259 réponses à ce sujet

[Mcfly616]

Isn't it obvious ? They're going to go from destroying one galaxy to the next. I'm crossing my fingers that the installment after ME:A will be ME:S (the Sombrero Galaxy).

[Killroy]

Wait, what? MEA has a new team separate from the team behind the Trilogy?

That's.....dissappointing and frightening.

Who cares? The team behind the trilogy gave us the ME3 endings so I see no reason why having them make ME:A would be better than a new team.

You didn't answer my question: Have you ever been involved in a technology transfer?

Do you know what it's like to *completely* turn over assets created and maintained by one group of individuals to another, and have them take full responsibility for all of it?

Your question is entirely irrelevant. The ME:A team already had the game assets before work on ME:A even began. They made the ME3 multiplayer, which primarily used recycled assets, and the Omega DLC, which used many recycled assets.

[wolfhowwl]

Multiplayer DLC.

 

Games as a service.

[Pasquale1234]

Your question is entirely irrelevant.

I'll take that as a no.
 

The ME:A team already had the game assets before work on ME:A even began. They made the ME3 multiplayer, which primarily used recycled assets, and the Omega DLC, which used many recycled assets.

And they probably used a shared code base that was developed, supported, maintained by Edmonton. Using an engine, tools, and various forms of middleware is not the same thing as taking full responsibility for the ongoing care and feeding of those assets.

[Felps Cross]

I will say this - MEA will probably fall short of the Trilogy for one reason : Garrus

Probably the best written and developed character of any game. I do hope we get another Turian squad mate. Garrus was a bro

With this I 100% agree.

 

 

I guess I'm going to have to say what we've all been wanting to say.

 

Bioware, make Garrus a squadmate in Andromeda.  If it doesn't match the story, so be it.  Andromeda needs more Garrus.

 

No Mass Effect without Vakarian. New BSN warcry.

Lets not risk it. The guy is perfect the way it is. haha.

[Killroy]

I'll take that as a no.

You can take it however you want. It's entirely irrelevant.
 

And they probably used a shared code base that was developed, supported, maintained by Edmonton. Using an engine, tools, and various forms of middleware is not the same thing as taking full responsibility for the ongoing care and feeding of those assets.

Explain exactly how this would cause massive expense. They already had the series' assets so why would continuing to use them but having a larger responsibility with them incur major expense?

[RiptideX1090]

I've also found myself wondering at the future of the series. Is this a standalone game? An effective reboot completely cut off from the Milky Way that will leapfrog an entire trilogy in our new setting? Is it the beginning of a long series of episodic games that aren't very interconnected, like the DA series has generally been (which is to say a new protagonist every game)? Is this the final note, the funeral dirge of a series that is now at this point being milked for its name and nothing else? Maybe it's a factory reset, the transition from everything that diverged in the original trilogy, which will be brought together in this installment so the next series of games after it will be starting effectively fresh?

 

...I just wish they'd talk to us about it already... A year and a half is a very long time to wait...

[Killroy]

...I just wish they'd talk to us about it already... A year and a half is a very long time to wait...

Then it's a good thing you don't have to wait a year and a half.

And seriously, get a grip. You're not going to die if they don't spill the beans 14 or 15 months before release. They've hardly said anything about the game. They're not going to start talking about it's sequels any time soon.

[Pasquale1234]

You can take it however you want. It's entirely irrelevant.

What's relevant is that you chose to start arguing with me about something with which you have no apparent knowledge or experience.
 

Explain exactly how this would cause massive expense. They already had the series' assets so why would continuing to use them but having a larger responsibility with them incur major expense?

What I said was:

Transferring an IP to a different group is pretty costly in and of itself

... because it is. It's faster, cheaper, easier for someone who initially designed and built a thing to support and maintain it going forward. There's no learning curve, no knowledge deficiency, no need for knowledge transfer, no need for time to get up to speed, and minimal risk.

And by the way, you don't know that they already had all of the series' assets.

[Seboist]

Long-term plan? From Bioware?

 

Even a short-term one would be an improvement.

