206 réponses à ce sujet

[Mox Ruuga]

Pandaman102 wrote...


Mass Effect 3 is a sequel to Mass Effect 2 and Mass Effect 1, you realize.

You realize, they are talking about ME1 decisions impacting ME2 there?

I don't doubt we may see something a bit more drastic grow from these come ME3. I posted the interview as further warning against believing the Bioware PR, since the effect of all three of the "most important" choices ended up as neglible in ME2.

[Zulu_DFA]

Mox Ruuga wrote...

Heh, the "You humans are all racist" turian is there even if you saved the council. The same goes for the asari who ended up on the "no fly" list as geth suspects due to new human paranoia and bureaucracy.

So much for the "big choices", yeah!

[Sir Ulrich Von Lichenstien]

Asheer_Khan wrote...

I really don't see any possibility for ME 3 to become more or less stand alone game because this would actually kill whole series.

I see now that Bioware made grave mistake starting two giant projects in this same time: Mass Effect series and SWToR MMO which steal from ME core of story writers whil ME 1 lead witer in first place.
In my opinion Bioware should FIRST finish ME series and then divert all focus on MMO.

For now i will monitoring very carefully any news about ME 3.

So basically they should actually expand the number of people working on the project to finish the final part?

I know what you are saying regarding the writers but you seem to be forgetting that SWTOR is being developed in the Austin, Texas, US Office and Mass Effect has been developed in the Edmonton, Alberta Canada Office. As for the writers, I am quite sure that they have had a basic idea of how the 3 parts are to be played out from the word go or we wouldn't have had the situation we had in ME2 regarding the LIs and for any other details wouldn't be hard for the current set of writers to confirm with anyone that has shifted to another 'project' to find out what the plan is/was, that and of course there is the more higher ups who most likely have an idea too and they are still on the same project.

Don't get me wrong, they did hype up the games something chronic and not everything that we was told at some point pre-game release was exactly true. But there are still plenty of things that will make peoples playthroughs different to one another. Some decisions will be minor or insignificant, some may have a certain value but I doubt they will ever be highly critical because as people have said, it would destroy the game.

Now if you look at it from a content point of view, let say hypothetically that we can have any of our squadmates as potential squadmates for the final game and they all have some potential content to give to us if they survive (like some of the NPCs from ME gave us in ME2). I have no issues with missing out on that content if I kill off <insert character/s here>, to be honest, I personally wouldn't care if it had an fair effect on my shep having the support of <insert race here>. That is a choice I/my shep made and I'll live with it.

What I would personally love to see, though I doubt it, is something akin to one of Ecael's playthroughs (made bad decisions in both ME and ME2) bring out the worse possible ending. If Bioware did that, I would tip my hat/cap off to them (if I was wearing one), but part of me sadly can't see them doing that. That isn't really a writers fault, but the main developers/producers for not allowing it, because am quite sure the writers would love to do it. The one thing that is keeping my faith that it might be possible is that even though you really have to play in a real 'am gonna kill everyone' way, they did make it possible in ME2 for it to end bad. So there is still hope I believe this can happen in ME3 as well.

[The Angry One]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

ratzerman wrote...

The Angry One wrote...
EA thinks only of the bottom line, and to that end they will force BioWare to make ME3 accessable to people who have never played ME1 or 2..

QFT

This only proves, that a default combination o choices "imported" by BioWare for the "New ME3 character" will be an average one. We, who played both ME1&2 should FEEL IT [/Harbinger mode off]... have benefits/penalties (aka actual consequences) of our choices made back there. Not just some cute "You humans are all racists!" comments from a noname00.npc.

The problem is major (i.e. non-cosmetic or incidental) consequences will probably be seen by the rEAper corporate suits as being an "unfair advantage" over people who only bought ME3, thus potentially reducing sales.
Hell in ME2 you get more of a difference (in terms of items you get) from preorders and god damn Dr. Pepper promotions than you ever do out of ME1 choices.

