Mass Effect 3 being further dumbed down

Fail said:
You know, there's something terribly wrong in this thread, some people are more concerned about inflation and price margins rather than whether a game is good or not.
Click to expand...

If I'm wrong, then I apologize - but weren't YOU the one who was just bitching about the fact that games are $59 and how they're a cash-grab-pocket-ripoff? :confused:
 
stop!theradio said:
If I'm wrong, then I apologize - but weren't YOU the one who was just bitching about the fact that games are $59 and how they're a cash-grab-pocket-ripoff? :confused:
Click to expand...
That argument failed, so now he's back to trying to enforce his subjective opinion of the quality of some of the latest games as objective truth.
 
rampantandroid said:
This is in the general forum, thanks. I plan to play this on the XBox 360. Did you play DA2? If so, you may just understand the doom and gloom.
Click to expand...

Sorry for not responding, I ended up having to run to work for 20 hours due to some bs.

Anyways, I never had any interest in DA2. I tried DA1 and didn't like it so I didn't play 2, my friend tried it and said he did not like it. But I also do not remember hearing or seeing any press release similar to the one you linked in this thread to about DA2?

I understand EA runs a lot of development and has been known to ruin games on their unrealistic time lines, but to expect a game to be dumbed down because they need more time has me confused since you are really the only one here claiming so.
 
DA 2 was a PoS, that's why I didn't buy it, it was nothing more than a cash grab.
 
Fail said:
DA 2 was a PoS, that's why I didn't buy it, it was nothing more than a cash grab.
Click to expand...

So is this how you operate, fail? Ignore past arguments when you got owned and proceed to start those same types of arguments with other people?
 
Never could get into this series. Doubt I ever will finding out this news.
 
Jellylesg said:
That's some superman-grade stamina you've got going there.
Click to expand...

Grabbed a nap at work since I was there in the wee hours of the morning. Would love to go into detail about what it was about but I honestly have zero stamina right now and am about to finally get to bed at 830.

Fail said:
DA 2 was a PoS, that's why I didn't buy it, it was nothing more than a cash grab.
Click to expand...

Ok, I get that with the whole 9months of development time part. But I do see/here/read people who do enjoy the game. Is there any site out there saying the game is a complete failure?
 
Trimlock said:
Grabbed a nap at work since I was there in the wee hours of the morning. Would love to go into detail about what it was about but I honestly have zero stamina right now and am about to finally get to bed at 830.



Ok, I get that with the whole 9months of development time part. But I do see/here/read people who do enjoy the game. Is there any site out there saying the game is a complete failure?
Click to expand...

You mean site reviews aren't bought and paid for?

that's news to me.
 
I guess i am in the minority that felt that ME2 < ME1. ME1 had an epic storyline, that i found lacking in ME2. Plus the inclusion of more shooter aspects in what should be an RPG annoyed me.

Was ME2 fun? Sure as hell was. Was it as good as ME1, not to me. But i am in the minority it appears, and no game maker is going to make a game for me, as there is no money in it. Sad days. :(
 
Mass Effect 1 was great for story and for the general RPG feeling. However, the game was tedious and redundant at times. Elevators times, realistic I suppose but this is the "future" and a bloody game. Mako roving was fun at first but became regurgitated and boring fast. lolmountainclimbing with barely any flat surface gets annoying. The item system was a huge mess. Interesting but still a mess.

Mass Effect 2 had a good story, not epic in the actual details but had a lot more emotion and "in the moment" feel to it. So it's debatable which story actually is better; depends which perspective you are judging it from. The combat system was a lot more fluid and enjoyable. The weapon/item system was good; I did wish there was a slight bit more modification possible but it was good enough. One of the bigger down falls I suppose was the decreased amount of "main missions". There was quite a bit of sidetracking but I still enjoyed it overall. Scanning... well... reminds me of some old computer game I used to play in the earlier 90s. Can't remember the name.

Bottom line: ME2>ME1, simply because ME2 actually captures the player in the moment, where as ME1 felt more like an outside view.
 
