Mass Effect Legendary Edition

Yippee38

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 21, 2000
Messages
2,114
Well there are rumors going around that Tencent has been saving billions to try and buy EA or Take-Two. If that happens you’ll see the demise of EA.
I don't think so. Gamers are like addicts. They don't care where it comes from, as long as they get it.
 

Nimisys

Fully [H]
Joined
Jun 20, 2000
Messages
19,157
No Pinnacle Peak DLC included. Which from a story perspective, isn't a huge loss. However it also was the closest thing to ME3 MP in SP form you could get. They makes part of me sad. It was a great way to test/tune weapon setups
 

twonunpackmule

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 27, 2005
Messages
1,599
Eh, I'm sure it'll be in a bargain bin within 6 months. No need to pay full price for an EA pizza.
 

Drexion

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 14, 2004
Messages
1,374
Bluepoint's remake of Demon's Souls has raised the bar for what people expect from having to pay full price for a re-release. If they are charging $60 then it should have been a full on remake outsourced to a studio like Bluepoint who have the capability to remake an old title to modern standards.

If it's just a remaster with AI-upscaled textures and improved lighting then it should have been something like '$15 if you own the games already'.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
57,923
No Pinnacle Peak DLC included. Which from a story perspective, isn't a huge loss. However it also was the closest thing to ME3 MP in SP form you could get. They makes part of me sad. It was a great way to test/tune weapon setups

ME3 has that in its Citadel DLC.
 

polonyc2

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 25, 2004
Messages
19,753
the first game looks like it has the biggest improvements and is closest to an actual remake...$30 would have been a better price for this new Legendary Edition...the trilogy is a classic so I definitely plan on picking it up at some point
 

Flogger23m

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Messages
11,467
Bluepoint's remake of Demon's Souls has raised the bar for what people expect from having to pay full price for a re-release. If they are charging $60 then it should have been a full on remake outsourced to a studio like Bluepoint who have the capability to remake an old title to modern standards.

If it's just a remaster with AI-upscaled textures and improved lighting then it should have been something like '$15 if you own the games already'.

Well it does include all 3 games. It brings some UI changes and the like to the first game. Seems like it is a good improvement, minus the lighting that changes the scenes too much. I too would've preferred it to be made on UE4 from the ground up but that isn't going to happen.
 

Domingo

Fully [H]
Joined
Jul 30, 2004
Messages
19,159
My memory is a little foggy, but I remember having to either play multiplayer, use a phone app, or play a DLC mini-game to get the best ending in ME3. You had to amass a certain number of allies/resources or something. I used the phone app, but it was fucking stupid to even have to. Is that still a thing or did they eventually fix/drop that?
 

Nimisys

Fully [H]
Joined
Jun 20, 2000
Messages
19,157
My memory is a little foggy, but I remember having to either play multiplayer, use a phone app, or play a DLC mini-game to get the best ending in ME3. You had to amass a certain number of allies/resources or something. I used the phone app, but it was fucking stupid to even have to. Is that still a thing or did they eventually fix/drop that?
They fixed that, you could get all endings now, provided you complete enough of the missions/side quests. A strict primary mission only game won't be enough.

I remember being angry about, until I tried the MP and then all was forgiven.
 

polonyc2

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 25, 2004
Messages
19,753
I wonder if this going to be Demon's Souls remaster quality or Bioshock remaster quality...
 

polydiol

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 3, 2004
Messages
1,394
I wonder if this going to be Demon's Souls remaster quality or Bioshock remaster quality...

As much as I love my Mass Effect shit, I fully expect low effort and disappointment 2020 to continue way past 2021
 

polonyc2

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 25, 2004
Messages
19,753
https://www.ea.com/games/mass-effect/mass-effect-legendary-edition/pc-system-requirements

MINIMUM:

Requires a 64-bit processor and operating system
OS: 64-bit Windows 10
Processor: Intel Core i5 3570 or AMD FX-8350
Memory: 8 GB RAM
Graphics: GPU: NVIDIA GTX 760, AMD Radeon 7970 / R9280X GPU RAM: 2 GB Video Memory
DirectX: Version 11
Storage: 120 GB available space

RECOMMENDED:


Requires a 64-bit processor and operating system
OS: 64-bit Windows 10
Processor: Intel Core i7-7700 or AMD Ryzen 7 3700X
Memory: 16 GB RAM
Graphics: GPU: NVIDIA GTX 1070 / RTX 200, Radeon Vega 56, GPU RAM: 4 GB Video Memory
DirectX: Version 11
Storage: 120 GB available space
 

UnknownSouljer

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 24, 2001
Messages
7,029
Unfortunately they don't list a target FPS or target resolution for either their minimum or recommended settings, which is a bit annoying.
There also is no DX12 implementation (optimization) - and clearly they aren't doing anything "crazy" like adding RTX.
 

