638 réponses à ce sujet

[Revan Reborn]

Way earlier, Edmonton has 2 teams, 'new IP' team is the one that made Mass Effect Trilogy

Somewhat. They have different writing teams and different senior management, but there is a crossover for the actual developers lower on the totem pole. I guarantee you full development of the game did not begin until DAI was complete and then the entire office moved to the new IP. The only thing that was happening before that was the writers were building the world and senior management was helping determine what kind of game it would be.

[straykat]

Inquisition suffered from a lack of vision, not a lack of time. They wrote a story and built content around a human PC, but then caved to fan demand and shoehorned in race selection, which even they admit caused the story to lose focus and the cutting of content. They tried to implement more systems/mechanics than they ever could have developed properly and ended up leaving unsatisfying remnants of many of them in the final game. Then they added a fourth race option and didn't bother to implement it properly or develop any content for it. Then they decided to make a bunch of huge maps without giving any thought to  adding content to those maps. And no one developing the game apparently took the time to look at the story from start to finish when it was written, which led to a completely uneven pace and a bumbling, moronic antagonist.

 

And I end up not only being disappointed with Bioware, but fellow players for bringing it to this point. Consciously or not.

 

Not exactly what I wanted to do.

[Killroy]

And I end up not only being disappointed with Bioware, but fellow players for bringing it to this point. Consciously or not.

 

Not exactly what I wanted to do.

 

Some people care more about the superficial choices than the story and content. Race selection in Inquisition amounted to nothing basically. A couple lines of dialogue throughout and a negligible bonus or penalty at the ball. Without at least the race-effected origin stories to play at the beginning your race had about as much impact as it did in Skyrim.

[In Exile]

Inquisition suffered from a lack of vision, not a lack of time. They wrote a story and built content around a human PC, but then caved to fan demand and shoehorned in race selection, which even they admit caused the story to lose focus and the cutting of content. They tried to implement more systems/mechanics than they ever could have developed properly and ended up leaving unsatisfying remnants of many of them in the final game. Then they added a fourth race option and didn't bother to implement it properly or develop any content for it. Then they decided to make a bunch of huge maps without giving any thought to  adding content to those maps. And no one developing the game apparently took the time to look at the story from start to finish when it was written, which led to a completely uneven pace and a bumbling, moronic antagonist.

 

I object. Every single Bioware game since JE had a bumbling, moron antagonist and an uneven pace. Corypheus is differently stupid compared to Loghain, the archdemon and Meredith, sure, but it's not a materially different kind of stupid. And really, bumbling moron is pretty much Saren in ME1.

[straykat]

Some people care more about the superficial choices than the story and content. Race selection in Inquisition amounted to nothing basically. A couple lines of dialogue throughout and a negligible bonus or penalty at the ball. Without at least the race-effected origin stories to play at the beginning your race had about as much impact as it did in Skyrim.

 

The changes are mostly negative, if anything. Just because it breaks from an original vision and is just tacky. And indulges the desires of tacky players to boot.

 

And I think it had a domino effect on the whole direction of the story. I don't know what pressured them into it, but the payoff wasn't worth it... if that's what they were hoping for. They should have already known that most people don't give a **** about race selection in the first place. All of their stats attest to this. They dilluted a story for the sake of a pointless minority.

[Helios969]

Inquisition suffered from a lack of vision, not a lack of time. They wrote a story and built content around a human PC, but then caved to fan demand and shoehorned in race selection, which even they admit caused the story to lose focus and the cutting of content. They tried to implement more systems/mechanics than they ever could have developed properly and ended up leaving unsatisfying remnants of many of them in the final game. Then they added a fourth race option and didn't bother to implement it properly or develop any content for it. Then they decided to make a bunch of huge maps without giving any thought to  adding content to those maps. And no one developing the game apparently took the time to look at the story from start to finish when it was written, which led to a completely uneven pace and a bumbling, moronic antagonist.

Which is why I'm so glad they've stuck to the human only PC.  Not that it guarantees a quality story, focused narrative and player agency.  And when I hear dozens of explorable worlds I cannot help but think of those DAI maps and have some concerns.  Here's hoping they get it right.

[Revan Reborn]

Which is why I'm so glad they've stuck to the human only PC.  Not that it guarantees a quality story, focused narrative and player agency.  And when I hear dozens of explorable worlds I cannot help but think of those DAI maps and have some concerns.  Here's hoping they get it right.