Fail said:
You mean site reviews aren't bought and paid for?

that's news to me.
Click to expand...

So if those same news sites give Witcher 2 great scores I expect you to accuse them of being paid off as well. Otherwise you will be a complete hypocrite.
 
Term-X said:
However, the game was tedious and redundant at times. Elevators times, realistic I suppose but this is the "future" and a bloody game.
Click to expand...

The elevators were actually a "clever" way to mask loading times while adding flavor to the game. The downside however is they made loading times on the PC unnecessarily long, which PC gamers did complain about. ME 2 of course went with actual loading screens, and there were shorter delays between transitioning areas. Yet we look here and we see PC gamers also complaining about elevators disappearing. You also have the same polarizing opinion regarding the inventory system and mako/vehicles.

What these really show is how subjective gaming really is, and that ones personal opinion is merely that, it is not reflective of something being definitively good/bad or right/wrong for everyone else.
 
Derangel said:
So if those same news sites give Witcher 2 great scores I expect you to accuse them of being paid off as well. Otherwise you will be a complete hypocrite.
Click to expand...

Who said I lend any credibility to review sites anymore?
 
Fail said:
Who said I lend any credibility to review sites anymore?
Click to expand...

I forgot the tongue icon for that post, sorry. I was giving you shit. But you probably give them about as much attention as I do these days. I can't remember the last time I read a game review.
 
Term-X said:
Mass Effect 1 was great for story and for the general RPG feeling. However, the game was tedious and redundant at times. Elevators times, realistic I suppose but this is the "future" and a bloody game. Mako roving was fun at first but became regurgitated and boring fast. lolmountainclimbing with barely any flat surface gets annoying. The item system was a huge mess. Interesting but still a mess.

Mass Effect 2 had a good story, not epic in the actual details but had a lot more emotion and "in the moment" feel to it. So it's debatable which story actually is better; depends which perspective you are judging it from. The combat system was a lot more fluid and enjoyable. The weapon/item system was good; I did wish there was a slight bit more modification possible but it was good enough. One of the bigger down falls I suppose was the decreased amount of "main missions". There was quite a bit of sidetracking but I still enjoyed it overall. Scanning... well... reminds me of some old computer game I used to play in the earlier 90s. Can't remember the name.

Bottom line: ME2>ME1, simply because ME2 actually captures the player in the moment, where as ME1 felt more like an outside view.
Click to expand...

This is a pretty good summary.

In ME1, Mako sections would've been significantly better if the random terrain generator wasn't convinced that every planet is made up entirely of the Rocky Mountains. Inventory system wasn't bad in and of itself, but the massive amount of redundant loot cluttering things up is what hosed it.

One thing I'll disagree with is that inventory was handled better in ME2. Maybe I've just been playing RPGs too long, but one element I've always liked is continuing to upgrade your characters' equipment throughout the game. ME1 had too many weapon varieties for the frequency of crates/loot drops, but would've been fine if they were harder to come by (even a bad weapon of a higher tier could be an upgrade if you weren't constantly being showered with guns). Especially lame since ponying up for the Firepower pack basically gave you the best of 3 weapon types for the whole game.

On the subject of story, I think that ME2, short main storyline and all, could be more immersive because BioWare did a better job with the mechanics of storytelling - the dialogue, the characterization, etc. On paper, I think the first game had the better story, but ME2's could be more compelling because it was better told.
 
Term-X said:
Scanning... well... reminds me of some old computer game I used to play in the earlier 90s. Can't remember the name.

.
Click to expand...

When you said that, it made me remember a game that I played ages ago called Alien Legacy. I remember flying my ship over the planets and scanning for supplies and alien technology to upgrade my ship.