Mchart

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
4,308
I'm fine with the original engines TBH, all the games really need is just proper modern high-res support, and all they need to do is up the poly-count of the models along with higher texture detail. The game will look just fine. HDR support would be cool, although i'm not sure if that's possible with UE3.
 

Nimisys

Fully [H]
Joined
Jun 20, 2000
Messages
19,157
I don't believe that for a minute. Wouldn't it be better to be honest? They clearly had a time and money budget that wouldn't allow a full port. Trying to use artistic reasoning has bit them in the arse once already.
from the article:
As an example, Walters pointed out how Kismet--a visual scripting language in Unreal 3--has no exact equivalent in Unreal 4. "Which means every moment, every scene, everything would have had to have been essentially redone from scratch and we knew, at that point, that we'd really be taking away from the essence and the spirit of what the trilogy was," he said.

I don't think this is an illegitimate concern. There were a ton of scripted scenes within the trilogy, and he is right, in needing to recreate them all, you were going to make changes, even inadvertently. I think they would have gotten a ton of backlash if they had changed, even subtly
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
57,923
Well it does include all 3 games. It brings some UI changes and the like to the first game. Seems like it is a good improvement, minus the lighting that changes the scenes too much. I too would've preferred it to be made on UE4 from the ground up but that isn't going to happen.

I wish people would pay attention and read the thread or do a little fact checking ahead of time. Actual gameplay footage of ME1 in The Legendary Edition has been shown. It's a limited section, but the lighting doesn't look as over processed as it does in the still images BioWare released, which might have been touched up (as many screenshots are), and don't seem to reflect the actual game. I too would have preferred a real remake of the game which ported everything into UE4 with entirely new game assets and everything else being largely the same.

My memory is a little foggy, but I remember having to either play multiplayer, use a phone app, or play a DLC mini-game to get the best ending in ME3. You had to amass a certain number of allies/resources or something. I used the phone app, but it was fucking stupid to even have to. Is that still a thing or did they eventually fix/drop that?

This was only true to a point. You just needed a certain amount of EMS to unlock certain endings. To be fair, in its original form this really didn't matter as all three endings were bleak, shitty, and all the same. With DLC releases you could reach the required 5,000 EMS easily, just by playing the game. So, it was never dropped so much as the EMS economy was adjusted so that you could play the SP alone to achieve the "better" endings.

I wonder if this going to be Demon's Souls remaster quality or Bioshock remaster quality...
Did you watch the trailer? It's pretty clear the game looks exactly the same as the original versions with upgraded textures and some additional lighting. Also, BioWare has been clear that ME1 is a partial remake and ME2/ME3 are remasters. It's pretty evident that this means "upgraded textures" and little else. As a texture modder, I can tell you this goes a very long way with these games. It won't make them look modern, but it does enhance the experience and does bring up the visual fidelity a lot. BTW, most of the original trilogy lighting was non-existent. A lot of the shading was built into the textures of ME2 and ME3. Between the textures on all three versions being downscaled for ME3 and the artistic direction being made darker, Shepard ended up looking like his/her hands and arms were always dirty. That's why. There was little in the way of actual lighting. It was all in the textures.
Unfortunately they don't list a target FPS or target resolution for either their minimum or recommended settings, which is a bit annoying.
There also is no DX12 implementation (optimization) - and clearly they aren't doing anything "crazy" like adding RTX.
They are running in Unreal Engine 3.x and still use the original character and environmental models made between 2006-2012. The oldest game will be just shy of 14 years old when the Legendary version launches and the newest one will be more than 9 years old. Target FPS? Largely irrelevant given the type of game it is, but given the technology you should be able to run it on a potato at 4K and get well over 60FPS easily. It's not DX12, nor does it have ray tracing because its a DX9.0c title. (If I recall correctly.)
Whaaat.. are you freaking kidding me?
Did you guys not watch the trailer? It's the same game with better textures. It was obvious it was UE3. I spoke about this at length in several threads about this topic after seeing the trailer. It was obvious it was the same exact game with improved textures and lighting. Nothing more.
the first game is half remake...the other 2 are remasters
Exactly.
I don't believe that for a minute. Wouldn't it be better to be honest? They clearly had a time and money budget that wouldn't allow a full port. Trying to use artistic reasoning has bit them in the arse once already.