Playing as a non-human in ME wouldn't make sense for a multitude of reasons. It's more practical in DA since all of the races are humanoids anyway. This is not the case in ME so it would be harder to implement. Either way, BioWare's stats have always proven most of their player base predominantly plays human over everything else anyway. It's why BioWare should really just ignore half of the "suggestions" BSN makes because more than likely they are not what the unspoken majority cares about. Obvious examples, different hair colors/types and romances for every sexual orientation known to man are not something most BioWare fans are likely interested in.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Which is why I'm so glad they've stuck to the human only PC.  Not that it guarantees a quality story, focused narrative and player agency.  And when I hear dozens of explorable worlds I cannot help but think of those DAI maps and have some concerns.  Here's hoping they get it right.

Meanwhile I still see it as one of the worst choices they could have made, especially if the leaks are to be believed and it's because it's going to be yet another human-centric ego stroking plot. 

 

Playing as a non-human in ME wouldn't make sense for a multitude of reasons. It's more practical in DA since all of the races are humanoids anyway. This is not the case in ME so it would be harder to implement.

Considering there are multiple races in Mass Effect that use the exact same body skeleton as humans, this is objectively inaccurate.

 

Either way, BioWare's stats have always proven most of their player base predominantly plays human over everything else anyway.

The player base predominantly play as male as well, yet that doesn't mean they should remove the option to play as a female. 

 

It's why BioWare should really just ignore half of the "suggestions" BSN makes because more than likely they are not what the unspoken majority cares about. Obvious examples, different hair colors/types and romances for every sexual orientation known to man are not something most BioWare fans are likely interested in.

So they should just listen to the things you want? 

[OdanUrr]

That's why I applaud Bethesda's decision to announce a game only when they're about ready to release.

[In Exile]

Meanwhile I still see it as one of the worst choices they could have made, especially if the leaks are to be believed and it's because it's going to be yet another human-centric ego stroking plot.

Considering there are multiple races in Mass Effect that use the exact same body skeleton as humans, this is objectively inaccurate.

The player base predominantly play as male as well, yet that doesn't mean they should remove the option to play as a female.

So they should just listen to the things you want?

There's no alternative to a humans are special plot. The humans are inferior sacks of **** plot won't get very far when being marketed to humans. Even Babylon 5 - that greatly inverted the usual humans are special plot - in terms of human ingenuity and morality was still a humans are special plot.

[lucky5hot]

 

There's no alternative to a humans are special plot. The humans are inferior sacks of **** plot won't get very far when being marketed to humans. Even Babylon 5 - that greatly inverted the usual humans are special plot - in terms of human ingenuity and morality was still a humans are special plot.

 

Meanwhile I still see it as one of the worst choices they could have made, especially if the leaks are to be believed and it's because it's going to be yet another human-centric ego stroking plot. 

 

The 'humans are special plot' or as Hanako described it, "human-centric ego stroking", is a fairly cynical way of looking at it. Its objective to say that in mass media, being 'accessible' is one of the attributes of good writing/narrative. Being relatable makes literature accessible and enjoyable to a wider range of audiences,  even if this is through relating to people's aspirations and self-actualization. Of course this is addition to attributes like layers of complexity, well explored themes and ideas, etc. But ultimately, much of an audience wont even notice nuance, layers of meaning or character exploration, etc.

 

Theres nothing terrible about appealing to the human condition, nor does this come anywhere near creating bad literature on its own. Star Wars, Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, all of these would probably be described good literature, (at least by a majority of people, and some in the book form rather than film), and they are also accessible at the same time with a 'human-centric ego stroking plot'.

 

I mean, I'm not sure what the implication here is, perhaps that in a sci-fi plot we could transcend this to arrive at 'life is special', instead of 'humans are special'. I'm very confused because his 'human-centric' thing is something I've never heard of as its unique to the Sci-Fi landscape, is this just another version of sexist or racist that is unique to Sci-Fi? I mean common, this is taking Social Justice to a whole new level.

 

---------

 

I kind of feel what you are talking about that I perhaps missed in a previous dialog is that many video games are rightly described by the growing games psychology industry as 'power fantasies'. Although this is correct, this concept has nothing to do with whether you are playing as a human or an alien, its still a power fantasy. Also, on the power fantasy point, this would require a whole different wall of text, but I see nothing particularly wrong with this in recreation.

 

---------

 

So, if we establish that this is merely a desire to play a cool different species, rather than some sort of writing flaw, I can engage this dialog. Ultimately, when it comes to playing as a non-human, despite the fact certain games like Dragon Age and The Elder Scrolls have done it, I've always felt like the implementation is very minimal and weak outside of a few key moments in those games. Additionally, it opens up a massive complexity for the task of writing, which in my opinion time could be much better spent.

