Mass Effect 2 Discussion - Fight for the Lost

[quote name='dmaul1114']It's not like the people making the DLC and ME3 would be in anyway involved with the movies vs. maybe meeting with the movie producers to talk about plot and characters a couple of times--if even that.[/QUOTE]Have you read any of the articles talking about this movie? Casey Hudson, Ray Muzyka, and Greg Zeschuk are all going to be executive producers.

I've already said that my true interest is in the games, not the movies. I've also already stated that I know the two have nothing to do with each other.

I'd take a step back as well, from the "babies" comment you come across as one of those obsessed fans who think the content creators owe them some stake in the franchise as they've spent so much time following it.
Click to expand...
jokee.png

A crappy movie (or a great movie) will have no impact on the game franchise, just like the Resident Evil movies had no impact on that series etc. Just totally seperate entities.
Click to expand...
That sounds awfully familiar...
[quote name='Tha Xecutioner']I full well know that, regardless of the movie's success/failure, the games' sales won't be hurt because of it.[/quote]

Stop trying to rope me in with the BioWare forum members who fear that a movie will destroy the games' legacy and tarnish the Mass Effect name forever - that's not at all what I'm saying.

--------------------------------

[quote name='shrike4242']Should we start listing out the dialogue we know they need to put into the movie?

* I should go.
* You have a message at your private terminal.
* Can it wait for a bit? I'm in the middle of some calibrations.[/QUOTE]Renegade Shepard:

*pounds fist into open palm* "...because he's a big, stupid jellyfish!"
"I was just thinking of how much you remind me of Santa Claus."
"...and I represent the second-guessing of galactic law."
"You won't look so smug with a hole in your head."
"I haven't been shot in the head near enough times for that to seem like a good idea."

[quote name='MSUHitman']If it is a Shepard story, or the story of another character in the universe, should it be a male or female lead?[/QUOTE]If it's Shepard: Male. There is no femShep. :cool:

If not Shepard: depends on the storyline they use. I'd imagine that the movie would have a male as the central/main character.
 
Fair enough. I just don't see it having any impact on ME2 DLC or the quality of ME3. So that comment seemed to stick out and not mesh with what you just posted.

If the devs are just going to be executive producers, they'll just be approving the scripts etc., probably not involved with the day to day production of the movie.

And besides, I doubt those three--assuming they're higher ups at Bioware on the Mass Effect team--are doing much of the programming work etc. that's getting us DLC and eventually ME3. But I could be wrong as I pay no attention to devs, so I'm not familiar with the names. Just guessing that they're mainly in producer roles with the games as well and just chipping in on the plot, approving things while most of real work is done by lower level staff like at any corporation.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']Fair enough. I just don't see it having any impact on ME2 DLC or the quality of ME3. So that comment seemed to stick out and not mesh with what you just posted.

If the devs are just going to be executive producers, they'll just be approving the scripts etc., probably not involved with the day to day production of the movie.

And besides, I doubt those three--assuming they're higher ups at Bioware on the Mass Effect team--are doing much of the programming work etc. that's getting us DLC and eventually ME3. But I could be wrong as I pay no attention to devs, so I'm not familiar with the names. Just guessing that they're mainly in producer roles with the games as well and just chipping in on the plot, approving things while most of real work is done by lower level staff like at any corporation.[/QUOTE]Ray Muzyka is the co-founder, Group GM, and CEO of BioWare; with Greg Zeschuk being co-founder, VP, and Group Creative Officer.

Casey Hudson is the Executive Producer and Project Director of the Mass Effect games.

They are very much involved with the future of ME2 DLC and with ME3 production.
 
But not the day to day programming work etc. if they're that high up--at least I'd be shocked if they're doing more than giving suggestions, setting plot lines, approving things etc.. So they can easily give input on the movies and the games IMO.

Hudson is probably more involved, but he'd probably be least involved with the movie most likely and left to focus on the game.
 
I would prefer that they skip a full motion picture and go a different route. I'd rather have something like the animatrix or that set of halo stories. An animated or CG version of the ME graphic novel or books would be interesting. I think one of those would have a better chance being good than a full Hollywood adaptation of the ME storyline.
 
