50 réponses à ce sujet

[AtreiyaN7]

As soon as someone offers up a sacrifice of a thousand slices of cheesecake to the gods? I figure human sacrifices are out, so dessert items are probably the next best thing.

[Sanunes]

There really is no difference between CG trailers and these sorts of "in-engine" trailers. Inquisition tried this BS with that first trailer and it looked about 12x better than the actual game ended up looking so "in-engine" means nothing when all they're doing is using a powerful engine to create CG trailers.
 

 

This could be why we aren't going to see anything soon because what we saw at that point could have been exactly what the final product of the game would have been, but during development things changed for simply they realized they needed to step down the graphics to work on the consoles. I think Bethesda did it right with Fallout 4 and I wish BioWare was doing the same thing with their games, don't say or show anything until just before release.

[Sully13]

GUYS i gave an exclusive sneek peak.

[Grieving Natashina]

I think I'd prefer they keep good ideas in the game.

Oh, I'm not arguing that.  Please don't mistake me.  What I was attempting and failing to get at was that if they are going to show examples of combat, dialogue wheels, quest styles, and all that, I don't want it to be something that could be cut later.  The mechanic for Crestwood, which I was also excited about initially, was something I was sad that they dropped as well.

 

Hopefully you can see the gist of what I was trying to say.  

[Sylvius the Mad]

Don't look now, but you've become a caricature of yourself.

Seeing gameplay isn't informative, because the important thing about gameplay is the player's decision-making that goes into it.  just watching gameplay shows us only the effects, not the causes.

 

The ruleset would be more valuable.

[Sanunes]

Inquisition was never going to look as good as that first "in-engine" trailer. No game looks that good. A game doesn't go from looking better than any game has ever looked or will look for years to come to looking just pretty good. It was a CG trailer with marketing spin put on it.

 

Fair enough if that criticism is directly solely on that first video, but I never felt that it was going to be anything near that for they even labeled it a teaser trailer. The later videos that started in 2014 I felt were pretty accurate of the final product.

[SardaukarElite]

Oh, I'm not arguing that.  Please don't mistake me.  What I was attempting and failing to get at was that if they are going to show examples of combat, dialogue wheels, quest styles, and all that, I don't want it to be something that could be cut later.  The mechanic for Crestwood, which I was also excited about initially, was something I was sad that they dropped as well.

 

Hopefully you can see the gist of what I was trying to say.  

 

I understand. What I meant was that the Crestwood demo justified having those big open areas in a Dragon Age game, it formed a core premise. So I think it was something that should have been shown off early as part of explaining what the entire point of the game was.

[Sylvius the Mad]

...

If I see a gameplay trailer showing me something that the character can do, I'm forced to ask what other options were available. The rule of cool does not sway me.

[KaiserShep]

Seeing gameplay isn't informative, because the important thing about gameplay is the player's decision-making that goes into it.  just watching gameplay shows us only the effects, not the causes.

 

The ruleset would be more valuable.

 

I'm not sure how they could really illustrate the ruleset to the audience at large without unraveling the proteins in their brains as a result of boredom. Rulesets are best left as info dropped in a thread or part of the BioWare blog, but as a presentation..meh. 

[ziyon conqueror]

I believe either N7 Day and/or the next The Game Awards

[Sylvius the Mad]

I'm not sure how they could really illustrate the ruleset to the audience at large without unraveling the proteins in their brains as a result of boredom. Rulesets are best left as info dropped in a thread or part of the BioWare blog, but as a presentation..meh.

I don't care how they provide them. But the rules should be provided.

You people can watch gameplay if you like. I'd rather extract that from the rules.

[Cyonan]

Seeing gameplay isn't informative, because the important thing about gameplay is the player's decision-making that goes into it.  just watching gameplay shows us only the effects, not the causes.

 

The ruleset would be more valuable.

 

Considering it's very likely that the game will be action based combat again, the ruleset isn't going to be a huge deal and gameplay trailers would be more effective to see how things like gunplay is going to be in that regards.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Considering it's very likely that the game will be action based combat again, the ruleset isn't going to be a huge deal and gameplay trailers would be more effective to see how things like gunplay is going to be in that regards.

I disagree. Regardless of the combat style. the ruleset is essential to understanding the combat.

[Oldren Shepard]

I hope too. Maybe in the N7 day.

[Stakrin]

CGI story trailer for N7 day, gameplay trailer for e3.

Then silence.
Then a month of game informer coverage.


Suddenly it reases holiday 2016

Edit: all a guess. Even the already-confirmed release date is an estimate and may be pushed back.

[RZIBARA]

gamescom? is bioware going to be there?

[MrFob]

- Watch_Dogs

- The Witcher 3

- The Devision

... I could go on.

 

All these endless discussions about graphics downgrades, false promises and endless delays. And now we are complaining that we don't see gameplay 18 months before the game will be released?