 

For the investment that is required, I would much prefer that they implement humans correctly, and spend more time on solid writing for one species, rather than spend 100's or 1000's of hours to implement another poor/minimal alternate race so occasionally I can hear myself referenced differently and there perhaps be 2-5 parts of the game where they actually address the racial/species issue and do something interesting with it.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

There's no alternative to a humans are special plot. The humans are inferior sacks of **** plot won't get very far when being marketed to humans. Even Babylon 5 - that greatly inverted the usual humans are special plot - in terms of human ingenuity and morality was still a humans are special plot.

I must have imagined all those science fiction series that didn't use those tropes, like Star Wars, Star Ocean, etc. 

 

 

 

 

 

The 'humans are special plot' or as Hanako described it, "human-centric ego stroking", is a fairly cynical way of looking at it. Its objective to say that in mass media, being 'accessible' is one of the attributes of good writing/narrative. Being relatable makes literature accessible and enjoyable to a wider range of audiences,  even if this is through relating to people's aspirations and self-actualization. Of course this is addition to attributes like layers of complexity, well explored themes and ideas, etc. But ultimately, much of an audience wont even notice nuance, layers of meaning or character exploration, etc.

 

Theres nothing terrible about appealing to the human condition, nor does this come anywhere near creating bad literature on its own. Star Wars, Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, all of these would probably be described good literature, (at least by a majority of people, and some in the book form rather than film), and they are also accessible at the same time with a 'human-centric ego stroking plot'.

 

I mean, I'm not sure what the implication here is, perhaps that in a sci-fi plot we could transcend this to arrive at 'life is special', instead of 'humans are special'. I'm very confused because his 'human-centric' thing is something I've never heard of as its unique to the Sci-Fi landscape, is this just another version of sexist or racist that is unique to Sci-Fi? I mean common, this is taking Social Justice to a whole new level.

 

---------

 

I kind of feel what you are talking about that I perhaps missed in a previous dialog is that many video games are rightly described by the growing games psychology industry as 'power fantasies'. Although this is correct, this concept has nothing to do with whether you are playing as a human or an alien, its still a power fantasy. Also, on the power fantasy point, this would require a whole different wall of text, but I see nothing particularly wrong with this in recreation.

 

---------

 

So, if we establish that this is merely a desire to play a cool different species, rather than some sort of writing flaw, I can engage this dialog. Ultimately, when it comes to playing as a non-human, despite the fact certain games like Dragon Age and The Elder Scrolls have done it, I've always felt like the implementation is very minimal and weak outside of a few key moments in those games. Additionally, it opens up a massive complexity for the task of writing, which in my opinion time could be much better spent.

 

For the investment that is required, I would much prefer that they implement humans correctly, and spend more time on solid writing for one species, rather than spend 100's or 1000's of hours to implement another poor/minimal alternate race so occasionally I can hear myself referenced differently and there perhaps be 2-5 parts of the game where they actually address the racial/species issue and do something interesting with it.

 

 

By human-centric, it means exactly how it sounds: having humans as a central interest, influence, subject, etc. The leaks mention on multiple occasions about how the game will be "finding a home for humanity", "determining the fate of humanity", etc. It makes it sound like humans are the center of the universe, when that shouldn't be the case in Mass Effect where humanity is part of a community. It has nothing to do with sexism, racism, or social justice. The Shepard Trilogy was full of this, and many players didn't like it and/or found it ridiculous. Things like humans are the most genetically diverse race in the galaxy(we aren't even on our own planet), or how humans are the best candidate for making a Reaper Dreadnought, or how everything should be dedicated to taking Earth back, or how it is human DNA that is needed to save the universe and reach the peace Reapers have been seeking. The only time it made sense to be human-centric was Mass Effect 1, because it was about humanity earning its place in the galactic community. Once we earned that place, any human-centricity should have stopped. But instead, it increased exponentially and is continuing in Andromeda, despite all races being in the same boat both literally and figuratively. 

[Lyrandori]

The delay I have no problems with. I do, however, have some problem with the definitive lack of recent and official information, even if it's just "tidbits". As of now we know more about No Man's Sky and Area 51 than Andromeda. I can understand the desire (EA's and/or BioWare's) to keep most information under wraps, but I also hate it when a game is being treated like it's a state secret.