Edit:
I went an googled Alien Legacy and found a youtube gameplay video. It really is pretty similar in some ways.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXgjxafhIiE&feature=related
 
I have to say, being a huge fan of ME 1 and 2, the more I hear about ME3 the less I'm excited. Being on Earth was already kinda stereotypical/lame, and I figure that the plot will be mediocre since they kind of wrote themselves in a hole with the Reapers, and probably will pull an Independence Day ending. But now I'm just hoping that they're just talking about adding in multiplayer or something, and not actually making the game easier.

Of course, on the bright side, the less excited for the game I am, the more pleasantly surprised I'll be if it turns out to be good.
 
They really cannot impress you people.

You all complained about the inventory, elevators, and mako in me. So they LISTENED TO YOU and removed them because that's what the majority said they wanted.

Then you all complained that they removed them when me2 came out. You complained that it no longer felt like an rpg. So now they are LISTENING TO YOU again and have talked about how they are making me3 more of an rpg and giving you back the modifiable weapons/armor you wanted.

Many of you complained that you are worried about the game being rushed just like every other game is these days and just like DA2 was. So they announce that they are delaying the release to work on better combat mechanics and a new audio engine with cooperative work from EA dice. An article full of speculation without ANY EVIDENCE is posted and you all go apeshit and claim that they are "dumbing it down" without any proof.

You people are seriously just looking for an excuse to hate it at this point. I can't think of any other reason why people would be posting these types of comments without any evidence to support their claims.

It continues to amaze me that bioware has the patience to put up with the crybaby community that pc gamers have become. They continue to listen to you even as you continue to hate them for listening to you.

Everyone admits that DA2 sucks simply because it was rushed. So why are you complaining that me3 is being delayed!?!? WTF!?!?
 
NaturalViolence said:
They really cannot impress you people.

You all complained about the inventory, elevators, and mako in me. So they LISTENED TO YOU and removed them because that's what the majority said they wanted.

Then you all complained that they removed them when me2 came out. You complained that it no longer felt like an rpg. So now they are LISTENING TO YOU again and have talked about how they are making me3 more of an rpg and giving you back the modifiable weapons/armor you wanted.

Many of you complained that you are worried about the game being rushed just like every other game is these days and just like DA2 was. So they announce that they are delaying the release to work on better combat mechanics and a new audio engine with cooperative work from EA dice. An article full of speculation without ANY EVIDENCE is posted and you all go apeshit and claim that they are "dumbing it down" without any proof.

You people are seriously just looking for an excuse to hate it at this point. I can't think of any other reason why people would be posting these types of comments without any evidence to support their claims.

It continues to amaze me that bioware has the patience to put up with the crybaby community that pc gamers have become. They continue to listen to you even as you continue to hate them for listening to you.

Everyone admits that DA2 sucks simply because it was rushed. So why are you complaining that me3 is being delayed!?!? WTF!?!?
Click to expand...

Actually people wanted an improved inventory system, not none at all. Then again Bioware can't make a good inventory system.

Valve and Blizzard deal with the same shit. Devs need thick skin to deal with the game community in general whether its PC or console gamers.
 
The MAKO was cool. The boring, repetitive missions with them were not. (Non-story line missions).
The inventory system sucked, it needed improving, not removal.
I am glad they removed the elevators, they were pointless.
 
Monkey God said:
The MAKO was cool. The boring, repetitive missions with them were not. (Non-story line missions).
The inventory system sucked, it needed improving, not removal.
Click to expand...
Agreed. The Mako missions were repetitive and rather bland. Thus the natural thing to do would make them more interesting... not remove them in favor of planet scanning. The inventory system was a mess, thus the natural thing to do is clean it up/fix it... not remove it. Though personally the removal of the inventory system didn't bother me in the sequel.
 
I had a long post going and then I rebooted...

Really, my doom and gloom stems from EA saying ME3 will apply to a larger audience. That screams COD, not KOTR to me.

Elevators? I didn't went them removed. I wanted shorter load times. Instead I got load times as bad or worse, with no elevator. No crew arguing. Nothing..just a spinning blueprint.

