[QUOTE=Wii60;29495059]Yes but i don't want super simplified gameplay and stuff, ME2 was awesome.[/QUOTE]
Then you have obviously failed to pay attention because gameplay is all they've been talking about, ad nauseum.
I forgot all about ME3 because of Portal 2 then someone linked me to ME3 screens. Then I remembered this thread, so in the past month or so has anything new besides a couple screens come out?
This is why I get really frustrated with facepunchers, especially when it comes to videogames. I know its the internet, but most of us have literally no faith in just about anything.
It seems the only company that can't do any wrong is valve. If they make a mistake, people here chalk it up a one time thing. The double standard is ridiculous, but I guess its a valve game forum.
When you look at any other company though, whether it be Infinity Ward or DICE or Rockstar, no matter the track record, no matter if everything they've made has been excellent, if they slip up with one sentence, or make a single tiny thing you don't like, you go ballistic, deriding the company as shit and ridiculing everything about it.
For DICE I wonder if they should just have not made a BF3 since it seems so many people don't like it. I can go onto any thread about BF3 on any forum and I'll find many people saying "its consolized" "its buggy" "DICE sucks".
For Rockstar any Max Payne 3 thread will have people calling rockstar the company that ruined Max Payne.
For Deus Ex: Human Revolution we get those people who want it to be exactly the same as DX.
For Bethesda we have whole forums against them and the new Fallout franchise.
In this case, we just have his word. One person's subjective word. What's his definition of "good starting point." How limited are the choices? We have very little information on the subject on this other than one staff member's word, and you instantly jump on it and blow it up by like 100. If they limit choices a lot you can complain then (although for some reason I highly doubt we'll even notice it since we don't know anything that's going on there), but now? Hell DA2 wasn't even a bad game, sure, it wasn't as engrossing as DA: O but just because a company takes a risk in one game which didn't pan out well, that means every game they make later on is going to suck?
[QUOTE=markfu;29495742]This is why I get really frustrated with facepunchers, especially when it comes to videogames. I know its the internet, but most of us have literally no faith in just about anything.
It seems the only company that can't do any wrong is valve. If they make a mistake, people here chalk it up a one time thing. The double standard is ridiculous, but I guess its a valve game forum.
When you look at any other company though, whether it be Infinity Ward or DICE or Rockstar, no matter the track record, no matter if everything they've made has been excellent, if they slip up with one sentence, or make a single tiny thing you don't like, you go ballistic, deriding the company as shit and ridiculing everything about it.
For DICE I wonder if they should just have not made a BF3 since it seems so many people don't like it. I can go onto any thread about BF3 on any forum and I'll find many people saying "its consolized" "its buggy" "DICE sucks".
For Rockstar any Max Payne 3 thread will have people calling rockstar the company that ruined Max Payne.
For Deus Ex: Human Revolution we get those people who want it to be exactly the same as DX.
For Bethesda we have whole forums against them and the new Fallout franchise.
In this case, we just have his word. One person's subjective word. What's his definition of "good starting point." How limited are the choices? We have very little information on the subject on this other than one staff member's word, and you instantly jump on it and blow it up by like 100. If they limit choices a lot you can complain then (although for some reason I highly doubt we'll even notice it since we don't know anything that's going on there), but now? Hell DA2 wasn't even a bad game, sure, it wasn't as engrossing as DA: O but just because a company takes a risk in one game which didn't pan out well, that means every game they make later on is going to suck?[/QUOTE]
I've given up on hoping Facepunch act resonable and mature a long time ago, I just supress it now.
[QUOTE=thrawn2787;29495112]ITS THE FUCKING END HOW IS THAT GREAT PLACE TO GET STARTED
Fuckin Bioware. My hopes sink ever downward[/QUOTE]
They basically want to ensure they don't lose out on too many sales due to people saying "I haven't played the first two, no point getting this one"
[QUOTE=markfu;29495742]This is why I get really frustrated with facepunchers, especially when it comes to videogames. I know its the internet, but most of us have literally no faith in just about anything.
It seems the only company that can't do any wrong is valve. If they make a mistake, people here chalk it up a one time thing. The double standard is ridiculous, but I guess its a valve game forum.
When you look at any other company though, whether it be Infinity Ward or DICE or Rockstar, no matter the track record, no matter if everything they've made has been excellent, if they slip up with one sentence, or make a single tiny thing you don't like, you go ballistic, deriding the company as shit and ridiculing everything about it.
For DICE I wonder if they should just have not made a BF3 since it seems so many people don't like it. I can go onto any thread about BF3 on any forum and I'll find many people saying "its consolized" "its buggy" "DICE sucks".
For Rockstar any Max Payne 3 thread will have people calling rockstar the company that ruined Max Payne.
For Deus Ex: Human Revolution we get those people who want it to be exactly the same as DX.
For Bethesda we have whole forums against them and the new Fallout franchise.
In this case, we just have his word. One person's subjective word. What's his definition of "good starting point." How limited are the choices? We have very little information on the subject on this other than one staff member's word, and you instantly jump on it and blow it up by like 100. If they limit choices a lot you can complain then (although for some reason I highly doubt we'll even notice it since we don't know anything that's going on there), but now? Hell DA2 wasn't even a bad game, sure, it wasn't as engrossing as DA: O but just because a company takes a risk in one game which didn't pan out well, that means every game they make later on is going to suck?[/QUOTE]
Valve ain't super jesus either, they've been on a long road to becoming a giant fat [I]corporation[/I] themselves, and the warnings signs were YEARS ago.
