertheless, the freedom here is the freedom of game directors/producers/executives to say whatever they feel is necessary to sell the game. For example: here is a partial quote from a PC Gamer interview with Hudson:

 

"...If you really build a lot of stuff and bring people to your side and rally the entire galaxy around you, and you come into the end game with that, then you'll get an amazing, very definitive ending...."

 

And that ending was truly an unexpected tri-coloured choice... eh?

From a PC Gamer article titled : bioware-on-how-your-choices-determine-mass-effect-3s-ending

source: http://www.pcgamer.c...ed_fragment_=#!

 

Gamers educating themselves about the "sales pitch"  which includes representative game video cinematics vs actual game content is the best way to keep a game company honest.

 

Sartoz made an point, as i previously mentioned about Jowood vs Piranha Bytes conflict in Gothic 3 release term.

[Sartoz]

 Snip

As you recognize, the fundamental calculus here is the problem: in order for the enemy to pose a credible threat all the way up to an apocalyptic finale, it has to be really strong, and it's simply not possible for most such enemies to be so thoroughly defeated in a single Bond-movie battle that their threat could just evaporate and be satisfactorily wiped out by the end of the story.

 Snip

                                                                                         <<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>

 

While I do not like the ending(s), that single Bond-movie battle you speak of is credible, provided you agree with the premise that the machine intelligence call Catalyst has:

1. Acknowledged its reasoning behind the 50K cycle for destroying organic life is faulty

2. The Repears and Mass Relays were built with a self-destruct button.

 

 Once the machine intelligence saw its error, it bowed to organic intelligence for a resolution.

 

 The problem, here, is that Bio sold the game with "a gamer's decisions influences the end-game" and the studio painted itself into a corner with that simple binary win-lose apocalyptic finale and blew away the game studio's manipulated expectations (from their promos).

[SolNebula]

It's BSN nothing new here.....keep moving.

[Mastone]

I find it strange that the OP really wonders why people are skeptical about ME:4 

ME:3 was an insult of the magnitude of Indiana Jones 4 or any of the starwars prequels and I agree with many here that the ending needs to be addressed in a meaningful/ logical way .

 

And if you were to inquire further then yes I would say that I am distrustful of Bioware /EA.
Looking at their game mechanics it hasn't changed from KOTOR 1 and imo it has gotten worse , companions are all love interests and if you do not engage them they somehow are incapable of doing their job which is totally improbable and doesn't invoke believe-ability which is always the key point of a good story.

From an overall perspective I am beginning to see some patterns:

Dragon Age Origins is a game I enjoyed playing, I have never taken a good look at Dragon Age 2 but am not hearing things that make me want to play, but I was looking to buy Dragon Age 3 and because the aforementioned loss of trust I looked at a YT video of 5-10 minutes of gameplay and it looked just like an MMO with a lot of the pointless fetch quests that accompany it.

Mass Effect 1 was a game which fully engaged me and although it had its fair share of bugs too, it never broke the experience for me, ME2 looked better and some gameplay mechanics were refined but all the companion characters had daddy issues and the whole game felt kind of "off" to me but as I knew that ME3 was coming I hoped that it was just a calm before the storm kind of thing, when I finished ME3 I was disgusted not only about the ludicrous ending but the entire ramp up to it ( from the day 1 DLC  to the linear character and choices made in ME1 and 2 are rendered pointless unless you like to read results in an email from teh terminal)

KOTOR 1 was a great game with a good plot, KOTOR 2 ( I  know Obsidian made it) was a bit less but nonetheless worthwhile and I was actually awaiting KOTOR 3 when they released SW:TOR... a story based MMO... yeah right. 

 

Now I understand it's all about money, but I don't see why making games less and less with each release and not innovate gameplay wise or taking an occasional risk is helping profits ( in the long run it will decline I suspect because you are eroding consumer trust)

[elrofrost]

Most likely little to none unfortunately, the game may as well be a new IP instead.

And that's my point. If Bioware doesn't even acknowledge Shepard and company they might as well call it a reboot and change the name. To do otherwise is insulting.