[quote name='erehwon']I would prefer that they skip a full motion picture and go a different route. I'd rather have something like the animatrix or that set of halo stories. An animated or CG version of the ME graphic novel or books would be interesting. I think one of those would have a better chance being good than a full Hollywood adaptation of the ME storyline.[/QUOTE]

Hehe I have to agree with you there, that would be the perfect move. Maybe sometime like what they did with Deadspace perhaps.
 
[quote name='100xp']"Tali vas Normandy quarantined kids meal box" - she'll come in a double bag sealed twice and hand sanitizer.[/QUOTE]

hhahah...:applause:
 
[quote name='Lord_Kefka']God, would they hurry up and release the next DLC pack already so we can fight about something else?[/QUOTE]The fighting's over (at least on my part, which was a good half of it) :cool:

My memory keeps trying to convince me that they said early June when talking about the DLC, but I haven't been able to find that in any of the articles or interviews. I really want it to hit ASAP though, because I'm interested in the quality of this "biggest expansion to the Mass Effect series to date".
 
I'm pretty skeptical of it since it will be part Hammerhead vehicle sections. So the on foot/story stuff probably won't be any longer than say Kasumi or BDTS were, just longer in total with the mediocre vehicle parts.

Hope I'm proven wrong on that though! That said, I'm in no rush as I probably wouldn't get to it until July or August as I've still got a good ways to go in Fallout 3, and then on to Bioshock 2 before I'd get back to ME2 DLC. On top of a busy work schedule ,with a week in Europe for a conference etc. in June.
 
My wife and daughter are going out of town for the whole first week of June, so this DLC would be the perfect thing to dive into after I thousand Final Fantasy XIII. Here's hoping!
 
Man, playing RDR and realizing it has more RPG elements than Mass Effect 2 makes me sort of sad. And it uses money just fine...

But it had me thinking, it would be great to see RDRs structure inside Mass Effect 3. Just imagine landing on a planet and it becoming an open world game, with towns/ports you could drive to that have shops, games, missions inside. And seeing the natural plant/wild life spread across the land, with random events you could come across (like a Batarian trap for a Quarian ect). That would be amazing... maybe Mass Effect 6 on X720.

It makes me realize how little detail there is in the ME universe now. There is rarely anything living or breathing about it. And they could have really expanded and made more things to do; like Quarian Poker or Batarian Dice in the citadel. Damn, just put anything!
 
I really don't want that in ME3 personally. ME2 worked for me as it was more straightforward, and did a great job with pacing and keeping the story going forward etc.

If I want an open ended game, I'll go play something like Fallout 3 I'm playing now. But I have the attention span for one of those every 2 years or so.

Point being, there are plenty of open ended games out there--they just don't work with games that are 100% story and character driven like Mass Effect IMO. They work with games like Oblivion and Fallout 3 that have pretty light stories, no main character (as you are the main character), no real party system etc.

Make Mass Effect an open RPG and you lose the cinematic story telling which is what really helps make the franchise standout IMO.
 
-_- no I didn't mean take out everything and replace it as an open world game. Just meaning landing on side mission planets could play out like that. And give the citadel more of a reason and more fun side things to do in it as well. AND bring back money as an important element.

It's wishes that will never happen.
 
I know what you were saying.

Just saying I prefer the series in the ME2 mold. I liked pretty much always being on a quest and not having to spend much time wandering around exploring and looking for quests etc.

Even ME1 didn't really have any exploration other than driving around the Mako on planets that were super redundant and boring.

So that type of gamplay just isn't part of the ME series.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']Make Mass Effect an open RPG and you lose the cinematic story telling which is what really helps make the franchise standout IMO.[/QUOTE]

I was thinking about this too... and would agree. The open-world in ME2 is more in the dialogue than the actual game. It gives the perception of an open-world but really is just small story loops very purposefully placed.

But I agree with DarkNessBear too... I hope ME3 does bring in some more RPG-like mechanics because its a bit too shallow in ME2. I mean, there wasn't even something as simple as a battle arena where you just go fight for credit or something... Doesn't seem too far-fetched.
 
I agree, they can bring back more RPG elements. I just don't want a lot of open world exploring. That's the one thing that keeps me from liking games like Fallout 3 as much as the ME series is too much time is spent with aimless wandering form location to location looking for sidequests etc.