[Lyrandori]

How I see it... ( just speculation on my part )

 

Is that Mass Effect: Andromeda will be the first game of a new ME series. Not necessarily 'a new trilogy' per se, although that's probably what's going to happen, but could also just be 'a bunch of' isolated stories set within the Andromeda galaxy; each with their respective standalone game. In any case, quite obviously, I don't believe that Andromeda is the last of the Mass Effect franchise, it's too much of a cash cow for either EA or BioWare (but especially EA) to ignore. So, yes, the Mass Effect franchise will be milked over the coming decade, that's a guarantee. And a new trilogy is highly probable. In fact, in my book, I'd have a hard time imagining Andromeda not being the first game of a new trio, it's set in an entirely new galaxy... the possibilities are virtually endless.

[RoboticWater]

And by the way, you don't know that they already had all of the series' assets.

Actually, knowing EA's development infrastructure, they certainly do, unless a bunch of people seriously messed up. Every kind of asset (code, art, etc.) are all available across the entirety of EA studios. I recently listened to a talk by an EA dev who works on EA's golf franchise and the grass rendering algorithm his team made was implemented across basically all of EA's Frostbite games. There's no way a BioWare team wouldn't have access to the entire ME asset library.

 

Of course, given the changes to the aesthetic we've seen, I doubt many of those assets are immediately reusable.

[Pasquale1234]

Actually, knowing EA's development infrastructure, they certainly do, unless a bunch of people seriously messed up. Every kind of asset (code, art, etc.) are all available across the entirety of EA studios. I recently listened to a talk by an EA dev who works on EA's golf franchise and the grass rendering algorithm his team made was implemented across basically all of EA's Frostbite games. There's no way a BioWare team wouldn't have access to the entire ME asset library.
 
Of course, given the changes to the aesthetic we've seen, I doubt many of those assets are immediately reusable.

No surprise - but just because it's sitting on an accessible server doesn't mean anyone on your local team has any familiarity with it.

[RoboticWater]

No surprise - but just because it's sitting on an accessible server doesn't mean anyone on your local team has any familiarity with it.

If it's an art asset (sound, texture, model, etc.) then that should be immediately reusable unless the devs are massively incompetent.

 

If it's code, then possibly not, but development studio staff are quite fluid. If there's some code (like some component of a physics engine), then EA can generally move around some engineers to get it working quite easily (convincing someone to switch from FIFA to BioWare isn't a hard sell). Developer rotation ensures that most devs have enough general experience to adapt to any kind of assets.

[The Hierophant]

Long term gameplan?

 

Profit.

[dreamgazer]

Right now, their long-term plan is to release Mass Effect: Andromeda, and there's nothing wrong with that.

[BabyPuncher]

I have to wonder how many graphical assets are salvageable after almost a five-year timespan and console jump and how many are simply scrapped.

 

The ME team has generally far outpaced the DA team as far as technical matters go. I wouldn't be surprised to see quite a jump from DA:I.

[RoboticWater]

I have to wonder how many graphical assets are salvageable after almost a five-year timespan and console jump and how many are simply scrapped.

 

The ME team has generally far outpaced the DA team as far as technical matters go. I wouldn't be surprised to see quite a jump from DA:I.

Generally, art assets are first made as a high res asset (far higher pixel/polygon density than the game engine could possibly handle) and then simplified to a low res asset that is actually usable, so as long as BioWare are willing re-derive the low res assets to fit with the Frostbite engine, the sky's probably the limit. Of course, the art style of Mass Effect has evolved along with the game's technology, so BioWare might not want to use any of the old stuff regardless.

 

ME's technical superiority came mostly from the Unreal Engine that vastly outstripped DA's old Infinity Engine (or whatever its called) in terms of power. Now that everything's in Frostbite, I think the games will probably have a similar technical prowess. I could be wrong though.

[AlanC9]

... because it is. It's faster, cheaper, easier for someone who initially designed and built a thing to support and maintain it going forward. There's no learning curve, no knowledge deficiency, no need for knowledge transfer, no need for time to get up to speed, and minimal risk.

 

 

But didn't they already pay those costs back when they had Bio Montreal handle ME3MP?

[Mathias]

Go in with a negative attitude. See only negatives.

 

That's what's gonna happen.