What you choose to believe is totally irrelevant. If you go to the Unreal Engine SDK page and look through it, you'll find BioWare is 100% correct. The Kismet scripting language used by UE3 is not present in the UE4 SDK. In fact, all scripting in UE4 is handled via C++. So, either they would have had to build a tool to translate and convert Kismet into C++, assuming one doesn't already exist. I checked and wasn't able to find one easily, so it may or may not. Furthermore, conversions like that are likely to result in issues which have to be fixed by hand adding complexity to the project. If they didn't convert it, then all the scripting, animations, etc. would have to be redone for the entire game. This adds considerable time and cost to the project as well. Plus, different game engines and their scripting can have a dramatic impact on how a game feels.

I agree with BioWare here. Making those changes probably wouldn't have gone over well unless the game was a total remake. That may have been preferable to some, but then the developers are making almost an entirely new game which costs considerably more than a remaster. These remasters attempt to capitalize on nostalgia and earn some quick bucks with little to nothing invested in them. It also serves a double purpose here. That's to get people interested in Mass Effect again as they are working on a fifth installment in the franchise. Right or wrong, it's what EA/BioWare chose to do. Sure, EA could have probably afforded whatever, (its not that simple either) but its all about ROI. That ROI calculation also involves risk. You can do a remake but that doesn't mean it would go over well. Mass Effect isn't Resident Evil. People have a strange attachment to these games and treat them as if they are sacred whether its deserved or not.

As for how much time and money BioWare had, you are talking completely out of your ass as you have no fucking clue how much the project cost or how long it was in development. Sure, this has been rumored to be happening for some time but we don't know the actual time frame that this has been worked on. Unless someone internally comes forward to spill the beans, (and is proven credible) we will never know how much time and money was invested in this remaster. BioWare is also stretched pretty thin. I would wager that the team working on the remasters is relatively small. BioWare is trying to save the dumpster fire that is Anthem and they are working on additional Mass Effect and Dragon Age titles.

All of that said, I do agree that this is a bit of a lazy cash grab. Yes, this could be done better but I understand what EA/BioWare are doing and why.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
57,923
I'm fine with the original engines TBH, all the games really need is just proper modern high-res support, and all they need to do is up the poly-count of the models along with higher texture detail. The game will look just fine. HDR support would be cool, although i'm not sure if that's possible with UE3.

You can't just increase the polycount of objects in UE3 like that. The engine has hard limitations for polycounts, character model sizes and textures. There are tricks to get around some of these, as we've seen games like Arkham Knight do so, but its an engine that's over a decade old. It can't do the same things as modern engines can.
 

polonyc2

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 25, 2004
Messages
19,753
It's pretty clear the game looks exactly the same as the original versions with upgraded textures and some additional lighting...It's pretty evident that this means "upgraded textures" and little else...As a texture modder, I can tell you this goes a very long way with these games. It won't make them look modern, but it does enhance the experience and does bring up the visual fidelity a lot.

All of that said, I do agree that this is a bit of a lazy cash grab. Yes, this could be done better but I understand what EA/BioWare are doing and why.

it's hard to tell if you're happy with the upgraded textures or not...you sound disappointed one sentence then in another you say how it can 'go a long way'

upgraded textures can be a major improvement or a minor one...it all depends on how much work the developer put into it...YouTube trailers are not an accurate way to judge the quality of the textures...the lighting in the screenshots they released make the game look worse in my opinion...too much bloom but again those are just static screenshots...don't be so quick to believe all the pre-release hype coming from the developer...everything sounds good but let's see what the final result is

I plan on getting the remastered collection regardless but it's just a question of Day 1 or wait for a sale
 

