You know what, I think Mass Effect 3 will be awesome!

[teebeeohh]

what are you basing this on?
a couple of screens and the promise that it will be dumbed down a appeal to brain dead monkeys?

And what are YOU basing the idea that it will be dumbed down from? I'd refute it myself, but it's been said better on this thread already, so here:

"appeal to a larger audience"
who except braindead monkeys is left after everyone and their companion cube liked ME2?
don't get me wrong i think ME3 will be great, especially if EA and Bioware take the backlash from DA2 serious. I just think it's stupid to take what little information we have and get worked up about it either way, the only thing we have seen are a couple of nice screens with way too much lens flare and some promises/threats by the developer. Until i see some gameplay videos, which we will probably get when E3 comes around,i am not forming and opinion about this at all.

 

[Zantos]

Your copy smelled like Marzipan!?
I should've bought a retail copy, damn.
Anyway, I must say, I'm sooooo keen for ME3, and hating on a game before it comes out is silly.

Yeah, it still does actually. I think it was only the PC release though, I don't quite have the will to go and smell my 360 copy to test this theory. Never found anyone to confirm that this happened with all the PC copies though. Maybe someone was just trying to poison me, it is almonds that cyanide is supposed to smell like, right?

 

[Avatar Roku]

what are you basing this on?
a couple of screens and the promise that it will be dumbed down a appeal to brain dead monkeys?

And what are YOU basing the idea that it will be dumbed down from? I'd refute it myself, but it's been said better on this thread already, so here:

"appeal to a larger audience"
who except braindead monkeys is left after everyone and their companion cube liked ME2?
don't get me wrong i think ME3 will be great, especially if EA and Bioware take the backlash from DA2 serious. I just think it's stupid to take what little information we have and get worked up about it either way, the only thing we have seen are a couple of nice screens with way too much lens flare and some promises/threats by the developer. Until i see some gameplay videos, which we will probably get when E3 comes around,i am not forming and opinion about this at all.

Ah, fair dues.

 

[Sarkule]

Your copy smelled like Marzipan!?
I should've bought a retail copy, damn.
Anyway, I must say, I'm sooooo keen for ME3, and hating on a game before it comes out is silly.

Yeah, it still does actually. I think it was only the PC release though, I don't quite have the will to go and smell my 360 copy to test this theory. Never found anyone to confirm that this happened with all the PC copies though. Maybe someone was just trying to poison me, it is almonds that cyanide is supposed to smell like, right?

ooh! It's a conspiracy. Wait, I'll go smell my brothers copy of it to check!

 

[Fanboy]

I am really hoping they bring back planet exploration as a key feature. Since they have already created the Hammerhead tank DLC there really should be no reason to leave it out. If they create outdoor environments such as those in the Firewalker and Overlord DLC it would really open up the game world again, while avoiding the sameness of ME1's wastelands.

I agree with the planet exploration. But only if they can come up with jokes as funny or funnier than the uranus joke.

Actually, this is an argument I have never understood.

In ME1, you could "scan" a planet. By mouse clicking on it and "poof" you got whatever collectible was on it. On a tiny handful of planets you could drop down and explore with the Mako. And that planet ALWAYS had an "Assignment" mission on it, even if it wasn't unlocked yet.

In ME2, you scanned a planet with the scanner. Yes, minigame, but one less annoying that the decrypt frogger of ME1, IMO. And then you'd find an anomaly on a tiny handful of planets where you could drop down and do an Assignment or Loyalty Mission. There's a very similar number of planets you can actually land on in ME2 to ME1 - the only difference is no Mako.

So, I wanted to ask - was it the Mako that you miss? Or the being able to drive around instead of going directly to the Assignment? Because the "scanner minigame" doesn't replace the driving around (it replaces the point-and-click scanner mechanic from ME1).

Trying to drive up random mountains in the Mako was always my least favorite part of ME1, so I'm sure I'm biased. Also I played ME2 before playing ME1, so I came at this from the opposite direction.

It's not really driving the mako that I miss, it's the feeling of being in a large, open universe. ME2 felt a tad claustrophobic; Moving from shuttle, to normandy, to citadel, to normandy, to Blue Suns Hideout didn't really feel like I was traveling that far a distance. Even the citadel felt minuscule compared to ME1, simply because they did not include large open areas like the Presidium.