I have plenty of faith in BW in regards to delivering a satisfying game. In regards to story, they wrote themselves into a corner a long while ago, and most 80's pop scifi was pretty hamfisted heehaw stupid to begin with, so using it as a source may not have been the best idea. I expect to be entertained and hail the return of Bro*Force to its original SUPER MAXIMIM HOLY SHIT POWER LEVEL for at least a couple of missions on Tuchanka.
No more, no less.
Expectations are meaningless without proper context, 14-18 year old males tend to suck at context, so why would one waste time bantering with people who are already predisposed and hyper-polarized based on subjective interpretations.
DA2 sucked because EA made BW churn it out in 14 months. There was no way it was going to not have issues.
[QUOTE=markfu;29495742]
In this case, we just have his word. One person's subjective word. What's his definition of "good starting point." How limited are the choices? We have very little information on the subject on this other than one staff member's word, and you instantly jump on it and blow it up by like 100. If they limit choices a lot you can complain then (although for some reason I highly doubt we'll even notice it since we don't know anything that's going on there), but now? Hell DA2 wasn't even a bad game, sure, it wasn't as engrossing as DA: O but just because a company takes a risk in one game which didn't pan out well, that means every game they make later on is going to suck?[/QUOTE]
Priestly is probably basing his opinions on Mass Effect 1 and Mass Effect 2, and to be honest ME2 didn't have many choices/consequences to begin with, not many that could substantially bite you in the ass in ME3 Endgame/epilogue anyway.
Well they've already stated they won't "punish any" decision, and Hudson's excerpt today basically echoes the same thing Priestly said, and that would be because their external marketing will be to new users; they expect vets to already be on board.
[QUOTE=27X;29496641]Valve ain't super jesus either, they've been on a long road to becoming a giant fat [I]corporation[/I] themselves, and the warnings signs were YEARS ago.
[/QUOTE]
With one big difference. Valve doesn't have stockholders or a board. It's not publicly traded. I really recommend getting your hands on 'The Final Hours of Portal 2'; Gabe's vision of the company is anything but a giant corporation.
That is why they've managed to stay [b]relatively[/b] the same as they've grown.... but they're still a vastly different company than they used to be, and logistics of scale dictates that change, no matter how well meaning the growth was intended to be, and this is just the beginning.
I just wonder if we get to fly spaceships and blow up reapers :allears:
[QUOTE=Thom12255;29489407]There's no way the Reapers would focus on just Earth.
In the ME2 ending we see thousands of them so I'm sure they're fighting all over the place.[/QUOTE]
It'd probably make sense that they want to remove humanity from the equation ASAP because, so far, humanity (well, not even humanity: one specific individual who happens to be human) has been the only real major threat to the Reapers during this cycle. They probably want to focus on Earth first to get rid of the bulk of us.
[QUOTE=DiscoInferno;29492800]:Deepest confusion: why are we talking like Elcor?[/QUOTE]
Venemous sarcasm: Because you touch yourself at night.
[QUOTE=Psychokitten;29500084]Venemous sarcasm: Because you touch yourself at night.[/QUOTE]
Amused: Family guy, ohoho.
I demand a link to the play of Hamlet with a all stare Elcor cast
[QUOTE=27X;29502155][url]http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/103/index/7243553[/url][/QUOTE]
[media]http://i52.tinypic.com/wsw8qp.jpg[/media]
Oh god what.
[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;29502241][media]http://i52.tinypic.com/wsw8qp.jpg[/media]
Oh god what.[/QUOTE]
[i]The precioussssssssssssss[/i]
[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;29502241][media]http://i52.tinypic.com/wsw8qp.jpg[/media]
Oh god what.[/QUOTE]
Creepily amused: Ololol
[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;29502241][media]http://i52.tinypic.com/wsw8qp.jpg[/media]
Oh god what.[/QUOTE]
:Sincere amusement: I laughed at that
I'm trying to imagine what the ending theme across the credits to ME3 will be like. As much as I'm sure Clint Mansell will make some fucking astounding music for the game, I kinda feel like I'd like M4 Part II to make a comeback.
It'd make it sort of feel as though we'd come full circle. We finished on that note after blowing the shit out of Sovereign, and after taking the rest of the Reapers down... it seems to me that it'd feel right to end on that same note.
And frying the collector's arses.
We didn't hear M4 Part II in ME2.
[QUOTE=sltungle;29503291]We didn't hear M4 Part II in ME2.[/QUOTE]
and that sucked. Mansell certainly has the chops to remix it.
i just hope that this game doesn't have severe dragon age 2 class manic depressive disorder
you know, "everyone hates everyone and everyone is an asshole to everyone and there's no way to solve anything because everyone is an asshole also your mother was enslaved by assholes and tali got raped by a krogan and you have space AIDS"
cause I wanna solve things and be the hero :saddowns:
Nah that was ME2
Hopefully not, Space AIDS sounds bad
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