Armenius

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
24,666
They are running in Unreal Engine 3.x and still use the original character and environmental models made between 2006-2012. The oldest game will be just shy of 14 years old when the Legendary version launches and the newest one will be more than 9 years old. Target FPS? Largely irrelevant given the type of game it is, but given the technology you should be able to run it on a potato at 4K and get well over 60FPS easily. It's not DX12, nor does it have ray tracing because its a DX9.0c title. (If I recall correctly.)
It is a DirectX 9.0c title, but the requirements list DirectX 11. Epic did release an update for Unreal Engine 3 in late 2011 that added DirectX 11 features, but they were not included in Mass Effect 3. From the looks of the improved lighting and other effects from the trailer they at least probably updated the games to use the last version of UE3.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dan_D
like this

M76

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
11,910
What you choose to believe is totally irrelevant. If you go to the Unreal Engine SDK page and look through it, you'll find BioWare is 100% correct. The Kismet scripting language used by UE3 is not present in the UE4 SDK. In fact, all scripting in UE4 is handled via C++. So, either they would have had to build a tool to translate and convert Kismet into C++, assuming one doesn't already exist. I checked and wasn't able to find one easily, so it may or may not. Furthermore, conversions like that are likely to result in issues which have to be fixed by hand adding complexity to the project. If they didn't convert it, then all the scripting, animations, etc. would have to be redone for the entire game. This adds considerable time and cost to the project as well. Plus, different game engines and their scripting can have a dramatic impact on how a game feels.
You are deliberately missing the point. They cite artistic reasons, yet it is completely technical / not having the time / willing to spend the money to do it. Which is fine. Just come clean about it instead of gaslighting.
 

Mchart

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
4,308
You can't just increase the polycount of objects in UE3 like that. The engine has hard limitations for polycounts, character model sizes and textures. There are tricks to get around some of these, as we've seen games like Arkham Knight do so, but its an engine that's over a decade old. It can't do the same things as modern engines can.
AK is still, IMO, the best looking game to date. I still play it often and I’m dumbfounded how good it looks. If AK looks that good, the engine is “good enough”.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
57,923
it's hard to tell if you're happy with the upgraded textures or not...you sound disappointed one sentence then in another you say how it can 'go a long way'

upgraded textures can be a major improvement or a minor one...it all depends on how much work the developer put into it...YouTube trailers are not an accurate way to judge the quality of the textures...the lighting in the screenshots they released make the game look worse in my opinion...too much bloom but again those are just static screenshots...don't be so quick to believe all the pre-release hype coming from the developer...everything sounds good but let's see what the final result is

I plan on getting the game regardless but it's just a question of Day 1 or wait for a sale

If it sounds like I'm happy and that I'm disappointed, its because I am. I'm torn between wanting fully upgraded games done in a new engine with new assets. Early rumors were that these were being ported to Frostbite, so I partly expected them to look like Andromeda. Which would have made sense because they could use a lot of assets out of that game in the remaster. That being said, I hated ME3's endings with a fucking passion and I've never forgiven EAoWare for that. That's where some joy comes in. Because its staying on the same engine, its very likely the modding tools developed for the series (ME3 in particular) will still work or can be made to work with the new game. So, mods like EGM and MEHEM should be made available to ME3 which GREATLY enhances my enjoyment of it.

Prior to the MEHEM mod, I completed ME1 7 times, ME2 21 times and ME3 2 times. I would play ME3 up to the "Priority Earth" mission and start over. I wouldn't play the game past that point because it was obviously lazy, rushed and just plain bad. Aside from that, ME3 was one of my favorite games of all time. After the MEHEM mod, I've completed that game probably about 10 times or more. Its no longer soul crushing to me. Had EAoWare imported it to Frostbite, its likely that the game's "artistic vision" bullshit would have been kept and I'd never enjoy the remaster of ME3 the way I could on the original engine. I'd stop before ever talking to that fucking star brat like I always did. On the original UE3 version, I can delete his ass from the game entirely.

As a texture modder, I can say that I'm pleased with the textures I've seen in the trailer. Based on what I've seen. Sure, I might be disappointed somewhat in the final product, but I don't think I will based on what I've seen. Also, the trailer shows things that are all in engine so I can tell the game doesn't look as bad as the still screenshots do. It's likely those are retouched after the fact given how different they look and given the fact that screenshots NEVER do a game justice. They almost always look better while playing than they do in screenshots and when they don't, it's because the screenshots were altered to a point where they don't represent the game anymore. I think that's what we are seeing here.