EA ladies and gentlemen. EA.

[jtav]

I disagree. A choice that only makes the game harder/unwinnable is no choice at all. You only succeed in frustrating long time players who must now go back and play both games again so they can beat the third.

I think Bioware handled choices about as well as can be expected. The "feel" of the Galaxy is very different on a pure paragon than renegade. If the plot diverges too much, Bioware essentially has to make games within a game with the same amount of resources. The results wouldn't be pretty.

[Jamesmc93]

I don't know about you guys, but I found the game extremely enjoyable and one of the best games I have ever played. What on earth more do you want out of it?

[JediMB]

DarthCaine wrote...

What are you talking about, watch them again
See the interrupt for Garrus? (back then it wasn't like in ME2)
See the destructable enviroment?
Casey says that you can upgrade your weapons and even change their looks
And also, check out that you could play as Garrus/Ashley

Not as much an "interrupt" as it was a less restrictive dialog-wheel usage. Obviously they realized that it didn't work well enough, and it was changed. Features are tweaked all the time during development.

See my previous paragraph. They obviously decided to settle for simply having explosive objects and the ability to manipulate crates and such with biotics.

I heard that he said we were supposed to be able to customize abilities and equipment, which you can. It was simplified, but it's there in the game.

Being able to ASSUME DIRECT CONTROL *coughs* over team-mates was obviously streamlined into simply being able to issue orders to them, like "attack", "hold", and telling them what powers to use.

[Bigdoser]

Yes they do if you killed the council or if they are dead it looks like a civil war might break out if u save the council humanity has the trust of almost the entire galaxy we will see the full effect of these types of choices in me3.

[JediMB]

Mox Ruuga wrote...

Heh, the "You humans are all racist" turian is there even if you saved the council. The same goes for the asari who ended up on the "no fly" list as geth suspects due to new human paranoia and bureaucracy.

But the turian weapon salesman has completely different dialog depending on your choice regarding the Council.

I love that guy.

[Pandaman102]

jtav wrote...

I disagree. A choice that only makes the game harder/unwinnable is no choice at all. You only succeed in frustrating long time players who must now go back and play both games again so they can beat the third.
I think Bioware handled choices about as well as can be expected. The "feel" of the Galaxy is very different on a pure paragon than renegade. If the plot diverges too much, Bioware essentially has to make games within a game with the same amount of resources. The results wouldn't be pretty.

So if the person who is tasked to save the galaxy is a psychopathic serial killer who destroys galactic alliances, encourages war between the races, commits genocide, destroys useful technology, and sabotages the organizations he/she works it's unreasonable those actions come around to bite everyone in the ass?

[Zulu_DFA]

The Angry One wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

ratzerman wrote...

The Angry One wrote...
EA thinks only of the bottom line, and to that end they will force BioWare to make ME3 accessable to people who have never played ME1 or 2..

QFT

This only proves, that a default combination o choices "imported" by BioWare for the "New ME3 character" will be an average one. We, who played both ME1&2 should FEEL IT [/Harbinger mode off]... have benefits/penalties (aka actual consequences) of our choices made back there. Not just some cute "You humans are all racists!" comments from a noname00.npc.

The problem is major (i.e. non-cosmetic or incidental) consequences will probably be seen by the rEAper corporate suits as being an "unfair advantage" over people who only bought ME3, thus potentially reducing sales.

Well, the Devs could forget to tell them...

Hell in ME2 you get more of a difference (in terms of items you get) from preorders and god damn Dr. Pepper promotions than you ever do out of ME1 choices.

Sh*t, you're damn right!

EA ladies and gentlemen. EA.

Why can't they stick to NHL series?
I wish Gianna Parasini () came after them sometime.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 27 février 2010 - 04:29 .

[The Capital Gaultier]

JediMB wrote...

Mox Ruuga wrote...

Heh, the "You humans are all racist" turian is there even if you saved the council. The same goes for the asari who ended up on the "no fly" list as geth suspects due to new human paranoia and bureaucracy.