 

Citadel (the ME3 DLC) is what saved the series for me. I was so disgusted with Kai Lang (among other things - such as pretty much ignoring every ME2 char) that i swore I'd never buy another Bioware/EA IP again.

 

But Citadel was so good I said, what the hey, and pre-ordered DAI. I might as well had reupped my Warcraft subscription. So this time, i don't care. Bioware is gonna have to earn my faith back. ME4 (or whatever they call it) will have to be flawless if they want me to spend $60+ on it. And flawless means they better deal with Shepard and company - not just ignore them.  Else I'll wait a year and buy it off the 10 dollar rack.

You know, I got a strange feeling ME4 is gonna be like COD in space. Mark my words.

 

[Altair_ShepardN7]

And that's my point. If Bioware doesn't even acknowledge Shepard and company they might as well call it a reboot and change the name. To do otherwise is insulting.

 

Citadel (the ME3 DLC) is what saved the series for me. I was so disgusted with Kai Lang (among other things - such as pretty much ignoring every ME2 char) that i swore I'd never buy another Bioware/EA IP again.

 

But Citadel was so good I said, what the hey, and pre-ordered DAI. I might as well had reupped my Warcraft subscription. So this time, i don't care. Bioware is gonna have to earn my faith back. ME4 (or whatever they call it) will have to be flawless if they want me to spend $60+ on it. And flawless means they better deal with Shepard and company - not just ignore them.  Else I'll wait a year and buy it off the 10 dollar rack.

You know, I got a strange feeling ME4 is gonna be like COD in space. Mark my words.

 

 

I wont feel insulted. I have no problems moving on and leaving the old behind. 

[Iakus]

And that's my point. If Bioware doesn't even acknowledge Shepard and company they might as well call it a reboot and change the name. To do otherwise is insulting.

 

Citadel (the ME3 DLC) is what saved the series for me. I was so disgusted with Kai Lang (among other things - such as pretty much ignoring every ME2 char) that i swore I'd never buy another Bioware/EA IP again.

 

But Citadel was so good I said, what the hey, and pre-ordered DAI. I might as well had reupped my Warcraft subscription. So this time, i don't care. Bioware is gonna have to earn my faith back. ME4 (or whatever they call it) will have to be flawless if they want me to spend $60+ on it. And flawless means they better deal with Shepard and company - not just ignore them.  Else I'll wait a year and buy it off the 10 dollar rack.

You know, I got a strange feeling ME4 is gonna be like COD in space. Mark my words.

 

Not acknowledging Shepard or the crew isn't a problem for me.  I'm more than willing to move on from that.  Even before the ending fiasco.

 

It's ditching the entire freaking setting that makes it Mass Effect in name only for me.

[Kadust]

I totally agree with this topic.

[Drone223]

Not acknowledging Shepard or the crew isn't a problem for me.  I'm more than willing to move on from that.  Even before the ending fiasco.

 

It's ditching the entire freaking setting that makes it Mass Effect in name only for me.

Exactly, from what was seen it may as well be a new IP instead.

[dreamgazer]

Not acknowledging Shepard or the crew isn't a problem for me.  I'm more than willing to move on from that.  Even before the ending fiasco.

 

It's ditching the entire freaking setting that makes it Mass Effect in name only for me.

 

So, are you officially out then?

[Nohvarr]

So, are you officially out then?

And give up the chance to continue complaining? I think not.

[Iakus]

So, are you officially out then?

We'll see.  Maybe they'll pull off a miracle and have something that actually makes sense.

 

Otherwise, yeah, I'm out.

 

Edit:  off course, I'd probably pass on the game anyway, given their recent attitude shift towards multiplayer in DAI.

[Nohvarr]

We'll see.  Maybe they'll pull off a miracle and have something that actually makes sense.

 

Otherwise, yeah, I'm out.

I don't believe you. If you haven't left by now you are not going anywhere.

[dreamgazer]

We'll see. Maybe they'll pull off a miracle and have something that actually makes sense.

Otherwise, yeah, I'm out.

What would be a "miracle"?

[Iakus]

I don't believe you. If you haven't left by now you not going anywhere.

Ask me how much I care what you think.

 

Better yet, don't

 

What would be a "miracle"?

 

If I knew that, it wouldn't be a miracle.