But they can do more with money, finding loot/weapons etc. for sure and I'd be fine with it. I didn't mind that stuff in ME1 at all. I preferred the more streamlined experience of ME2, but would be ok with some of that stuff coming back.
 
You do realize RDR is an action-adventure game heavy on open world mechanics and ME2 is a action RPG heavy with shooting and morality mechanics. The problem with what you want is that it's called "feature creep". I studied Game Design and this usually breaks a game either by delaying it and possibly having the devs having to strip features to ship it in time. ME3 will be a lot of ME2 and probably a bit more RPG elements considering they've listened to fans in the past. I wouldn't mind playing that so called Solitaire game you can play on your Omni tool haha. ;) Anyone remember Commander Keen and his simple watch pong game? :cool:

A bit of that talked here, The Making of ME2:http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=248635&source=newsletter
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Spybreak8']You do realize RDR is an action-adventure game heavy on open world mechanics and ME2 is a action RPG heavy with shooting and morality mechanics. The problem with what you want is that it's called "feature creep". I studied Game Design and this usually breaks a game either by delaying it and possibly having the devs having to strip features to ship it in time.[/QUOTE]

I don't quite understand... can you explain more about "feature creep"?
 
[quote name='faceturd']I don't quite understand... can you explain more about "feature creep"?[/QUOTE]

Feature Creep is more commonly used to describe features that sneak into the project that weren't described in original design documents. Usually occurs whenever some member of the team goes "Hey, wouldn't it be cool if we do ...?" For example, a team is tasked with building a bicycle, but ten "wouldn't it be cool..." moments later, and the thing can now wirelessly link up to other bicycles, can fire rockets, while missing every milestone and being over budget. It can be a problem in any production group, but in a large group like Bioware, they have systems in place to prevent it.

I think he was trying to say that the more features a game has, the more potential problems they could run into with time, budgets, and actual functionality. Although, he's using a term that doesn't really fit, especially when you consider that we're all just random people on an internet board discussing ideas.

On the topic of ME's "world", I'd have to say I preferred how ME1 handled their settings over ME2. The citadel in particular, it was much larger, and had a lot more minor quests that really fleshed the world out better. I also preferred how missions that might involve killing someone didn't necessitate going to a new zone or whatever, but allowed the fight to play out in that area. With ME2 whisking you away to some new area for any mission, I ended up feeling like I was going to a bunch of smaller capsule areas instead of one giant "world". Heck, ME2's mission areas were so disjoint you could never re-enter an area once you left. For ME3, I'm hoping they go back a bit to make the "world" feel larger, even if they don't go for an open-world layout.
 
[quote name='Salamando3000']I'd have to say I preferred how ME1 handled their settings over ME2. The citadel in particular, it was much larger, and had a lot more minor quests that really fleshed the world out better. I also preferred how missions that might involve killing someone didn't necessitate going to a new zone or whatever, but allowed the fight to play out in that area. With ME2 whisking you away to some new area for any mission, I ended up feeling like I was going to a bunch of smaller capsule areas instead of one giant "world". Heck, ME2's mission areas were so disjoint you could never re-enter an area once you left. For ME3, I'm hoping they go back a bit to make the "world" feel larger, even if they don't go for an open-world layout.[/QUOTE]
Couldn't have said this better myself. It didn't really bother me while I was playing through the game, but looking back it's one of the few things that I hope they change.
 
[quote name='Salamando3000']Feature Creep is more ...[/QUOTE]

Hmm... thanx. Makes sense.

On the topic of ME's "world", I'd have to say I preferred how ME1 handled their settings over ME2.
Click to expand...

While I finished ME2 my friend was actually playing through ME1 and so I watched sometimes and was really nostalgic about the first game. As best as I could understand myself (not easy sometimes) is that I missed the feeling of a strong central narrative that carried through the game... it was Shepard's mission. In the second one, Shepard is always around and involved, but I felt like most of the game was about the team members and these small self-contained stories like you mention. The collector's were somewhat involved, but actually quite sparse in the actual emotion of the game except for book-ending the experience. Disjointed in some way for sure... but still hard for me to describe. But reading your comment I feel like we are addressing a similar idea.
 