But the turian weapon salesman has completely different dialog depending on your choice regarding the Council.

I love that guy.

It's rather jarring.  Made me feel much better about saving the Council in one playthrough.  Thank you, Mr. Only Man in the Universe with a Strong Opinion.

[WilliamShatner]

Mox Ruuga wrote...

Back in August, The Great and Powerful Hudson had this to say about choices in ME1 and their consequences in ME2:

IGN: If you had to pick three decisions from the first Mass Effect that most affect the story in the sequel, what would they be?

Casey Hudson: For those who haven't played Mass Effect, I should mention that (a) there are some spoilers ahead, and ( you really should play Mass Effect. I'd say the top 3 decisions are probably the choice of who lives and dies in the nuclear explosion on Virmire, who you had a romance with (if any), and whether you allowed the Galactic Council to die during the final battle. These things naturally cause some of the longer-lasting effects on your story as Commander Shepard. Another interesting aspect is that the sum of your decisions – your renegade / paragon status – also has an immediate and profound effect that we can't explain without giving away some of the story.

Underlines inserted by me, for emphasis.

Link:

http://xbox360.ign.c.../1014425p1.html

Whereas the top three is more like:

1) Whether you let Shiala live.
2) Your interaction with Conrad Verner (bugged).
3) Helena Blake decision.

[AngryFrozenWater]

Jamesmc93 wrote...

I don't know about you guys, but I found the game extremely enjoyable and one of the best games I have ever played. What on earth more do you want out of it?

To get what was promised: Choices would have impact on the game. They are hard to find (if any). Sten would say: The cake was a lie.

[The Angry One]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

Jamesmc93 wrote...

I don't know about you guys, but I found the game extremely enjoyable and one of the best games I have ever played. What on earth more do you want out of it?

To get what was promised: Choices would have impact on the game. They are hard to find (if any). Sten would say: The cake was a lie.

I wouldn't say the cake was a lie.
More like the cake came as promised, but it was dry and there was no frosting.

[Zulu_DFA]

jtav wrote...

I disagree. A choice that only makes the game harder/unwinnable is no choice at all. You only succeed in frustrating long time players who must now go back and play both games again so they can beat the third.
I think Bioware handled choices about as well as can be expected. The "feel" of the Galaxy is very different on a pure paragon than renegade. If the plot diverges too much, Bioware essentially has to make games within a game with the same amount of resources. The results wouldn't be pretty.

We're talking about ME3, the last game in the series. We discuss whether BioWare stick to their promise that we'll see drastic impact of our "big choices" in the end of the trilogy, and what does that promise mean in the firat place.

I never expected much of ME1's choices to be seen in ME2. I was dissappointed a little, because I saw too many of them having a negligible, cosmetic and in the first place unwanted impact. I wish in addition to the "Mark as read" button on Shepard's private terminal, they put a "Reply with 'Go to hell!'" button there. I'd be using it quite often.

[AngryFrozenWater]

The Angry One wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

Jamesmc93 wrote...

I don't know about you guys, but I found the game extremely enjoyable and one of the best games I have ever played. What on earth more do you want out of it?

To get what was promised: Choices would have impact on the game. They are hard to find (if any). Sten would say: The cake was a lie.

I wouldn't say the cake was a lie.
More like the cake came as promised, but it was dry and there was no frosting.

Agreed.

[Tokion]

I agree with pretty much all the OP said. The impact was not enough for the stuff you did from the previous game. But this is possiblity the first game I have seen that can 'import' the decisions you made from another game, that itself is pretty damn impressive.

I believe bioware will improve on this in ME 3, hopefully will reward those vetern who have took their shepard through the 3 games. Then end this trilogy with a bang.

I have faith in bioware! ;D

Modifié par Tokion, 27 février 2010 - 04:47 .

[newcomplex]

Harder yes....Impossible?