 

Then again I know... I know. If they were to release too much information, we'd then have too many expectations (that would be normal). Then we'd discover after the game's release that 'x' amount of content that had been shown a year ago was cut out and/or massively changed, of course for the worse. Does anyone remember the PAX Prime Pre-Alpha showcase of Inquisition's Crestwood "battle", and what we actually got in the final game? Do we want to see that again? Nope, we don't. Better we don't actually know what's being cut, modified, tempered with right now as it is still being developed. It's a frustrating situation as a gamer to not know much about a game we want to know more about. But it's equally frustrating to feel "betrayed" or "lied to" after you shell out the big bucks to buy it brand new.

 

We must be patient, and cross our fingers that BioWare feels absolutely confident that the game-play and game features revelation they'll throw as us is going to make it to the final game, not only there as it was shown but even more polished at release. I sincerely believe that game developers need to stop showing the big game features when they don't know if they can actually do it, or do it in time, or do it well. However, with this said, telling us essentially nothing about a game that's just about a year away from release is also perhaps excessive. There's go to be something viable to show us without revealing too much at the same time. Give us a few screenshots? A short teasing clip of some environments? There's gotta be something BioWare, c'mon.

[lucky5hot]

By human-centric, it means exactly how it sounds: having humans as a central interest, influence, subject, etc. The leaks mention on multiple occasions about how the game will be "finding a home for humanity", "determining the fate of humanity", etc. It makes it sound like humans are the center of the universe, when that shouldn't be the case in Mass Effect where humanity is part of a community. It has nothing to do with sexism, racism, or social justice. The Shepard Trilogy was full of this, and many players didn't like it and/or found it ridiculous. Things like humans are the most genetically diverse race in the galaxy(we aren't even on our own planet), or how humans are the best candidate for making a Reaper Dreadnought, or how everything should be dedicated to taking Earth back, or how it is human DNA that is needed to save the universe and reach the peace Reapers have been seeking. The only time it made sense to be human-centric was Mass Effect 1, because it was about humanity earning its place in the galactic community. Once we earned that place, any human-centricity should have stopped. But instead, it increased exponentially and is continuing in Andromeda, despite all races being in the same boat both literally and figuratively. 

 

 

Okay, you've actually peaked my interest now. I think you have a point but I think you would have to start by agreeing that this idea/issue you are bringing up 'human-centric' is really just analogous to our own race issues from the past millennium.

 

I say this because what you are essentially bringing up is 'humanism'. And if we discovered alien life, there might be a new word created that goes something like 'lifeism'.

 

IE, all life is precious/sacred, all life should be preserved. Therefore, one race/species shouldnt consider their own interests above another for said reason.

 

The metaphor/analogy you present is that this is similar to say a white people thinking they are better than 'insert colonialized race here'. I dont want this to span into a SJW versus 'why should I have white guilt' issue, lets just all agree that **** that happened in the past sucked and focus on the parallel with the game here.

 

This question is actually incredibly interesting. I've never done any subjects on ethics/morality etc, and I've read only the beginnings of content on philosophy, but if you were to say propose value between a Krogan life and a human life, (and not one of your Krogan pals you've managed to convert to paragon, but your average krogan), a Krogan who thrives on bloodshed and at one point wanted to conquer the galaxy for the sheer love of bloodlust, you raise an interesting discussion about whether humans SHOULD consider their own interests. I would sit on your side here, the 'paragon' side of 'humanism/lifeism', but I would not necessarily blame somebody for not valuing the life of all Krogans over the rest of the galaxy, and making that choice in the game. A harder choice still would be the Rachni.

 

----------------------------

 

With all this said, IMHO The renegade option should be victory at any cost. As you are playing as a human character, your choices will be largely self-serving and human-centric. In my opinion, this should be at stark contrast for your desire to see humans being nice to other races because they hold that set of values. If your desire is that all video games or movies are all sunshine and lollypops and you never see the greedy side of humanity then in my opinion you have poor taste in literature. When you explore renegade, greed should play a factor.

 

However, the paragon option should most certainly hold the values you are talking about and not be 'human-centric' as it wouldnt be very paragon. So the question is, does the paragon playthrough of ME1-3 correctly reflect a 'all life is precious', view of morality as opposed to human-centric?

 

From a quick recap, I would have to conclude yes;

 

- Save the council despite them shitting on you

- Save the Rachni

- Save AI that were created by the Quanari despite them being a machine based life

- Save the Krogan despite them wanting war, give them another chance

- Need I go on?

 

I mean, to me I feel like you are doing some serious projecting on the game here, because to me the paragon play throughs seem to be very much a 'good of the galaxy not just humanity', plot theme. Everything about paragon is literally your contention, that all life/races are sacred and should be protected... the greater good.

 

If you are angry just because you CAN be greedy in the game, then sheesh man, boring.

