82 réponses à ce sujet

[N7_Salohcin]

Seeing how the only material that has been officially released for Andromeda is the announce trailer and a few images of concept art, I am having difficulty understanding your frustration to the point where its difficult to respond to your concern... its not even going to be released until late 2016 dude. We literally only know surface details, and who knows if that leaked survey is even accurate. Even if it is, things can change. No point in worrying about it till we know more.

[CHRrOME]

Let's say the leaked survey thingy is actually true, let's say the game will be just like it was described there (which was not so much info after all). We still do not know how things are gonna be, maybe the game will be super cool and fun. Until we have some actual confirmed information, some actual footage, or we can finally play the game, there's no way of knowing for certain.

If someone described to me the whole Mass Effect series in half a page (like that survey) I'd probably believe the game was 'okay' at best. And yet ME1 was great, ME2 was very good and ME3... I rather not talk about it, but you get the idea.

 

Okay, about the race selection. In one comment back in page 1 you said that you do not understand why people say that different races don't feel... well, different.

Basically if you play as a Salarian you want to feel like a Salarian, not just look like a Salarian, if all races are going to act in the same way, behave in the same way, resolve things in the same way, then is not really a new race. It's just a human with a different skin (something like DA:I, although is not the best example ever).

If I give you an M16A2 (yes, a bloody M16) with a woodland camo and I pick the same M16A2 with an urban camo, what is the difference? both guns are the exact same, perform in the same way, just with a different pattern color. If I give you a red car and I pick the exact same car in blue, will your car be faster than mine? (assuming you are not an ork).

That's the feel for different races. They have to feel different, not just look different.

 

To truly make a worthy race selection, they should have a story suited for it. If all the races are gonna play the same, then it feels like a skin selection rather than race selection. ME:A probably has a story suited for humans like the original trilogy, so I'm assuming that's why there won't be a race selection.

 

Why did they choose a human story again? that answer I do not have.

[Helios969]

While I have some concerns we get space inquisition there's no real info out there to make any kind of rational judgement.

[Suron]

Let's say the leaked survey thingy is actually true, let's say the game will be just like it was described there (which was not so much info after all). We still do not know how things are gonna be, maybe the game will be super cool and fun. Until we have some actual confirmed information, some actual footage, or we can finally play the game, there's no way of knowing for certain.

If someone described to me the whole Mass Effect series in half a page (like that survey) I'd probably believe the game was 'okay' at best. And yet ME1 was great, ME2 was very good and ME3... I rather not talk about it, but you get the idea.

 

Okay, about the race selection. In one comment back in page 1 you said that you do not understand why people say that different races don't feel... well, different.

Basically if you play as a Salarian you want to feel like a Salarian, not just look like a Salarian, if all races are going to act in the same way, behave in the same way, resolve things in the same way, then is not really a new race. It's just a human with a different skin (something like DA:I, although is not the best example ever).

If I give you an M16A2 (yes, a bloody M16) with a woodland camo and I pick the same M16A2 with an urban camo, what is the difference? both guns are the exact same, perform in the same way, just with a different pattern color. If I give you a red car and I pick the exact same car in blue, will your car be faster than mine? (assuming you are not an ork).

That's the feel for different races. They have to feel different, not just look different.

 

To truly make a worthy race selection, they should have a story suited for it. If all the races are gonna play the same, then it feels like a skin selection rather than race selection. ME:A probably has a story suited for humans like the original trilogy, so I'm assuming that's why there won't be a race selection.

 

Why did they choose a human story again? that answer I do not have.

 

Because casual gamers don't care and it's harder to "relate" to an alien species.  Hence why they're going human again since they're sticking with only one race option.  Being an alien may not matter to you, or me, it may even be preferable...but for the typical "casual" gamer, they want to BE human.  Hence why we're only humans again...or at least in very large part.  Besides it's about colonizing, etc..they're not going to have the focus of such a thing, esp after ME1-3, be on the Turian, or Quarian, point of view.  It's going to be human PoV.

 

And while it's nice to have choice, as you said, other races are basically just skins and otherwise human-like anyway.  homogenized like DA:I ? no thank you.

 

But yah...the "why" they chose human again should be more than obvious.