Characters in ME2 feel a bit more shallow to me; ones like Jack just serve to piss me off to the point where I will architect it so she dies the next time I play. Having to run all over the ship to find my crew is fun the first time or two. After that...well, I want my whole crew in the cargo bay again. I preferred the layout of the SR-1 to the SR-2. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the SR1 was...what, 3 levels, but the first two levels involved no load time...you just ran down the stairs and you were at your quarters, med bay, mess hall and so forth.

It's neat to be able to explore the ship, yes. But that wears off when you need have to add a recurring event to your calendar called "visit all floors to visit all crewmembers and try to advance dialog further and get their loyalty mission" - it was too formulaic. Each member had some wonderful loyalty mission: miranda's sister. Grunt's...whatever that was called...proving himself. Tali's court martial...etc. Aside from Zaeed (and Morinth, but she is recruited DURING a loyalty mission) everyone had SOME form of loyalty mission. I think the ONLY loyalty mission I enjoyed was Kasumi's...and small parts of Tali's. Why? Oh, I dunno...one is dialog and the other is sneaking around. They're not solely focused on "SHOOT KILL BLOW UP."

Also, scanning is a reason I am not keen on another play through of ME1 due to the inventory system. I hate it. Just as much as I hate scouring the planet surface in the Mako.

ME2 I am more likely to replay, but the scanning chases me off. As does the lack of proper depth in the main story, instead the game just focuses on pleasing your own crew. ME1 felt grant and overarching. I felt that the galaxy was large. In ME2...I don't feel that. I feel stuck in my own little world. Does the lack of the Mako contribute to that feeling? Yes - I miss looking up to see a planet and some moons above me. I miss seeing stuff like the planet with a scar from a mass accelerator. ME2 might be streamlined, but it lost so much in the process. But hey, it appealed to the masses more, so I only expect EA to go further down that path.
 
rampantandroid said:
I had a long post going and then I rebooted...

Really, my doom and gloom stems from EA saying ME3 will apply to a larger audience. That screams COD, not KOTR to me.

Elevators? I didn't went them removed. I wanted shorter load times. Instead I got load times as bad or worse, with no elevator. No crew arguing. Nothing..just a spinning blueprint.

Characters in ME2 feel a bit more shallow to me; ones like Jack just serve to piss me off to the point where I will architect it so she dies the next time I play. Having to run all over the ship to find my crew is fun the first time or two. After that...well, I want my whole crew in the cargo bay again. I preferred the layout of the SR-1 to the SR-2. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the SR1 was...what, 3 levels, but the first two levels involved no load time...you just ran down the stairs and you were at your quarters, med bay, mess hall and so forth.

It's neat to be able to explore the ship, yes. But that wears off when you need have to add a recurring event to your calendar called "visit all floors to visit all crewmembers and try to advance dialog further and get their loyalty mission" - it was too formulaic. Each member had some wonderful loyalty mission: miranda's sister. Grunt's...whatever that was called...proving himself. Tali's court martial...etc. Aside from Zaeed (and Morinth, but she is recruited DURING a loyalty mission) everyone had SOME form of loyalty mission. I think the ONLY loyalty mission I enjoyed was Kasumi's...and small parts of Tali's. Why? Oh, I dunno...one is dialog and the other is sneaking around. They're not solely focused on "SHOOT KILL BLOW UP."

Also, scanning is a reason I am not keen on another play through of ME1 due to the inventory system. I hate it. Just as much as I hate scouring the planet surface in the Mako.

ME2 I am more likely to replay, but the scanning chases me off. As does the lack of proper depth in the main story, instead the game just focuses on pleasing your own crew. ME1 felt grant and overarching. I felt that the galaxy was large. In ME2...I don't feel that. I feel stuck in my own little world. Does the lack of the Mako contribute to that feeling? Yes - I miss looking up to see a planet and some moons above me. I miss seeing stuff like the planet with a scar from a mass accelerator. ME2 might be streamlined, but it lost so much in the process. But hey, it appealed to the masses more, so I only expect EA to go further down that path.
Click to expand...

