Mass Effect Megathread - Ah, yes, titles. We have dismissed that claim - Games

[QUOTE=JeanLuc761;30905307]That is EXACTLY my problem. I don't remember which Bioware executive said it, but the quote was "Mass Effect 3 is a great entry point for new players!" That was literally the worst videogame-related quote I've heard in a good long while, and I include just about everything Bobby Kotick has said.[/QUOTE] I heard Casey Hudson say that multiple times at E3, i'm not very pleased at that being the selling point. But again, maybe they're just not selling it well. [QUOTE=Janus Vesta;30905338]Calm down, players who don't play all 3 games will likely get fucked over by the default choices. Like in ME2 where Wrex is dead if you don't play ME1.[/QUOTE] I'm not concerned with other players being penalized for not playing the previous games, i'm concerned that the people who [i]did[/i] play them will be 'forgotten' about in an effort to up sales and draw in the shooter crowd.

[QUOTE=DX_V;30905408] I'm not concerned with other players being penalized for not playing the previous games, i'm concerned that the people who [i]did[/i] play them are forgotten about in an effort to up sales and draw in the shooter crowd.[/QUOTE] Thank you for wording that more eloquently than I was thinking.

[QUOTE=Canuhearmenow;30905349]DA3 [I]might[/I] be better then DA2, but definitely not as good as DA1. Origins didn't really feel as though it was meant to be a trilogy, and was only given that task after EA discovered Fantasy games can actually make serious money. Besides, the lobotomized the game entirely to appeal to the ME2 crowd and they'll likely keep the same system for DA3, which is just aching for disaster.[/QUOTE] Well they did say Origins was meant to introduce the world incase they got to make any future games. And DA2 only got 18 months development time. If they get a good 2-3 years to work on 3 it could be really good. If not it'll be DA2 2, which would suck.

I wouldn't say he doesn't have any characterisation just yet but knowing Bioware, he probably won't. Jacob.

[QUOTE=Devodiere;30905495]I wouldn't say he doesn't have any characterisation just yet but knowing Bioware, he probably won't. Jacob.[/QUOTE] I honestly think Jacob is a far better character than most people give him credit for. I actually like that he's one of the few "normal" people in the series.

[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;30905468]Well they did say Origins was meant to introduce the world incase they got to make any future games. And DA2 only got 18 months development time. If they get a good 2-3 years to work on 3 it could be really good. If not it'll be DA2 2, which would suck.[/QUOTE] The problem is that they also tried to use the Mass Effect treatment on something that was more or less supposed to be Baldur's Gate 21st century edition, Dragon Age excelled at being a hardcore classic Fantasy RPG, and it's sales represented that.

[QUOTE=Canuhearmenow;30905522]The problem is that they also tried to use the Mass Effect treatment on something that was more or less supposed to be Baldur's Gate 21st century edition, Dragon Age excelled at being a hardcore classic Fantasy RPG, and it's sales represented that.[/QUOTE] I don't understand, you don't like that whenever you press a button something [h2]AWESOME HAPPENS?[/h2]

[QUOTE=DX_V;30905547]I don't understand, you don't like that whenever you press a button something [h2]AWESOME HAPPENS?[/h2][/QUOTE] Maybe I'm being unintentionally thick, but I didn't notice the "dumbing down" of Dragon Age 2. The combat was still very in-depth and heavily utilized pause-and-play, and I quite liked having a voiced protagonist.

[QUOTE=Canuhearmenow;30905522]The problem is that they also tried to use the Mass Effect treatment on something that was more or less supposed to be Baldur's Gate 21st century edition, Dragon Age excelled at being a hardcore classic Fantasy RPG, and it's sales represented that.[/QUOTE] I'm just hoping they learned from the pretty negative reception DA2 got.