[Sidney]

I can tell you, without lying, that I found TW2 to be a complete dud.  So much so that I have not even watched footage from TW3.  And one of the biggest reasons was the fact that I found it virtually impossible to RP as Geralt.  I found that character to be completely uninteresting to me.  I will take a blank-slate PC like those in TES over a stereotypical pre-determined character with some leeway in personality any day.  But, that's my subjective opinion, just like your opinion is also subjective.  But, I really don't want to see this turn into yet another TW3 vs. Bioware game thread.  Just wanted to point out that your opinion isn't shared by everyone.  And I say this as someone who's been playing RPGs for about 30 years.

TES my character is a pile of inventory and stats not a "person" who has motivations and goals. Ask anyone about their TES character and they will rattle off a list of skills and items. Ask someone about Shep and the first thing they tell you about is paragon or renegade which is telling you something about the character not the characters stats. That is a what I am looking for in role playing, the chance to shape by character not build up a mass of skills.

Witcher, KOTOR, Planescape Tormet, Mass Effect, Fallout all of them are all single "species" games where there are other races or species and all of those are light years better role playing experiences than TES games despite much less choice on your main character you get cause they have defined a lot more clearly a main character. There is a place for the grind and level stuff and I've played enough Borderlands and even the TES games to wear that badge...but that isn't what I want in a story driven game.

[Aesa]

 

i dont like when people judge a game they know nothing of. dont judge unless you play it... :/

 

That's stupid if someone sees something that they dislike about a product/potential product they have every right in the world to voice their issues with it.

"Don't judge unless you play it!", "Once you've played the game then you can have an opinion!".

No. People can judge, will judge, and has the right to judge.

Tell me does that "don't judge unless you play it rule" apply to people who constantly sing praise after praise about a game, or does it only apply to people who have "not very nice" things to say?

Sorry but I'm not interested in encouraging a mindless hug box full of people who are incapable of/are afraid to voice opinions that could be considered "negative".

 

I'm not sure why you're being so aggressive towards someone who was voicing their opinion in a totally harmless way. Mercy's point is valid. Yes, people can and should judge, but it's ignorant to pass such a harsh judgment on something we have very little real information on. The rest of your response to her is largely a straw man tangent, because she said nothing at all about not being negative.

 

Everything you wrote in your original post is assuming that the leaked survey is fact, but regardless of what you believe, it is, at this point, only rumor. However let's presume it actually is true (something I concede is likely):

 

1.) The survey said nothing at all about saving Andromeda, only exploring and colonizing it whilst racing to uncover forgotten technology to "determine the fate of humanity." The plot could just as easily be about humanity's attempt to forge a place in a new untamed galaxy while defending themselves from those who would try to stop them. To me, it sounds closer to old expeditionary/wild west history than "ogm we gots to save the universe again!"

 

2.) DAI's leak was met largely with hype, whereas the response to Andromeda's has been rather lukewarm. Fans have expressed their concerns on both it and the announcement trailer over and over (and over and over) again. What we know about MEA is highly likely to change between now and its final product. A final product you know nothing about, which goes back to Mercy's point on not judging something you have no knowledge or experience with.

 

I agree with you that it's important for fans to share their criticism and concern with Bioware, but I believe that it should be done in a constructive and civil way--not with aggression, assumptions and cynicism. 

[N7_Salohcin]

TES my character is a pile of inventory and stats not a "person" who has motivations and goals. Ask anyone about their TES character and they will rattle off a list of skills and items. Ask someone about Shep and the first thing they tell you about is paragon or renegade which is telling you something about the character not the characters stats. That is a what I am looking for in role playing, the chance to shape by character not build up a mass of skills.

Witcher, KOTOR, Planescape Tormet, Mass Effect, Fallout all of them are all single "species" games where there are other races or species and all of those are light years better role playing experiences than TES games despite much less choice on your main character you get cause they have defined a lot more clearly a main character. There is a place for the grind and level stuff and I've played enough Borderlands and even the TES games to wear that badge...but that isn't what I want in a story driven game.

 

I agree. I was a huge fan of TES games in the past but eventually became so bored and tired of its much left to be desired RPG and cookie cutter character mechanics. Just didn't feel like a really unique experience for me in the end. I loved the lore, but having a silent character being unable to make any real decisions, race decision playing no prominent role, etc... beside the point of needing to have countless mods to make the games playable.