The communities got exactly got what they asked for. Look at the big new titles: Fallout 4, XCOM 2, Star Wars Battlefront, etc. Publishers reacted and are now showing of their games 6 month in advance of release instead of 2 years in advance. I was never part of the downgrade discussions (found them silly myself) but I am not opposed to this trend at all. I'd rather the devs are left alone to finish their game as a whole and then the Publisher can take stuff and show it. Because when EA shows us one level of a game 2 years in advance, then the devs will have worked for 3 months just to polish the heck out of that little bit, rather then building a cohesive hole game.

So as far as I am concerned, the later start of the marketing drum roar is one of the few positives that resulted from these incessant downgrade discussions. I don't really need to see gameplay until next year and I hope BW will be left alone to concentrate on making a good game as a whole for as long as possible

[SNascimento]

I don't see any trend about revealing gameplay. Some games reveal it sooner others latter. The Last of Us for example, had a significant downgrade but that didn't stop Naughty Dog from showing Uncharted 4 more than a year before its eventual release. 

I like to see gameplay sooner rather than latter because as I understand it shows confidence from the developers and I also associate it with good development time. 

[Cyonan]

I don't see any trend about revealing gameplay. Some games reveal it sooner others latter. The Last of Us for example, had a significant downgrade but that didn't stop Naughty Dog from showing Uncharted 4 more than a year before its eventual release. 

I like to see gameplay sooner rather than latter because as I understand it shows confidence from the developers and I also associate it with good development time. 

 

It more so depends on how long they've been working on the game rather than how long before release it is. You do want your gameplay to be in a decently polished state before you show it off. What you can also end up getting is heavily scripted trailers that aren't actually showing off natural gameplay as it wouldn't be ready yet.

The main reason for waiting until closer to release is to get people hyped up for the game just before it comes out with some big reveals.

 

I disagree. Regardless of the combat style. the ruleset is essential to understanding the combat.

 

The ruleset can be important, but Third Person Shooters are going to have pretty similar rulesets between them for the most part anyway when it comes to the core shooting mechanics.

 

Gunplay isn't something you can read numbers and rules for to figure out if it's going to feel good or not. Even a gameplay trailer isn't 100%, but it's the best you can do short of actually letting us play the game.

 

A ruleset isn't going to tell me if a gun sounds good when fired, if bullets hits enemies with a satisfying impact, or if moving around the battlefield feels natural and fluid.

[Sylvius the Mad]

A ruleset isn't going to tell me if a gun sounds good when fired, if bullets hits enemies with a satisfying impact, or if moving around the battlefield feels natural and fluid.

I don't think I care about those things.

[Sylvius the Mad]

The ruleset can be important, but Third Person Shooters are going to have pretty similar rulesets between them for the most part anyway when it comes to the core shooting mechanics.

Also, my experience with third-person shooters is remarkably limited. As a general rule, any game called a shooter is a game I don't play.

So relying on the conventions of the genre helps me not at all, since I don't know what they are.

[Cyonan]

I don't think I care about those things.

 

I don't think that's relevant to the idea that knowing the ruleset is more important than gameplay trailers "regardless of the combat style".

 

Also, my experience with third-person shooters is remarkably limited. As a general rule, any game called a shooter is a game I don't play.

So relying on the conventions of the genre helps me not at all, since I don't know what they are.

 

That's why I was saying that for the action/shooter based gameplay that showing a gameplay trailer is more important than listing off the ruleset.

 

Mass Effect has always been designed as a third person shooter, and the 2nd/3rd games has only reinforced that design philosophy. I feel very confident saying that ME:A is going to improve upon what they did in Mass Effect 3 with better third person shooting gameplay.

 

So showing off the gameplay trailer makes more sense than posting a ruleset.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I don't think that's relevant to the idea that knowing the ruleset is more important than gameplay trailers "regardless of the combat style".


That's why I was saying that for the action/shooter based gameplay that showing a gameplay trailer is more important than listing off the ruleset.

Mass Effect has always been designed as a third person shooter, and the 2nd/3rd games has only reinforced that design philosophy. I feel very confident saying that ME:A is going to improve upon what they did in Mass Effect 3 with better third person shooting gameplay.

So showing off the gameplay trailer makes more sense than posting a ruleset.

I just started ME3, and right out of the gate I think I'd understand the game better if I'd seen the rules first.

Shootet gameplay all looks basically the same to me (fast-paced and chaotic). Even playing the game now - not just watching it - I don't think I'm getting as much out of it as I would if I read the rules.

[N7Jamaican]

I believe either N7 Day and/or the next The Game Awards

 

Def N7 day, at least a gameplay trailer on N7 day.

[GaroTD]

Gamescom ? Anyone knows if they are going to show something there?