TOOO BOLLDDDDD

[jtav]

I'm aware you're talking about ME3. What I'm saying is that any given set of choices from the last two games shouldn't equate turning the difficulty up to Insanity+++ That is a recipe for frustration and angry gamers. What I would prefer is that ever major choice have a positive and negative impact. Save the Council and there are more ships to fight the Reapers but they deadlock at the worst possible time. And so on.

[mopotter]

Depending on how many different kinds of endings you can have, I have no problem if one or two (and two is pushing it), where everyone is dead or consumed by the reapers, Shepard dies, or any of the other disaster endings you can come up with.

BUT and it's a big one. If there is not one ending where my Shepard ends up with his/her LI and the world is saved because we were lucky and willing to risk it all, I will be so upset I may take a vacation to Canada and BioWare will have an older lady standing outside their building with a big sign saying WHY WHY did you fail me after all these years.

Life itself has too many bad endings. Friends, family die and there isn't any reset button. I want to play a game that is uplifting and the hero gets the girl/guy/alien and can retire until the next universe threatening event or until their kids take over the universe saving job.

So yes, I do think your choices should effect the ME3 ending, and stupid choices should give you the ending you deserve and careful choices whether you are paragon or renegade (really wish there were other names for these two viewpoints) should help you save the universe.

edit:  may have gotten sidetracked with my own obsessions.  I was pretty happy with the decisions I made in ME1 and it was interesting to see them carried over in ME2.  Would I have liked a bit more,  yes.  I would have liked to know more about the new council in the game I didn't save them.  But I did save the Rachni Queen and heard from her.  I did let Shiala live and it was interesting to see her.  I hope that ME3 shows more detail, but for never playing a game that I could carry over decisions, I was pleased with the results.

Modifié par mopotter, 27 février 2010 - 04:59 .

[Zulu_DFA]

jtav wrote...

I'm aware you're talking about ME3. What I'm saying is that any given set of choices from the last two games shouldn't equate turning the difficulty up to Insanity+++ That is a recipe for frustration and angry gamers. What I would prefer is that ever major choice have a positive and negative impact. Save the Council and there are more ships to fight the Reapers but they deadlock at the worst possible time. And so on.

Then we pretty much agree. I didn't mean that ME3 is like "Oh, you killed the Rachi queen? Ha! now all krogans regenerate 3 times as fast lol!!!"

Save the Council and there are more ships to fight the Reapers - but it's not just 30 cruisers instead of 12 in the final cutscene where the Reapers are 100% blown up no matter what, just because the player cared to start the game. It works well with CoD, but there the all the fun is in the process. In a game that boasts that "choices matter from the previous two games" the result of those choices must be more rewarding.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 27 février 2010 - 05:04 .

[Zulu_DFA]

mopotter wrote...

...paragon or renegade (really wish there were other names for these two viewpoints) ...

Paragon = tranquil
Renegade = frantic

[SimonTheFrog]

It's not really realistic to assume that BioWare will create levels, complex side missions or even main mission that require certain decisions from ME1 or ME2.



They cannot create complex scenes and long gameplay parts that half of the player won't ever see. This is not going to happen. Creating levels and everything is way too expensive and time consuming to do it for just a part of the players.



What we can expect again are some dialogs either missing or existing and some sidequests within the hubs, like what happened from ME1 to ME2.



And some different cutscenes in the end, sure.



But not much more... and actually, this is not so bad after all. When i play the game i want to see most of it's content. If i knew that a huge battle sequence or some nice infiltration mission on a remote planet is not available for me because of some decisions back in ME1 i'd really be frustrated.

[Zulu_DFA]

SimonTheFrog wrote...

But not much more... and actually, this is not so bad after all. When i play the game i want to see most of it's content. If i knew that a huge battle sequence or some nice infiltration mission on a remote planet is not available for me because of some decisions back in ME1 i'd really be frustrated.

Come on, it's 2010s out there! It's the new definition of replayability!