 

 

I'm not sure why you're being so aggressive towards someone who was voicing their opinion in a totally harmless way. Mercy's point is valid. Yes, people can and should judge, but it's ignorant to pass such a harsh judgment on something we have very little real information on. The rest of your response to her is largely a straw man tangent, because she said nothing at all about not being negative.

 

Everything you wrote in your original post is assuming that the leaked survey is fact, but regardless of what you believe, it is, at this point, only rumor. However let's presume it actually is true (something I concede is likely):

 

1.) The survey said nothing at all about saving Andromeda, only exploring and colonizing it whilst racing to uncover forgotten technology to "determine the fate of humanity." The plot could just as easily be about humanity's attempt to forge a place in a new untamed galaxy while defending themselves from those who would try to stop them. To me, it sounds closer to old expeditionary/wild west history than "ogm we gots to save the universe again!"

 

2.) DAI's leak was met largely with hype, whereas the response to Andromeda's has been rather lukewarm. Fans have expressed their concerns on both it and the announcement trailer over and over (and over and over) again. What we know about MEA is highly likely to change between now and its final product. A final product you know nothing about, which goes back to Mercy's point on not judging something you have no knowledge or experience with.

 

I agree with you that it's important for fans to share their criticism and concern with Bioware, but I believe that it should be done in a constructive and civil way--not with aggression, assumptions and cynicism. 

 

 

This.

[timebean]

Just my person opinion...

 

I disagree with the implication that folks who are fine playing as a human, or who think races need to be more than skin-deep, do not know how to roleplay.

 

I played Skyrim.  I roleplayed the crap out of it.  My Nord HATED the high elves and took pleasure in tearing them to shreds. She camped out and wore animal skins and hunted.  She was a beast. But ultimately, the skin I wore made so little difference, that it did not really matter.  I dug it, sure, but it did not change the world or how people responded to me in any meaningful way. 

 

And this isn't because I don't have an imagination.  It's because when I went through and played a a high elf, it was still the same damned game.  My high elf could still join up with the Nord rebels?  Seriously?  The ability to make your roleplaying decisions mean anything in that particular game world was minimal.  And if I wanted to just use my imagination to roleplay...I would not be playing a video game. I would be zoning out the bus-stop. And there would be a hot male alien with me...but not a gross one...one with like a minor brow ridge, but who still looked human enough to make out with me. Sigh...why do I even both with games?

 

Ahem.  Back to it.

 

I would love to play other races in ME:A, but only IF it was a meaningful role-playing experience. In DAO, all they did was give each race its own origin story with a few brief mentions here and there to remind you that you were a an efl/human.dwarf.  Nothing too big.  Nothing that took a great amount of resources. HOWEVER, the intro was so powerful in each one of my playthroughs, that it really did affect the way I actually roleplayed my character.  My city elf straight up HATED humans.  All of them.  Even gooey Alistair.  She was pissed off! Humans were jerks and she saw it and she hated them, the Grey Wardens, the whole damned world! And that really did affect the story in major ways...even the final outcome at the Landsmeet. So, despite being simple, in my opinion, DAO shows how multiple races could be done properly.  Enough room for me to develop my character how I wanted, but enough agency to get me started and to make me care about it.

 

In DAI, I had more race options...but there was absolutely NO agency and few mentions of it.  Every single play-through felt exactly the same to me.  No matter how much I would squeeze my (granted) paltry imagination, there was not a drop of difference in the game. It was just a skin...like Skyrim. And that is why it is not longer on my PC. I feel like my renegade female Shep and paragon male Shep in ME felt more different than my human male and quunari female in DAI.

 

So IF they were going to make playable races in ME;A, I personally hope they make it meaningful.  Perhaps it is because I am not imaginative enough to be a deep roleplayer. I'll accept that. Even still...horns and hair alone do not a qunari make!

[mopotter]

Here's the thing, tell me and try not to lie, that The Witcher with many fewer "options" than TES games isn't a better role playing experience. Fewer options isn't a limiter on role playing as I said it is about depth not breadth and deeper games give you more ways to role play your character than having a homogenized game where all actions are the same. That is the difference between role playing and playing the TES games which are less about role playing and more about character management and progression.