And again, the Mass Effect games have always had tons of fucking lens flare. Go back and fire them up or look at video of the original games. It's always been there. Yes, its harsher now, but if you go and look at ReShade presets for any game, you'll see that's what people seem to want. That's all they do is turn up the bloom and add more contrast. Its stupid, but it is what it is.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
57,923
AK is still, IMO, the best looking game to date. I still play it often and I’m dumbfounded how good it looks. If AK looks that good, the engine is “good enough”.

What you don't understand are the actual technical limitations of the game engine. Most of what was done in Arkham Knight was to make the city scape larger since map size in UE3 is so small by even the standards of Arkham Knights day. Yes, the game looks good but a lot of that is related to texturing and the lighting used, not so much a matter of higher polygon counts for characters. You can go higher than what ME3 did for somethings, but characters like the Reaper Brutes in the third game were actually over the line and are made up to at least two characters fused together. That's how they had to get around the limitation. It's a very real limitation and working around it is much harder than you think.

Frankly, the guys behind Arkham Knight also drastically altered the engine by their own admission. There is a lot of cost, time and expertise required to do that.
 

M76

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
11,910
from the article:


I don't think this is an illegitimate concern. There were a ton of scripted scenes within the trilogy, and he is right, in needing to recreate them all, you were going to make changes, even inadvertently. I think they would have gotten a ton of backlash if they had changed, even subtly
I have read the article, and have programming experience, and immediately identified that as bullshit. Just because the language for scripts changed doesn't mean you can't achieve the exact same effect. Yes, it is probably a lot of work to port if there are no translator tools available, but don't cite artistic reasons when it's clearly a technical difficulty they have no desire to adopt to or overcome.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
57,923
I have read the article, and have programming experience, and immediately identified that as bullshit. Just because the language for scripts changed doesn't mean you can't achieve the exact same effect. Yes, it is probably a lot of work to port if there are no translator tools available, but don't cite artistic reasons when it's clearly a technical difficulty they have no desire to adopt to or overcome.

Its obvious that you can. It was done with Halo 1 and 2. However, its a matter of time, money and projected ROI.

You are deliberately missing the point. They cite artistic reasons, yet it is completely technical / not having the time / willing to spend the money to do it. Which is fine. Just come clean about it instead of gaslighting.

I can agree with that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: M76
like this

M76

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
11,910
I've recently become aware that there is a lot of dialogue in ME2 that is never used in that game, but included with the files nonetheless. Some due to bugs others because narrative changes, some simply just not used for some reason, probably due to time constraints on the original development. Now if they went back and added some of the missing dialouge back in, I'd say it is a worthy remaster.
 

UnknownSouljer

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 24, 2001
Messages
7,029
They are running in Unreal Engine 3.x and still use the original character and environmental models made between 2006-2012. The oldest game will be just shy of 14 years old when the Legendary version launches and the newest one will be more than 9 years old.
Which is a shame. I realize porting over the source code to the newer engines would likely require some level of script rewriting (fixing, etc), but if their goal is/was to have the highest fidelity possible and bring the game into 2021 then those are steps I feel they should've taken.
However it's obvious that they have absolutely done the lowest common denominator things rather than any level of aspirational things (HDR, RTX, increased poly counts, dramatically improved lighting, reworking of character animations, etc - let alone content things like restored content).
Frankly the community has largely done most of the things it looks like the remaster is going to do. Now they're just going to package it nicely and sell it back to us for $60. Don't get me wrong, there is something to be said for removing all the of the speed bumps and annoyances with installing third party mods (of which both you and I have clearly done) - but I don't think I'm crazy for wanting them to have done something that only they could do with the source code and resources.

I'm just laying out my personal criticisms. Truth be told that after this launches and reviews land - as long as they don't screw it up I'll likely still buy it despite its mediocre and relatively minor changes. That doesn't mean I don't think it should have been more or greater though.
Target FPS? Largely irrelevant given the type of game it is, but given the technology you should be able to run it on a potato at 4K and get well over 60FPS easily.
I think you missed what I was saying. They give two specifications to run the game, but they do not note what those specifications would give you in either resolution or frame rate. Recommended could be 4k 60. Recommended could be 1080p 30. Obviously we could make an educated guess, but that is what it would be: a guess. It wouldn't have been that hard for them to simply tell us. We also don't know if there will be a frame cap due to engine limitations. But I'm hoping this will allow for the game to be run at at least 120fps without breaking things.
It's not DX12, nor does it have ray tracing because its a DX9.0c title. (If I recall correctly.)
Right. You and I are both talking about the obvious here. My pointing this out is more about what "little" they did when there was opportunity to do more.