I do agree with that faceturd. The one drawback of ME2 for me was the narrative/story. It was pretty disjointed and just a pretty bland plot compared to the first game. The first game was a great story about chasing a rogue spectre and discovering the Reaper threat.

ME2 was mostly about gathering the team to go forward against the reapers in ME3. Added some new plot elements with the Illusive Man, discovering how Reapers are formed etc.--but again it all really seemed to just set the story for ME3.

Minor nitpick in a great game, but that is the one area I prefered ME1 to ME2.
 
So I can't decide if I should buy the Kasumi pack or wait and buy the Overlord one. I know, I'm cheap for not buying both, but I'm not really looking to purchase any more points at the moment.
 
[quote name='Fjordson']So I can't decide if I should buy the Kasumi pack or wait and buy the Overlord one. I know, I'm cheap for not buying both, but I'm not really looking to purchase any more points at the moment.[/QUOTE]

Kasumi isn't that special. I played it in about 1 hour experiencing some "neat" ideas but nothing close to novel or groundbreaking... The best part of is was getting a good SMG. I would wait because Overlord sounds like a real expansion of sorts.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']Agreed. I have zero interest in online RPGs. Was super bummed that the new Knights of the Old Republic turned out being an MMORPG.[/QUOTE]

I'm actually looking forward to The Old Republic. While it falls within the same universe, it's technically not in the Knights of the Old Republic series, so I consider it a spinoff and a stand-alone game.

On the other hand, throwing multiplayer into Mass Effect 3 doesn't make sense. It's YOUR Shepard's story, and having someone else play Garrus and Tali on your squad just detracts from who those characters are and the engaging experience BioWare is creating.
 
Yeah, I don't view the KOTOR game as some affront that tarnishes the series etc.

Just sad as I loved KOTOR and would love a next gen single player one.

Anyway, I'm sure there's zero chance of ME3 being multiplayer. They'd save that for some future game as well, as they want to finish the single player trilogy storyline for sure.
 
Well with such an epic story of every species in the galaxy trying to fight off the Reavers I could see where multiplayer comes into the equation. I think if any company would handle it with discretion it would be Bioware so I'm not at all worried, as say if it were Activision. In all things considered Bioware could go the unlockable method since it's a RPG (player progresses and unlocks abilities/weapons/increases health/ammo/etc) and quite frankly that sounds like it would be fun and addicting as hell. Guild Wars did the MMO/ (not saying this is an MMO) but single player well and I think a lot of developers took notice with them. You could have a whole multiplayer event happening and not even showing the other players playing the game but I doubt they'd do that just based on the job description. That's how I'd handle it anyways, something like Guild Wars Factions always shifting faction border (based on PvP faction wins lands would be engulfed in a different faction color).
 
I do think the ME universe is good for a MMORPG. I just have no interest in online games, so I hope if there is one it doesn't come at the expense of continuing the single player series beyond ME3.
 
[quote name='Fjordson']So I can't decide if I should buy the Kasumi pack or wait and buy the Overlord one. I know, I'm cheap for not buying both, but I'm not really looking to purchase any more points at the moment.[/QUOTE]I can't see how anyone would skip out on Kasumi. She's a great new character, has an awesome loyalty mission, and nets you one of the best guns in the game. She's also a fantastic squadmate to bring with you because of her Shadow Strike (cloaking backstab) and her Flashbang Grenades that take out enemy weapons (including Collectors being taken over by Harbinger).

That being said, the Overlord DLC is supposed to be the biggest expansion to the Mass Effect series yet - equipped with full cinematics, dialog, Hammerhead missions/open world traveling, and so on.

Your decision comes down to: one of the best characters/squadmates/loyalty missions/guns in the game vs. big-ass, 2-3 hour expansion. You really should find a way to get both.

-----------------------

For a future MMORPG project relating to Mass Effect: I'd be all over that. I'd love to have a huge-ass game where you could choose to be a Krogan during the Rachni Wars, a Turian during the First Contact War, a Geth or Quarian before/leading up to the Morning War, a Salarian in the STG during the Krogan Rebellion, or a human during the Skyllian Blitz.

The universe is definitely big enough to handle numerous storylines and paths for various characters - something you'd see in a MMORPG.
 