You would have to pay me a lot of money to play any of the Witcher series.      I'm not interested in having a set protagonist whether it's Laura Croft or Adam Jensen.   Role playing, for me, means I can make my character male or female, different class, sometimes different race.   

 

It's why I play a limited number of games, and those I play I keep to replay.  BioWare is one of those game companies I keep.  Borderlands, Dragon Dogma Fall Out, Elder Scrolls, TOR, Diablo - these are my game choices.  Game experience is personal and what I look for in a gaming experience isn't the same as someone else.  Luckily I can find a number of games that satisfy my interest.

[AllianceGrunt]

You would have to pay me a lot of money to play any of the Witcher series.      I'm not interested in having a set protagonist whether it's Laura Croft or Adam Jensen.   

 

Exactly! He never asked for this. 

[Mdizzletr0n]

Not that I will agree that the game is necessarily a missed opportunity well before playing it, I will agree that there are multiple ways to create a Mass Effect game that occurs in the MWG. The easiest of course being set in the time around ME1 and ME2, especially in the years when Shepard is presumed dead.

That actually may not have been bad. Since it always felt like everyone just sat on their hands when Shepherd died and said "Welp...Shep's gone. Shut it all down. Nothing more to do here. We're screwed."

[daveliam]

TES my character is a pile of inventory and stats not a "person" who has motivations and goals. Ask anyone about their TES character and they will rattle off a list of skills and items. Ask someone about Shep and the first thing they tell you about is paragon or renegade which is telling you something about the character not the characters stats. That is a what I am looking for in role playing, the chance to shape by character not build up a mass of skills.

Witcher, KOTOR, Planescape Tormet, Mass Effect, Fallout all of them are all single "species" games where there are other races or species and all of those are light years better role playing experiences than TES games despite much less choice on your main character you get cause they have defined a lot more clearly a main character. There is a place for the grind and level stuff and I've played enough Borderlands and even the TES games to wear that badge...but that isn't what I want in a story driven game.

 

I disagree about TES.  If you asked me about my Skyrim character, stats are one thing I would mention, but only because they sub-in for classes in that game (for example, I'd mention that my 'main' character is a two-handed warrior with high archery, but that's not any different than saying that my main Inquisitor is a two-handed champion).  I would talk about motivation, goals, etc.  Perhaps you play those game differently than I do, but recognize that you choose to play those games in a particular way.  If your insinuation is that you can't role-play in TES games because the characters are just 'skins', then that's on you.  Granted, it's find to play them that way.  But it's not a universal experience.

 

With regard to major decisions effecting the world, from what I hear, that's no better in TW3.  In fact, that's one of the most consistent complaints about that game series:  lack of real long-term, world-altering consequences (because it's from a set source material).

 

And, just to clarify, I totally agree that TES has weak 'main' plotlines.  For me, it's all about having my characters (each different with different motivations/goals/attitudes) living in this vast 'open' world.  That's the thing that TES offers that games with set protagonists don't offer. 

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Here's the thing, tell me and try not to lie, that The Witcher with many fewer "options" than TES games isn't a better role playing experience. Fewer options isn't a limiter on role playing as I said it is about depth not breadth and deeper games give you more ways to role play your character than having a homogenized game where all actions are the same. That is the difference between role playing and playing the TES games which are less about role playing and more about character management and progression.

Okay. The Elder Scrolls franchise is a better roleplaying experience than the Witcher franchise for me. I mean that sincerely. The more a character is defined, the less possible it is to roleplay. It's why I prefer protagonists like the Inquisitor over protagonists like Hawke or Shepard. 

[Kappa Neko]

*snip*

This very true...

However, I played an elf in DAI who romanced Solas, and that helped me feel like I was actually not playing a human. I agree though that there were few instances where my character's race was addressed. It was an improvement over DAO to me for sure though.

 

I'd LOVE to play an alien in ME:A singleplayer. But if I had to choose between good implementation of different personalities/choices and more race options, I'd gladly take human again. My sweet paragon Shep and my psycho renegade Shep were nothing alike. It was a very different experience. I enjoyed Hawke a lot more than my elf  warden and elf inquisitor too.

[Xaijin]

TES my character is a pile of inventory and stats not a "person" who has motivations and goals. Ask anyone about their TES character and they will rattle off a list of skills and items. Ask someone about Shep and the first thing they tell you about is paragon or renegade which is telling you something about the character not the characters stats. That is a what I am looking for in role playing, the chance to shape by character not build up a mass of skills.