EDIT: Grammar, spelling, not content
 
Last edited:

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
57,923
It is a DirectX 9.0c title, but the requirements list DirectX 11. Epic did release an update for Unreal Engine 3 in late 2011 that added DirectX 11 features, but they were not included in Mass Effect 3. From the looks of the improved lighting and other effects from the trailer they at least probably updated the games to use the last version of UE3.

I had forgotten about that. I remember thinking that the game being on 9.0c on launch was weird given that UE3 did support DirectX 11 at the time. However, if you know where to look, there are many signs in ME3 that the game was rushed and released long before it was ready. Updating to DX11 was just one more thing that didn't get done.

I've recently become aware that there is a lot of dialogue in ME2 that is never used in that game, but included with the files nonetheless. Some due to bugs others because narrative changes, some simply just not used for some reason, probably due to time constraints on the original development. Now if they went back and added some of the missing dialouge back in, I'd say it is a worthy remaster.
That doesn't surprise me. I knew about this and what the dialog is in ME3. From the cut dialog in ME3, the final mission in the game was originally intended to be much bigger in scope than what we got. Some of this content was restored in one of the mods for it. Although, the vast majority of it remains unused to this day. I doubt BioWare is going to add any of this stuff back in. As much as I love those games and would love to see more content in them I don't think that's going to happen.
 

cybereality

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
6,962
Unreal Engine 4 has Blueprints, which was the successor in terms of visual programming to Kismet. You can make a UE4 game with all Blueprints, but you can also use C++ if you like.

I guess that is one reason visual coding is not as good. If the scripting was done in C++, or a still existing language like Python, it would be relatively easier to port to a a new engine and still have the same logic.

Even so, at that point they might as well do a Capcom and make a totally new remake with the same story, it might be similar in terms of the cost of production.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
57,923
Which is a shame. I realize porting over the source code to the newer engines would likely require some level of script rewriting (fixing, etc), but if their goal is/was to have the highest fidelity possible and bring the game into 2021 then those are steps I feel they should've taken.
However it's obvious that they have absolutely done the lowest common denominator things rather than any level of aspirational things (HDR, RTX, increased poly counts, dramatically improved lighting, reworking of character animations, etc - let alone content things like restored content).
Frankly the community has largely done most of the things it looks like the remaster is going to do. Now they're just going to package it nicely and sell it back to us for $60. Don't get me wrong, there is something to be said for removing all the of the speed bumps and annoyances with installing third party mods (of which both you and I have clearly done) - but I don't think I'm crazy for wanting them to have done something that only the could do with the source code and resources.

As I said, this should have been given the Halo 1 and 2 treatment where the gameplay was kept, but all of the visual assets were replaced with new ones. In my opinion, remasters done the way Crysis 1 was are fucking lazy. Retexturing the game isn't that difficult. Updating the lighting effects is something, but its still low hanging fruit compared to a real remaster of the game's visuals. A remaster should bring the game up to modern standards visually.

As someone who made texture mods for the game, I am somewhat miffed that EAoWare is looking to sell us a game with improvements that us modders have been giving out for free for nearly a decade. That being said, the textures here look to be better than most of the stuff we made, but that's because they have the original source files for the game and the original textures prior to them being compressed down for the XBOX 360. That's effectively what all three versions got. Plus, they did make adjustments to the lighting and from the comparisons I've seen (not the still images) the lighting overhaul looks to be a good decision that elevates the visuals for the most part. At the same time, I'm admittedly like a battered housewife when it comes to Mass Effect and I have no ability to stand strong and wait for reviews, not pre-order the game and I'm all in.

Fuck I'm more excited for this than I have been for most games that have come out since Andromeda aside from Cyberpunk 2077. Like I've said, I'm happy ME3 is still on UE3. Another silver lining here is that a lazy retexture with some updated lighting means that BioWare has an excuse not to remake it in line with "modern sensibilities." A total remake would likely be a woke dumpster fire and it's probably good we aren't getting that. But, I hear what you are saying.