The big question is: What exactly do they mean by wider audience? It wasn't like he was addressing gamers or the gaming press. It was an earnings call for stock holders who generally know as much about videos games as I do about quantum physics, which is nothing at all. So for now it is probably best not to worry too much until more of the game is shown. It won't be out for nearly a year, plenty of time to worry when solid details are announced.
 
NaturalViolence said:
How does that scream COD? This is an insane assumption.
Click to expand...

COD is setting records for game sales. RPGs are not. Halo set records. The games setting sales records are straight up FPSes with multiplayer. This is why I think that the likely direction is to a rails shooter. I hope I'm wrong.
 
Last edited:
Fail said:
CoD games have been defective products since MW2
Click to expand...

While MW1 was fun at times, it was still your generic "look, we give you achievements for ranks and unlocks! Don't you see special since you have a gold desert eagle?" - and god forbid you ever reinstall Windows lest you start all over. The fix? Take someone else's saved data, or just attach a debugger with PB off, figure out the address in memory of your rank and up it.

Fundamentally the rank system is a stupid idea....and IW then took the stupidity to a new level and stored the data on the hard drive...they didn't even store it in My Documents...let alone cache it on a central server. Sure, an OK idea for a console. Shitty idea on a PC.
 
Monkey God said:
The MAKO was cool. The boring, repetitive missions with them were not. (Non-story line missions).
The inventory system sucked, it needed improving, not removal.
I am glad they removed the elevators, they were pointless.
Click to expand...

The point of the elevators was to provide a seamless galaxy while masking loads. As soon as a full screen loading screen comes up, BAM!, immersion broken.

For all the bitching over the elevators there was only ONE, just one, mandatory elevator that you would come in frequent contact with that took a substantial amount of time... The elevator from Csec to the Normandy. Every other elevator could be skipped with a fast travel station in the Citadel (this type of load keeps you immersed in the game), or if you really felt like walking the other elevators were fairly short. I take it that most people didn't plan ahead when working through their quests and ended up using that long elevator FAR more than was truly necessary. You should only hit it a handful of time at most, but I get the feeling that certain people were traveling to and from the Citadel constantly and this is what brought on the elevator hate.

Ideally, they would have been dynamic elevators that only take as long as the load takes, and inter-party banter can be started on the elevator and continued once exited if the load was quick.
 
Last edited:
COD is setting records for game sales. RPGs are not. Halo set records. The games setting sales records are straight up FPSes with multiplayer. This is why I think that the likely direction is to a rails shooter. I hope I'm wrong.
Click to expand...

It is insane to say "well cod is popular so since they are saying they want to game to be popular they must be making it like cod".

The fact that fps are successful hasn't stopped any of the other developers that are making rpgs from making rpgs. None of them have said "hey! let's scrap this rpg and turn it into a shooter!".

Plus mass effect is a shooter/rpg hybrid. And bioware already released the details on how they were adding more rpg elements and ramping up the existing ones. Please read some of the details: http://www.gameinformer.com/p/masseffect3.aspx

It's not going to be a rails shooter without rpg elements. Just watch the casey hudson interviews if you have doubts. And it is not going to have multiplayer, they've already said so and it wouldn't make any sense. It's a mass effect game, it's part of a trilogy and it will have the same basic mass effect style that the other two had. Please stop with the doomsday prophecies unless you have evidence that they are doing what you claim they are doing.
 
Some new details on ME3. Seems like it's going to be EPIC.

1. Mass Effect 3 will have fewer party characters than Mass Effect 2
Don't expect to have nearly as many characters in Mass Effect 3 as you did in ME2. ME2's large crew—12 playable characters—was necessary for the game's posse-building storyline, but was a little large for BioWare's taste.

"Twelve was a big number in Mass Effect 2 - almost too big", says Hudson. "We're focused on a smaller squad with deeper relationships and more interesting interplay in Mass Effect 3' he explains. "We're not going to have twelve again but we are going to do more with the characters on your squad including Liara, and Kaidan or Ashley. And we're bringing everyone back - every main character is in Mass Effect 3 somewhere."