 

----

 

Also, like it or not, the game is entirely fictional. So for all you know, humans COULD be superior in this fictional world created, as per all the items you listed out. IMHO reason you find this 'ridiculous' is your desire to normalize the human/alien issue debate against your projection of our own human/race issue debate. In reality, due to genetic diversity, if we encountered aliens its quite likely that we would either be smarter or dumber than them. The fact that the aliens in ME were so normalized in terms of intelligence was actually a flaw in my opinion, not the other way around, and it was done as a narrative device so we could have the best interaction with them and the game COULD be an analogy for race issues.

[kensaileo]

https://twitter.com/camharr

Mass Effect Senior Editor Leaves BioWare

[Sylvius the Mad]

Inquisition suffered from a lack of vision, not a lack of time. They wrote a story and built content around a human PC, but then caved to fan demand and shoehorned in race selection, which even they admit caused the story to lose focus and the cutting of content. They tried to implement more systems/mechanics than they ever could have developed properly and ended up leaving unsatisfying remnants of many of them in the final game. Then they added a fourth race option and didn't bother to implement it properly or develop any content for it. Then they decided to make a bunch of huge maps without giving any thought to  adding content to those maps. And no one developing the game apparently took the time to look at the story from start to finish when it was written, which led to a completely uneven pace and a bumbling, moronic antagonist.

What you say only makes sense if you assume that BioWare's objective was to make a tightly woven narrative in a heavily story-based game.

 

That's clearly not what Inquisition is.

 

That uneven pacing is a good thing.  We should always get to control pacing.  And those open areas were, I hope, intentionally left mostly empty of story content, because having every part of the game be relevant to the story just makes the game's setting feel less real.  That we have no reason to visit a town is not a reason for the town not to exist.

 

I really like the pacing in DAI.  I really like the huge areas I can wander around for no reason at all.

[Sylvius the Mad]

It's the project that BioWare Edmonton is working on now. For the past several years they've been building the IP. Now, they are in the process of actually making a game out of it. I'd say 2018 for a release date is likely. BioWare Edmonton has been working on it since DAI so I except a 3-4 development cycle at most. I doubt it will be as large in scale as MEA, which has a ridiculously long dev cycle for a BioWare game, but we just don't know anything about it.

Not that long.  They didn't plan another ME game after the third one.  So when they (or EA) decided that there would be another ME game, a whole new team had to be assembled.  That's not a quick process.

[Sylvius the Mad]

https://twitter.com/camhar

Mass Effect Senior Editor Leaves BioWare

That's https://twitter.com/camharr

 

Your link is someone else.

[Killroy]

https://twitter.com/camhar

Mass Effect Senior Editor Leaves BioWare

 

...what even?

[Akrabra]

https://twitter.com/camhar

Mass Effect Senior Editor Leaves BioWare

So this is the source that Revan has been getting his information from. Well it is clear as day now. 

[Draining Dragon]

https://twitter.com/camhar
Mass Effect Senior Editor Leaves BioWare

Was the typo intentional? It made me chuckle.

[Seraphim24]

Actually it's true though I just checked, not because of that twitter.

 

http://www.gamnesia....ng-bioware-next

 

Out of curiosity I checked the credits, he apparently was an "editor" (Not sure what that is to be honest) for a few Bioware games, but was apparently part of Gears of War and Guild Wars 2 first or something?? I'm just sort of guessing here.

[Battlebloodmage]

I'm not sure if it's a good thing or bad thing when people from DA and ME team keep leaving Bioware in droves. Maybe we'd get a better product with fresher faces or maybe the series will turn into a pile of craps with new people. I guess it's becoming a gamble at this point. I'd probably wait to see the reviews first before buying the next Bioware product. If it's terrible, I would still buy it but probably during an Origin sales where it's half price off or something. 

[Killroy]

What you say only makes sense if you assume that BioWare's objective was to make a tightly woven narrative in a heavily story-based game.

 

That's clearly not what Inquisition is.

 

That uneven pacing is a good thing.  We should always get to control pacing.  And those open areas were, I hope, intentionally left mostly empty of story content, because having every part of the game be relevant to the story just makes the game's setting feel less real.  That we have no reason to visit a town is not a reason for the town not to exist.

 

I really like the pacing in DAI.  I really like the huge areas I can wander around for no reason at all.

 

Inquisition is not the game it was supposed to be. The narrative was supposed to be tighter and maps more lively and engaging, according to the devs themselves. They're not making games for your very specific, very weird preferences.

[kensaileo]

That's https://twitter.com/camharr

 

Your link is someone else.

Sorry,my fault and thank you