Witcher, KOTOR, Planescape Tormet, Mass Effect, Fallout all of them are all single "species" games where there are other races or species and all of those are light years better role playing experiences than TES games despite much less choice on your main character you get cause they have defined a lot more clearly a main character. There is a place for the grind and level stuff and I've played enough Borderlands and even the TES games to wear that badge...but that isn't what I want in a story driven game.

Your inability to understand the context that drives the rpg experience is your problem not anyone else's and it certainly isn't universal, otherwise Skyrim wouldn't have outsold ME3 by a factor of 6.

[AlanC9]

I've seen people play the "your tastes in game design are just because you don't understand X" bit before. I've never seen it work.

I'm sure Sidney will give you a thorough working-over if he bothers to read this, but I think you're badly misreading his point, which is that the context isn't really there in Skyrim. You can pretend it is, sure, but that's not the same thing.

As for sales, are you sure Skyrim doesn't sell because you can ignore RP and just go out there and kill stuff without real consequences?

[Xaijin]

Seeing as Skyrim is still in the top 5/10 active user in ______ title chart on steam, and on both the nexus and workshop, quest fixes, character/race overhauls and immersion mods are downloaded more than combat overhauls by a factor of nearly 20, yeah I'm pretty sure. Point of fact, the most popular series of quest fixes has been downloaded more times than ME3 has sold copies.


Again, you're assuming some lawyertastic arguing is about to commence and it isn't; the highlighted post is opinion masqueraded as fact with "cause I think so" as the raison d'etre, which isn't terribly factual either. More choices, to a clearly and cleanly delineated extent tend to produce more positive experiences. That's not a supposition, that's how 40 years of buying and playing habits work. As long as the player isn't overwhelmed by the number of differential choices, they tend to associate the product as a more positive experience simply by having those choices exist.

[CHRrOME]

I played Skyrim.  I roleplayed the crap out of it.  My Nord HATED the high elves and took pleasure in tearing them to shreds. She camped out and wore animal skins and hunted.  She was a beast. But ultimately, the skin I wore made so little difference, that it did not really matter.  I dug it, sure, but it did not change the world or how people responded to me in any meaningful way. 

 

This

 

I feel like my renegade female Shep and paragon male Shep in ME felt more different than my human male and quunari female in DAI.

 

And this.

 

 

I like to believe that I have some imagination, but even so, trying to roleplay a game that does not change on the slightest with the different races you can pick... it just doesn't work. Granted, it can work for a while, but at the end it's all the same.

I think I started to play again Skyrim about 18th times. Of course I haven't finished it 18 times (beaten it 2 times I believe, my very first playthrough and some other 'lucky' playthrough at some point), and the reason because I start over and over and over again is because it gets so boring at some point being everything just the same as the previous playthrough, that I start again and try to roleplay a new character.

Downloaded a ridiculous amount of mods, to make it as immersive as possible and help me to feel the game different. It always end up in the same way, because every single quest is the same, nobody gives a flying F about whether you are a High Elf or an Orc, it's too damn repetitive. At some point if I don't use 3d person cam, I forget what race I'm playing with...

[Ahglock]

I roleplay both. To relate to tabletop games. In a home campaign where I make my own character I design and roleplay my character if we were handed pre-gens I still roleplay I just have a different character than what I'd normally design. Good and bad in both. One I have complete control the other I more influence how the character is.

[AlanC9]

@ Xaijin: So, first you start a lawyertastic argument and then you say you're not going to make one? You're such a tease. Just as well you weren't going to make one, since the one you started on seemed to be all non sequiturs.

Which post is the "highlighted" one, anyway? You mean Sidney's? Yeah, of course he's expressing his own judgement of the two RPG styles' relative worth. What else could such a post be?

Honestly, I don't see what the market argument could ever prove. Nobody makes arguments about film quality by trying to prove something with box office figures. Some great films make tons of money, some don't, some terrible films make tons of money. Why would such an argument work with games?

[goishen]

 Asari space cowgirl.

 

 

*imagines Liara in a pair of chaps, knot tied in front of her blouse, and a cowboy hat, with a piece of straw in her mouth *

 

Yes, this.   Please.   PLEASE!