Multiplayer is fine for any spin off because really anything goes, but it should stay the f*ck out of the trilogy IMO. They've experimented enough as it is and already have a few promises to deliver in the third game. Better they focus on delivering them rather than stretching out their resources catering to casual fans and different genres yet again.

I just hope they plan to revisit and revamp the single player experience of ME at some point after the trilogy.
 
[quote name='Tha Xecutioner']I can't see how anyone would skip out on Kasumi. She's a great new character, has an awesome loyalty mission, and nets you one of the best guns in the game. She's also a fantastic squadmate to bring with you because of her Shadow Strike (cloaking backstab) and her Flashbang Grenades that take out enemy weapons (including Collectors being taken over by Harbinger).
[/QUOTE]

I thought it was pretty good, but probably not quite worth the price to the average player like me who was already done with their 1 or 2 playthroughs and thus had no more missions to use her or the SMG on. Value obviously goes up for me if they put out a DA-Awakenings type full on expansion etc.

Definitely lot more value for the crazy diehards like you that do a shit ton of playthroughs, as you'll get a lot of use out of the character and gun.

Though I don't see what the fuss is over the character--she didn't do much for me in terms of her story, design etc.
 
[quote name='Tha Xecutioner']I can't see how anyone would skip out on Kasumi. She's a great new character, has an awesome loyalty mission, and nets you one of the best guns in the game. She's also a fantastic squadmate to bring with you because of her Shadow Strike (cloaking backstab) and her Flashbang Grenades that take out enemy weapons (including Collectors being taken over by Harbinger).

That being said, the Overlord DLC is supposed to be the biggest expansion to the Mass Effect series yet - equipped with full cinematics, dialog, Hammerhead missions/open world traveling, and so on.

Your decision comes down to: one of the best characters/squadmates/loyalty missions/guns in the game vs. big-ass, 2-3 hour expansion. You really should find a way to get both.[/QUOTE]
Damn, guess I might have to just buy both then. Overlord sounds bad ass, I didn't realize it was so extensive.
 
Ok fine if you don't agree with my Side Planet Open World idea. But you cannot disagree that the NPCs in Mass Effect (either it be the Citadel, Omega, on board the ship, planets ect) need some type of dynamic procedural AI. Everything everywhere is way too static, it would be nice seeing the citizens actually going about their day following a "day/night" cycle.

It's almost insane how lacking the game is with that. That guy in Omega will always be heckling that Elcor to let him in... ect. ect. ect. ect.
 
[quote name='DarkNessBear']Ok fine if you don't agree with my Side Planet Open World idea. But you cannot disagree that the NPCs in Mass Effect (either it be the Citadel, Omega, on board the ship, planets ect) need some type of dynamic procedural AI. Everything everywhere is way too static, it would be nice seeing the citizens actually going about their day following a "day/night" cycle.

It's almost insane how lacking the game is with that. That guy in Omega will always be heckling that Elcor to let him in... ect. ect. ect. ect.[/QUOTE]

Ok it's fine if you don't agree with my Side Planet Open World idea but you cannot disagree that the NPCs in Mass Effect, whether it be; the Citadel, Omega, Normandy, Planets, etc, need some type of dynamic procedural AI.

There you go fixed.

F that. I mean yes that would be cool but again this is an added feature that might detract from what they need to be focusing on. I'd rather have improved combat than procedural AI crew for my ship.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just cause you took one "game design" class doesn't mean you know how much effort it takes. Sorry. And if they can't handle that, than Bioware is a crap company.
 
Sure, they could add a bit more there. Have them wander around aimlessly like NPCs do in Fallout 3/Oblivion. As long as they keep people you need to talk to for side quests etc. in the same place! Or add a marker/compass system like those Bethesda games. I don't want to have to wander all over trying to find someone to finish a quest etc.
 
[quote name='DarkNessBear']Just cause you took one "game design" class doesn't mean you know how much effort it takes. Sorry. And if they can't handle that, than Bioware is a crap company.[/QUOTE]

Haha I majored in Game Art & Design kid, fyi.
 
Ooh, are we about to have a credentials-wagging contest? If we are, I have some stuff I'd need to dig up.