So yes, it is very possible that you might not get to control your favorite ME2 character. That said, every character from the game has a role to play in the story, provided they survived your trip through the Omega-4 relay.

2. You will travel to new worlds.
This one's kind of a no-brainer. Many of the planet you'll visit in ME3 are places you've only heard about in previous games. Hudson mentions that you'll see Palaven (the Turian homeworld) and Rannoch (the Quarian homeworld) in the game. It's also confirmed that you will return to Krogan homeworld Tunchaka.

As you might have already guessed, Shepard will also be going to Earth in this game. Hudson said that players will get to see "a Seattle/Vancouver megacity" both before and after the Reapers destroy it. Connecting the world of <Mass Effect to our own, the city is designed to look just like Vancouver. "If you Google Map Vancouver the layout is pretty much the exact same as our map," according to level artist Don Arceta.

3. Those worlds are going to be big.
Reapers are big. In order to have accommodate fights with them, or even having them nearby means designing levels much larger than the usual spaceship corridors that make up a large portion of Mass Effect's locales. Many of levels will include more open spaces. BioWare plans to make the shift in a way a dramatic way, claiming that some levels that are not only larger than anything ever seen in a Mass Effect game, but larger than any game built with the Unreal Engine.

Think of it this way. At least one level has to be big enough for Shepard to fight using a 50-foot tall Cerberus mech.

4. In combat, you'll need to think on your feet
The gunplay in Mass Effect 2 is mostly standard cover-based shooter fare. It was often OK to hide behind cover, picking off enemies at the back of a room while directing your teammates. The ME3 team plans to change that. They want you to be forced to scramble. To do that, BioWare is putting enemy tactics at the forefront. Different types of enemies will not only have varying abilities, they'll those skills in tandem. "Some will provide covering fire for snipers, some will deploy smoke to hide advancing comrades, others will coordinate subordinate units, and one will stomp around consuming its fallen friends to fuel itself," according to the feature.

5. Weapons are going to be much more customizable and detailed
In keeping up with their pledge to create a "deeper RPG experience" this time around, you'll be able to fine-tune your weapons in Mass Effect 3 much more than the last two games. "Every weapon is modular and can be customised with up to five modifications; scopes increase a rifle's zoom factor, new barrels increase accuracy or damage," Says Hudson. "Sling your gun on a workbench and it can be customised for a job at hand." Based on that last part, it sounds like it may be important to not only upgrade your weapons, but adjust them to suit different situations.

Hudson also mentioned that the team has been mixing it up with members of the DICE team, getting advice on how to make the guns sound realistic in varying environments.

Now that you've read all that, you're probably not happy that you'll have to wait until 2012 to finally get your hands on it.
 
contrivance said:
Some new details on ME3. Seems like it's going to be EPIC.

1. Mass Effect 3 will have fewer party characters than Mass Effect 2
Don't expect to have nearly as many characters in Mass Effect 3 as you did in ME2. ME2's large crew—12 playable characters—was necessary for the game's posse-building storyline, but was a little large for BioWare's taste.

"Twelve was a big number in Mass Effect 2 - almost too big", says Hudson. "We're focused on a smaller squad with deeper relationships and more interesting interplay in Mass Effect 3' he explains. "We're not going to have twelve again but we are going to do more with the characters on your squad including Liara, and Kaidan or Ashley. And we're bringing everyone back - every main character is in Mass Effect 3 somewhere."

So yes, it is very possible that you might not get to control your favorite ME2 character. That said, every character from the game has a role to play in the story, provided they survived your trip through the Omega-4 relay.

2. You will travel to new worlds.
This one's kind of a no-brainer. Many of the planet you'll visit in ME3 are places you've only heard about in previous games. Hudson mentions that you'll see Palaven (the Turian homeworld) and Rannoch (the Quarian homeworld) in the game. It's also confirmed that you will return to Krogan homeworld Tunchaka.