 

"Having a bad day, Shepard?"  

 

PLEASE!

[AnAccountWithNoName]

Not that I will agree that the game is necessarily a missed opportunity well before playing it, I will agree that there are multiple ways to create a Mass Effect game that occurs in the MWG.  The easiest of course being set in the time around ME1 and ME2, especially in the years when Shepard is presumed dead.

 

I would actually prefer a return to the Milky Way, to be set pre-ME1.  I dont want ME 5 to be even another human focused game.  Give us a galaxy, in which Man hasn't reached the stars yet.  For the first time, let us play an Alien character in a campaign.  The Krogan Rebellion era, is a time period a game should be devoted to.  Playing as a Turian would make the most sense for that era.

 

However if Bioware is insistent on making the player human only, there are still ways to make a ME game without treading on ME3 or leaving the galaxy.  If we do get a game set between ME1 and ME2, I want the threat to be a local issue, we have gotten enough of the whole saving the galaxy thing.  A game in that time period, could also be set in just a few solar systems.

[Mercyva]

That's stupid if someone sees something that they dislike about a product/potential product they have every right in the world to voice their issues with it.

"Don't judge unless you play it!", "Once you've played the game then you can have an opinion!".

No. People can judge, will judge, and has the right to judge.

Tell me does that "don't judge unless you play it rule" apply to people who constantly sing praise after praise about a game, or does it only apply to people who have "not very nice" things to say?

Sorry but I'm not interested in encouraging a mindless hug box full of people who are incapable of/are afraid to voice opinions that could be considered "negative".

 

 

 

you can judge whatever you want, just remember, there are hundreds of people working on ME:A, and are human too. they work hard to give us a finished product. seeing this negativity online, in a place they might visit to keep doing more awesome things for us, its not helping anyone.

 

plus, i have opinions on ME:A and the trilogy, i just dont like to spread negativity and judgement in a game we know nothing of, plus your whole argument is about the leak. which mean nothing. remember we're more than a year from launch, anything can change! if you have an opinion, make it a constructive one. so yeah, have a good day.

[Sidney]

Your inability to understand the context that drives the rpg experience is your problem not anyone else's and it certainly isn't universal, otherwise Skyrim wouldn't have outsold ME3 by a factor of 6.

Maybe you are head cannon-ing all the stuff in Skyrim. You'd have to because precious little of anything is actually in the game. The game is the game, the part that interacts with you is what matters. Head cannon is pointless since you can head cannon up pretty much any game including Pac- Man (and if you can't you are missing the context driving the experience) so once you move past that and actually look at what the game is doing it makes all the difference in the world.

[Sidney]

Seeing as Skyrim is still in the top 5/10 active user in ______ title chart on steam, and on both the nexus and workshop, quest fixes, character/race overhauls and immersion mods are downloaded more than combat overhauls by a factor of nearly 20, yeah I'm pretty sure. Point of fact, the most popular series of quest fixes has been downloaded more times than ME3 has sold copies.
Again, you're assuming some lawyertastic arguing is about to commence and it isn't; the highlighted post is opinion masqueraded as fact with "cause I think so" as the raison d'etre, which isn't terribly factual either. More choices, to a clearly and cleanly delineated extent tend to produce more positive experiences. That's not a supposition, that's how 40 years of buying and playing habits work. As long as the player isn't overwhelmed by the number of differential choices, they tend to associate the product as a more positive experience simply by having those choices exist.

1. Sales figures <> quality. Taylor Swift > Vivaldi? Mike Bey > Akira Kurosawa? Skyrim > Planescape Torment or maybe Flappy Bird > XCOM? You also wrongly assume it is the role playing experience that sells Skyrim when the fact that it can be played as an endless kill-A-thon using the same skills one uses in COD isn't why it sells so many copies. Let's face it if you think the story is a major element of role playing (and it is because that is where you interact wi the world beyond killing things) TES clearly isn't selling anything based on the plot. Plus, it is equally clearly not playing as a tiger-man that is why it sells a bazillion copies. I'd bet the insanely overwhelming number of players are humans.

2. All posts on message boards are opinions unless one is trying to show a specific fact. When people don't have a good argument they devolve into the "na uh that is just like your opinion man" bit.