Have there been any games to actually implement procedurally generated actions for NPC's like that? I know of games that have characters use basic scripting to move around and appear real, but nothing truly random, as you seem to suggest. Though, basic scripting would be more than most NPC's in ME have. Most that I can remember do little more than stand around in their predetermined area. At the very least, they should have people able to do a number of things in the area they're supposed to be in...allow the Engineers to move around and actually fix things...have Jacob clean weapons in the armory...or Miranda work out (with accompanying workout attire).
 
Beginning to sound like a Krogan pissing contest in here....OK, I rescind my previous comment and we go back to arguing about a movie that won't be made for like 3 years.
 
[quote name='Salamando3000']Ooh, are we about to have a credentials-wagging contest? If we are, I have some stuff I'd need to dig up.

Have there been any games to actually implement procedurally generated actions for NPC's like that? I know of games that have characters use basic scripting to move around and appear real, but nothing truly random, as you seem to suggest. Though, basic scripting would be more than most NPC's in ME have. Most that I can remember do little more than stand around in their predetermined area. At the very least, they should have people able to do a number of things in the area they're supposed to be in...allow the Engineers to move around and actually fix things...have Jacob clean weapons in the armory...or Miranda work out (with accompanying workout attire).[/QUOTE]

Not that I'm aware of but random is usually used amongst code a lot. The use of a random integer helps to "un-stiffen" an event, give the NPC a different path then before and such. I think the closest you can get to random realistic actions would be in GTAIV. That said a lot of games use the spawn the object or person away from player and have it pass by player or attack player method (Red Faction: Guerrilla for example). I think it would be cool if you walked around the Citadel or Omega and the people actually whispered hey that's Commander Shepard but again this is a minor gameplay mechanic! Would make the world a bit more livelier, just not needed. I agree procedurally generated actions would be a nice touch and who knows they've pretty much got the Mass Effect ground work set so maybe they can venture into this with ME3.

I think, now that I've been trying to come up with a good example, the Left 4 Dead games do a good procedural method but then again the enemies might follow set AI paths in the level or just head directly towards the player from a random spawn point. The "AI Director" always makes it interesting and hey that would be neat to have in some areas in Mass Effect (like an always different setup on a derelict ship).
 
Money > Balance?

...You tell me.

If competitive multiplayer does make an appearance in ME3 then I won't be the least bit surprised if those so called enriched RPG elements are half-assed or completely absent to accentuate it. Now should that happen my interest in the franchise from then on will shift to novels and comics until the company decides to stumble upon their core audience again. Right now I'm not sure they can see us with those gigantic dollar signs blocking their view.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I personally can't support the trilogy's unnecessary evolution into a generic shooter differentiated from the pack by storyline, universe and character development alone. Something any other shooter could easily have had for years. I just find it hilariously sad that as far as the industry is concerned in order to 'properly' advance one genre it must be strip mined and assimilated into whichever happens to be the most popular - the alpha genre.

Meh... at the end of the day it really is whatever though for real. If this news is for a spin off then I'll probably give it a chance and check it out. If it's for ME3 then Bioware can seriously f*ck off with that noise. It will be the only game in the trilogy I won't have a perfect score for because I for damn sure won't be playing it.
 
[quote name='Ink.So.Well.']
If competitive multiplayer does make an appearance in ME3 then I won't be the least bit surprised if those so called enriched RPG elements are half-assed or completely absent to accentuate it.[/QUOTE]

With any luck, the multiplayer aspect isn't competitive, but rather a co-op Horde-like mode. Although unnecessary, it could be a worthy addition if done right, as long as the core game experience doesn't suffer.

Of course, if it's competitive multiplayer tacked on to ME3, then that's a big mistake.
 
Yeah, I strongly doubt it will be competitive multiplayer.

I think if anything it would be either a new MMORPG in the ME universe and not ME3. Or it would be adding a Co-op mode since it is a party-based RPG.

I just can't see competitive MP being any fun. The shooting still sucks compared to a pure shooting game, it would be no fun geting stuck in singularities etc. etc.
 
I just saw this on Joystiq. I pray it isn't competitive MP tacked onto ME 3. I have a feeling it's something separate, though. Some kind of spin-off game. Or if it is in ME 3, it could be a co-op thing. Four player parties going through ME missions sounds kind of neat, but still I think that would take away from the dialogue and possible RPG elements of the next game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top