[QUOTE=JeanLuc761;30905565]Maybe I'm being unintentionally thick, but I didn't notice the "dumbing down" of Dragon Age 2. The combat was still very in-depth and heavily utilized pause-and-play, and I quite liked having a voiced protagonist.[/QUOTE] At the risk of sounding like an EA-hating bandwagoner, but Dragon Age 2 was the perfect example of how EA beats down it's developers so they can fill their coffers with cash cows. Dragon Age 2 had amazing potential to be a truly great sequel to Origins, hell even a voiced protagonist would've been fine if better utilized, but the game was horribly rushed and was staffed by the likes of Hamburger Helper (who admitted to hating video games.)

[QUOTE=JeanLuc761;30905565]The combat was still very in-depth and heavily utilized pause-and-play.[/QUOTE] You and I must be playing two different games, there was virtually no strategy in the second game. It was a glorified hack-and-slash, which would have been fine but it masqueraded around as if it was a worthy sequel to Origins. To be honest the combat wasn't even the worst part of that game for me, it was how shallow some of the characters felt (especially the romance options), not to mention how underwhelming and unimportant the story felt. The story wasn't an epic like Origins, it was about one dude in a city getting rich. I felt like I should have been listening to a rap album while playing the game, it wasn't until later in Act 3 when things even got going. Then it ended. I don't think the game is terrible, but it certainly wasn't what I was hoping for when I played it. I was hoping for something like Dragon Age: Origins 2 (you know like when Baldur's Gate 2 was released), I didn't get it and I was disappointed. I'm harsh on the game because I don't want it to infect the Mass Effect games, but it isn't worthy of anything under a 6/10 imo.

[QUOTE=DX_V;30905667]You and I must be playing two different games, there was virtually no strategy in the second game. It was a glorified hack-and-slash, which would have been fine but it masqueraded around as if it was a worthy sequel to Origins. To be honest the combat wasn't even the worst part of that game for me, it was how shallow some of the characters felt (especially the romance options), not to mention how underwhelming and unimportant the story felt. The story wasn't an epic like Origins, it was about one dude in a city getting rich. I felt like I should have been listening to a rap album while playing the game, it wasn't until later in Act 3 when things even got going. Then it ended.[/QUOTE] You'll note I never said DA2 was superior to DA:O ;) In my opinion, DA:O was about as close to a perfect 10 as you can get with modern RPGs. I thought it was a masterpiece. DA2, on the other hand, was closer to a 7. It had some good ideas and some entertaining moments (and Varric), but it was let down by a lot of shallow storylines and less strategic combat. I definitely don't see how DA2 was a hack-and-slash though. There was no button-mashing whatsoever.

[QUOTE=doommarine23;30905241]You're not the story writer.[/QUOTE] Yes I am [img]http://i.somethingawful.com/forumsystem/emoticons/emot-colbert.gif[/img]

[QUOTE=JeanLuc761;30905733]You'll note I never said DA2 was superior to DA:O ;) In my opinion, DA:O was about as close to a perfect 10 as you can get with modern RPGs. I thought it was a masterpiece. DA2, on the other hand, was closer to a 7. It had some good ideas and some entertaining moments (and Varric), but it was let down by a lot of shallow storylines and less strategic combat. I definitely don't see how DA2 was a hack-and-slash though. There was no button-mashing whatsoever.[/QUOTE] Oh I wasn't acting under the assumption that you were stating that DA2 was in any way better than Origins, I was just comparing the sequel to it's predecessor. I apologize if I made it sound like you were a white knight defending DA2's honor, it was unintentional. I agree that Dragon Age 2 had some shining moments, Merrill, Varric, Aveline, the family dynamic, attempting to have a voiced character. Though even the stuff that was good felt like it was rushed and half-assed. All the characters could have been so much better if they were written better, the family dynamic could have been an amazing way to immerse people into the storyline if they didn't get lazy and take your sibling away at the beginning of the game, and imagine if they had VAs for numerous races and sexes for the PC (like Origins but with voice acting). The game could have been flat out amazing, but they got rushed and allowed poor writers to write critical parts of the story and important characters. Which is exactly what I don't want for ME3. They are two different teams yes, but it seems like Bioware is focusing too much on attracting new players and doing crap that makes the last game of the series a 'great entry point for new players', that is the exact same thing they said about DA2. It would be too easy for them to just change evey character into romance options, cut out the meaningful and well hidden side-missions, and just focus on big explosions and lots of fighting with minimal depth. This would sell well and would require less time to do, the only problem is for those of us who enjoy the story elements of the game just as much if not more than the action, get the cold shoulder.