 

Absolutely not true. Still sour from the ME3 endings, I went into the Citadel DLC with negative pre-conceived notions, and as of today Citadel is my favorite DLC from Bioware.

[Pasquale1234]

But didn't they already pay those costs back when they had Bio Montreal handle ME3MP?

Not necessarily.

And I've already addressed some questions about the differences between using base code and middleware that someone else developed versus taking over complete responsibility for it.

Not to mention - MP mostly reused SP assets, with a few new char kits, animations, powers thrown in.

Of course, this discussion seems to be focused primarily on code and graphics. It doesn't begin to address any of the realities of world-building, lore-building, species creation, or anything else involved in setting up the premise, goals, storylines, characters, mission structures of this whole new thing - or the process involved in converting this overall vision into something that's possible to realize within budget and fun to play.

[Sanunes]

BioWare is in a no-win situation for people want to know about the game, but if they share anything and it is not 100% accurate to the final product they are called liars or they mislead people intentionally.  I remember how upset people were when they released the video for Shepard's death before the game was released and it was something that happens in the first 15 minutes of the game, how would people react to when they are told they are setting up another trilogy before the first game is even released.

 

BioWare Montreal has been working on Mass Effect since the era of Mass Effect 2 DLC and were also responsible for Omega, which had a decent story just stretched too thin, but then again Mass Effect 1 felt the same to me.

[Killroy]

What's relevant is that you chose to start arguing with me about something with which you have no apparent knowledge or experience.

Digital data transfer. It's not smuggling two tons of cocaine into the US. And we already know that BioWare and EA have the infrastructure in place for quick, easy data transfer/sharing. Moving every EA studio to the FB3 engine included sharing tools and data in real time. The Mass Effect team was learning from the Inquisition team as Inquisition was being developed. Why is that a simple task but the new team having access to assets they're already using is a monumental task?
 

What I said was:
... because it is. It's faster, cheaper, easier for someone who initially designed and built a thing to support and maintain it going forward. There's no learning curve, no knowledge deficiency, no need for knowledge transfer, no need for time to get up to speed, and minimal risk.

What you're describing is inherent in most game development cycles. Moving to a new console generation, turnover in workforce, employees working on 2 or more franchises, etc. Even if the ME3 all moved on to ME4 there would still be the same issues you're talking about.

And by the way, you don't know that they already had all of the series' assets.

What, the team making the multiplayer and DLC expansions had to request each asset they needed as they needed it, like children asking for more cookies? Use your brain. Almost every single asset in MP was recycled and the combat in SP was being developed by both studios simultaneously.

[Erstus]

Who cares? The team behind the trilogy gave us the ME3 endings so I see no reason why having them make ME:A would be better than a new team.Your question is entirely irrelevant. The ME:A team already had the game assets before work on ME:A even began. They made the ME3 multiplayer, which primarily used recycled assets, and the Omega DLC, which used many recycled assets.

I care and I am sure there are others who are concerned too.

An entirely new team can just go and change whatever they see fit for change. They can change the whole tone and direction of the ME universe for the worst.

That is very concerning. That same team from the Trilogy gave us the incredible and memorable Mass Effect 1 and 2. This new team just seems to care about exploration and little else.

What a shame it would be to lose the Paragon/Renegade play opitions and moral choices/consequences that defined the previous trilogy

[AtreiyaN7]

They always said the first three games were Shepard's trilogy - it's not like ME3 being the end of it all was unplanned. Execution of the ending in ME3 is another matter. I can  understand people's issues with it, although I was and have always been mostly okay with the endings - concept-wise - even before the EC. The only plan I care about BW having atm is making ME:A as good as it can be and getting it to me sometime next year.

 

The future is always uncertain for any series if you ask me, and if I had to base my purchasing decisions on whether or not may favorite series has a bright future, I probably wouldn't have picked up MGS5, because there is no bright future for MGS from this point forward thanks to Konami. Instead, I bought the MGS5, I like the game for what it is, and I'm enjoying the heck out of it as opposed to worrying about what happens next.

 

If this is the end (which it probably is, given Konami's current business goals and behavior), I'm okay with it because I had fun in a game universe that I like one last time.