I'm just laying out my personal critisisms. Truth be told that after this launches and reviews land - as long as they don't screw it up I'll likely still buy it despite its mediocre and relatively minor changes. That doesn't mean I don't think it should have been more or greater though.

I think you missed what I was saying. They give two specifications to run the game, but they do not note what those specifications would give you in either resolution or frame rate. Recommended could be 4k 60. Recommended could be 1080p 30. Obviously we could make an educated guess, but that is what it would be: a guess. It wouldn't have been that hard for them to simply tell us. We also don't know if there will be a frame cap due to engine limitations. But I'm hoping this will allow for the game to be run at at least 120fps without breaking things.

Right. You and I are both talking about the obvious here. My pointing this out is more about what "little" they did when there was opportunity to do more.

Yes, I did miss what you were saying. Primarily because I don't think its an issue. It should run fantastic on anything and if I recall correctly, the game already goes well above 60FPS without issues now. I don't know, I haven't fired up any of the trilogy games in a couple of years or more.

Unreal Engine 4 has Blueprints, which was the successor in terms of visual programming to Kismet. You can make a UE4 game with all Blueprints, but you can also use C++ if you like.

I guess that is one reason visual coding is not as good. If the scripting was done in C++, or a still existing language like Python, it would be relatively easier to port to a a new engine and still have the same logic.

Even so, at that point they might as well do a Capcom and make a totally new remake with the same story, it might be similar in terms of the cost of production.

Pulling a Capcom would be making an entirely new game. That's not cheap. Plus, there would be the crowd bitching about changing the game's story and characters profoundly and others which would want it to be treated like the camp that never wanted any alterations to the original Star Wars Trilogy. The direction BioWare went here is a safe one. They'll sell some copies and probably make some money while getting people interested in Mass Effect again. It's low effort, low risk, relatively high reward. A full on remake might break sales records, but it might be a fiasco.

BioWare has struck out with their last two games. Although, there is every indicator that Andromeda was financially successful, despite being an internet meme and a critical failure of sorts. Anthem was an absolute disaster and continues to be. Dragon Age Inquisition was also successful but not as successful as the studio had hoped. Basically, BioWare needs a win for their EA overlords and this seems like an easy one for them. Let's also be frank, most remasters are about this lazy as this is and in some cases lazier. The bar set by most studios on remasters is pretty low.
 
Last edited:

Flogger23m

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Messages
11,467
Pulling a Capcom would be making an entirely new game. That's not cheap. Plus, there would be the crowd bitching about changing the game's story and characters profoundly and others which would want it to be treated like the camp that never wanted any alterations to the original Star Wars Trilogy.

You can remake a game from a technical standpoint without altering the story and the like.

The direction BioWare went here is a safe one. They'll sell some copies and probably make some money while getting people interested in Mass Effect again. It's low effort, low risk, relatively high reward.

Which sums up the project. Enhanced versions of games have been a thing since the early 2000s and this is what Legendary Edition is. For fans of the series it is certainly nice, while it can get newer gamers into the lore before they release the next new title.

I'll likely play ME1 and ME3 LE in the future. Only did ME3 twice, whereas I did 1/2 hour or so times each. ME1 LE will see the biggest upgrade making it worthwhile. I think I'll skip 2.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
57,923
You can remake a game from a technical standpoint without altering the story and the like.

Sure, you could but that's unlikely. Given the censorship they are applying to certain cut scenes its obvious that a remake would be some woke pile of shit. Plus, Andromeda had some of that, albeit not as much as its given shit for.

Which sums up the project. Enhanced versions of games have been a thing since the early 2000s and this is what Legendary Edition is. For fans of the series it is certainly nice, while it can get newer gamers into the lore before they release the next new title.

I'll likely play ME1 and ME3 LE in the future. Only did ME3 twice, whereas I did 1/2 hour or so times each. ME1 LE will see the biggest upgrade making it worthwhile. I think I'll skip 2.
ME2 is probably my favorite of the games overall. Although, ME3's gameplay is definitely better on a mechanical level.
 

M76

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
11,910
You can remake a game from a technical standpoint without altering the story and the like.
The temptation is just too high to change it. Look at Mafia Definitive Edition. It was supposed to be a faithful remake, yet they couldn't help themselves they ruined the narrative and dialogue, changed the characters, cut content that wasn't for the lowest common denominator. Made changes to the story for the sake of it that adds nothing of value, instead takes away from it.
 
Top