As you might have already guessed, Shepard will also be going to Earth in this game. Hudson said that players will get to see "a Seattle/Vancouver megacity" both before and after the Reapers destroy it. Connecting the world of <Mass Effect to our own, the city is designed to look just like Vancouver. "If you Google Map Vancouver the layout is pretty much the exact same as our map," according to level artist Don Arceta.

3. Those worlds are going to be big.
Reapers are big. In order to have accommodate fights with them, or even having them nearby means designing levels much larger than the usual spaceship corridors that make up a large portion of Mass Effect's locales. Many of levels will include more open spaces. BioWare plans to make the shift in a way a dramatic way, claiming that some levels that are not only larger than anything ever seen in a Mass Effect game, but larger than any game built with the Unreal Engine.

Think of it this way. At least one level has to be big enough for Shepard to fight using a 50-foot tall Cerberus mech.

4. In combat, you'll need to think on your feet
The gunplay in Mass Effect 2 is mostly standard cover-based shooter fare. It was often OK to hide behind cover, picking off enemies at the back of a room while directing your teammates. The ME3 team plans to change that. They want you to be forced to scramble. To do that, BioWare is putting enemy tactics at the forefront. Different types of enemies will not only have varying abilities, they'll those skills in tandem. "Some will provide covering fire for snipers, some will deploy smoke to hide advancing comrades, others will coordinate subordinate units, and one will stomp around consuming its fallen friends to fuel itself," according to the feature.

5. Weapons are going to be much more customizable and detailed
In keeping up with their pledge to create a "deeper RPG experience" this time around, you'll be able to fine-tune your weapons in Mass Effect 3 much more than the last two games. "Every weapon is modular and can be customised with up to five modifications; scopes increase a rifle's zoom factor, new barrels increase accuracy or damage," Says Hudson. "Sling your gun on a workbench and it can be customised for a job at hand." Based on that last part, it sounds like it may be important to not only upgrade your weapons, but adjust them to suit different situations.

Hudson also mentioned that the team has been mixing it up with members of the DICE team, getting advice on how to make the guns sound realistic in varying environments.

Now that you've read all that, you're probably not happy that you'll have to wait until 2012 to finally get your hands on it.
Click to expand...

Sound's cool. Still glad it got delayed, puts it away from other games I want to play and hopefully means it won't be rushed.
 
NOoooooo, but I want all ME1 and ME2 companions to follow me around in ME3!!! Eviiiil devs!!


Just kidding. Sounds like ME3 will be a tad better than ME2 (which was really awesome). Looking forward.
 
I don't care how many main characters are around as long as they are fleshed out and interesting. I don't think anyone in the ME universe is as fun to talk to as HK-47 and Jolee from KOTOR. Wrex was close I suppose.

Sounds good though. Maybe their emphasis on ME1 squadmates is indicative of the direction they are taking everything. I hope so!
 
So I did this series all backwards...I played ME2 first, thought it was one of the best games I've ever played, and just started ME1. A little harder for me to get into ME1 so far, and holy crap are there a lot of items. Just in the first short mission there was probably 20 pieces of crap to pick up and analyze. I see what people are saying now; I like the idea of customizing my loadout, but ME1 is way over the top. ME2 didn't have enough for me, especially since I got the firewalker pack. Hopefully ME3 is like Goldilocks and is justttttt right.
 
contrivance said:
Some new details on ME3. Seems like it's going to be EPIC.

1. Mass Effect 3 will have fewer party characters than Mass Effect 2
Don't expect to have nearly as many characters in Mass Effect 3 as you did in ME2. ME2's large crew—12 playable characters—was necessary for the game's posse-building storyline, but was a little large for BioWare's taste.
Click to expand...

It wasn't big for players' tastes though. It added a lot of replayability which is important if your forking over $50 for just a 20-30 hour game. I doubt they flesh out the new characters much better than all the old ones. Just budget cutting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top