After having a nice debate with someone on Steam, we came to the conclusion that Bioware being bought by EA was the single worst thing to ever happen to it. I do not have any doubts about Bioware's ability to create amazing games, but I do have an inkling they're gradually going to be churning progressively worse games (or, at least games that aren't geared towards their RPG roots) by their new corporate overlords.

[QUOTE=Canuhearmenow;30905887]After having a nice debate with someone on Steam, we came to the conclusion that Bioware being bought by EA was the single worst thing to ever happen to it. I do not have any doubts about Bioware's ability to create amazing games, but I do have an inkling they're gradually going to be churning progressively worse games (or, at least games that aren't geared towards their RPG roots) by their new corporate overlords.[/QUOTE] EA (like many publishers) does have a tendency to do a little bit of money grubbing, but I haven't noticed much of a negative influence on Bioware. At least, not yet. With Mass Effect 2, the worst we really had was the high number of DLCs (most of which turned out to be rather excellent and worth the money, imo). With Dragon Age 2...that was an admitted rush job and I doubt they're going to make that mistake again.

[QUOTE=JeanLuc761;30905945]EA (like many publishers) does have a tendency to do a little bit of money grubbing, but I haven't noticed much of a negative influence on Bioware. At least, not yet. With Mass Effect 2, the worst we really had was the high number of DLCs (most of which turned out to be rather excellent and worth the money, imo). With Dragon Age 2...that was an admitted rush job and I doubt they're going to make that mistake again.[/QUOTE] ME2 and Origins were pretty much done before Bioware was bought by EA. The only game that Bioware has developed fully under EA, was DA2.

[QUOTE=DX_V;30905979]ME2 and Origins were pretty much done before Bioware was bought by EA. The only game that Bioware has developed fully under EA, was DA2.[/QUOTE] Well, assuming the extra 3-6 months Bioware's been given for ME3 are being devoted to making the game the best it can possibly be, it appears EA learned from their mistake of rushing DA2.

One thing that annoys me is when I can't max everything out. Like, you can't complete all of your powers because there is a level cap. I don't mind how hard it is, or how long it takes, as long as it's possible. Maybe give less points and draw it out longer like in the first one, maybe not quite that long where it take multiple playthroughs, but not quite as fast as ME2.

The main problem with DA2 wasn't gameplay (it was mostly unchanged, with a few minor tweeks). The main problem was the rushed story and lackluster characters.

[QUOTE=shatteredwindow;30906121]One thing that annoys me is when I can't max everything out. Like, you can't complete all of your powers because there is a level cap. I don't mind how hard it is, or how long it takes, as long as it's possible. Maybe give less points and draw it out longer like in the first one, maybe not quite that long where it take multiple playthroughs, but not quite as fast as ME2.[/QUOTE] I'm not even slightly ashamed to say that any new playthrough of ME1 I do is aided along with trainers (for extra experience points, not infinite health or ammo). Sorry, Bioware, but I don't want to do three full playthroughs just to get to level 60.

[QUOTE=MaverickIB;30905243]Keep in mind that Shepard was kind of thrust into things the same way. He was just an exceptional soldier doing his job, and happened to have the entire fate of the galaxy thrown into his lap. Also, I think it represents the desperate nature of ME3, at this point average joes have to step up and become heroes.[/QUOTE] That's why I'm kind of thinking he's being freshened up to possibly take on the reigns in future Mass Effect games. Possibly. [QUOTE=MaverickIB;30905183]I think Vega fits the "jarhead thrown into the mix of things" look pretty well. Also, keep in mind that that's an [B]alternate[/B] outfit. His normal look could be something significantly less douchey. [/QUOTE] By the looks of it though alternate outfits are merely reskins and minor details added. I'm assuming the eye piece on Vega is an addition to his real outfit. [QUOTE=DX_V;30904822]I don't know where I saw it but there was an image of Shepard and Liara canoodling and Liara's head tentacles were in a mess, it was sweet but kind of strange. I always wondered if Asari's head tentacles were hard or if they were actually movable. Edit - [IMG]http://k.min.us/ib0IQ6.jpg[/IMG] Found it, i'm a fucking wizard.[/QUOTE] I would say they're bone supported or at least cartilage supported. Kind of like how are noses are flexible to a degree.

[QUOTE=doommarine23;30898493]SEE THE CYCLE REPEATS NOW THIS IS TALI TIME. Soon we'll go back into what other phase is next[/QUOTE] [b]Confidence born of ignorance, the cycle cannot be broken. The pattern has repeated itself more times than you can fathom.[/b] [QUOTE=JeanLuc761;30905255]That's another way of looking at it. I'll be honest, I'm just worried that Bioware is focusing on the wrong audience. What I've seen of Mass Effect 3 looks INCREDIBLE (save for the on-rails sequence), but I'm still nervous about it.[/QUOTE] I don't see why everyone's getting bitchy at an on-rails shooter sequence. In real life if you're sitting in the back of an ATV shooting at something, I'm sorry to tell you but you probably aren't ALSO driving the vehicle. Shepard's shooting, Legions driving. Shepard gets to decide what to shoot, Legion gets to decide where to go. Simple as that.

I hope legion gets some nice screentime beyond that one mission.

Well, was just about to play Mass Effect 2 for a while, but my computer thinks it's a bad idea. Anyone know what it means when the computer emits a loud, intermittent beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep when under heavy stress? Please note, I've only noticed this problem in Mass Effect 1 and 2. Quick research suggests either the video card is going bad or the RAM is having trouble.

[QUOTE=WilhelmScreamer;30906802]I hope legion gets some nice screentime beyond that one mission.[/QUOTE] Oh I think everyone wants to see Legion come back.

I hope EAs 'leadership' doesn't cause ME3 to be a huge fuck up like DA2. I hope if EA starts throwing around demands Casey Hudson simply tells them to go fuck themselves and leave game development up to the big boys who know how to handle it.

[QUOTE=sltungle;30906519] I don't see why everyone's getting bitchy at an on-rails shooter sequence. In real life if you're sitting in the back of an ATV shooting at something, I'm sorry to tell you but you probably aren't ALSO driving the vehicle. Shepard's shooting, Legions driving. Shepard gets to decide what to shoot, Legion gets to decide where to go. Simple as that.[/QUOTE] Just because there is a reason behind a crappy game mechanic doesn't mean it should be there in the first place. I personally don't have a problem with it, but it's a bad defense to say it makes sense in real life, when they can just not use it, and I can see why people wouldn't like it.

[QUOTE=shatteredwindow;30906847]Just because there is a reason behind a crappy game mechanic doesn't mean it should be there in the first place. I personally don't have a problem with it, but it's a bad defense to say it makes sense in real life, when they can just not use it, and I can see why people wouldn't like it.[/QUOTE] Explain how it's a crappy game mechanic, though. Do you think the sequence would be better if you driving and gunning? Like in the Mako, or in the Hammerhead? I think the idea is that by taking the focus off of what's in front of you and trying to navigate over the terrain they can be more cinematic with the events behind you: the Reaper walker lumbering over you. You have to admit that having a more cinematic and tense sequence like the current one would convey more of the sense of hopelessness that BioWare seem to be going for here than if you were driving and gunning and occasionally saw the Reaper walker.

Legion and HK-47 get into a fight, who wins?