Remember driving the Mako through that huge hallway on Ilos? Compare that to the small on-foot section before it and you can hopefully understand what I'm getting at.

 

[Sarkule]

Your copy smelled like Marzipan!?
I should've bought a retail copy, damn.
Anyway, I must say, I'm sooooo keen for ME3, and hating on a game before it comes out is silly.

Yeah, it still does actually. I think it was only the PC release though, I don't quite have the will to go and smell my 360 copy to test this theory. Never found anyone to confirm that this happened with all the PC copies though. Maybe someone was just trying to poison me, it is almonds that cyanide is supposed to smell like, right?

Nope, just yours it seems!
I think someone might be trying to kill you :O

 

[RoyalWelsh]

You know what OP, I think it will be awesome too.

 

[Alon Shechter]

Am I the only one who doesn't care about anything right now except L.A Noire and Max Payne 3?
I just finished the second Max Payne, it was mindblowing and Mass Effect is scared from its might.

 

[Harry Mason]

I'm almost entirely sure it will be awesome. Mass Effect 1 was awesome, and Mass Effect 2 was awesome, and as far as I'm concerned, anyone whining about RPG elements being removed or it being too "shooter"y or not "shooter"y enough ARE MISSING THE POINT. Christ. It like a child getting increasingly wonderful Christmas presents and complaining about each one being wrapped differently.

As far as being repetitive, name me a single game that is not (that isn't Warioware) and I will bake cookies and send them to you. Oatmeal.

There's also another thing to keep in mind that I don't know if anyone's mentioned... In Mass Effect 1 & 2, each plot changing decision exponentially multiplied the amount of content that the subsequent games would have to contain. That's why the decisions in Mass Effect 2 seemed larger. Because they could afford to be. If this is the final chapter, no plot decisions will effect the amount of work they have to do on another sequel. That means they can throw many more decisions at you, and LARGER heavier-hitting ones at that. The only thing they'll need to keep in mind if the fucking ending cutscene. My money is on it being pretty fabulous.

Captcha sez: "Cutest fale"
Hmmm...

 

[Nackl of Gilmed]

Here's a list of what we KNOW:
- Combat will be more fluid with SWAT turns and rolls
- Some RPG elements are returning.
- Meaningless stats are gone and are being replaced with meaningful ones.
- Weapon Mods are making a return
- Melee will be improved.
- Emphasis on Z-Axis gameplay
- Larger environments with less chest-high-walls.

All of that sounds great!

That's a really good list. I was not aware of most of those things. So they seem to pretty much know what they're doing with gameplay. The sticking point will be the story. So long as the ending adequately caters to and pays off the player's specific combination of decisions, I'm pretty sure I'll be happy.

 

[Grey_Focks]

It'll be awesome, and no one doubts that; we're just sad that it sounds like less and less of an RPG every time we hear about it.

See, here's what I don't quite understand. In every single article and in multiple press releases, Bioware has gone on record to say that they're improving and bringing back RPG elements to Mass Effect 3.

Here's a list of what we KNOW:
- Combat will be more fluid with SWAT turns and rolls
- Some RPG elements are returning.
- Meaningless stats are gone and are being replaced with meaningful ones.
- Weapon Mods are making a return
- Melee will be improved.
- Emphasis on Z-Axis gameplay
- Larger environments with less chest-high-walls.

All of that sounds great!

I'd also like to add to that list that powers/abilities will be returning, but will have multiple evolutions as you level them instead of just the one at the end.

But yea, it's Mass Effect 3. I'm quite the card carrying ME fanboy, so my stance on it can be guessed, but suffice to say, my body is ready.

 

[Doctor Proctor]

Here's a list of what we KNOW:
- Combat will be more fluid with SWAT turns and rolls
- Some RPG elements are returning.
- Meaningless stats are gone and are being replaced with meaningful ones.
- Weapon Mods are making a return
- Melee will be improved.
- Emphasis on Z-Axis gameplay
- Larger environments with less chest-high-walls.

All of that sounds great!

That's a really good list. I was not aware of most of those things. So they seem to pretty much know what they're doing with gameplay. The sticking point will be the story. So long as the ending adequately caters to and pays off the player's specific combination of decisions, I'm pretty sure I'll be happy.

A lot of this sort of information can be found on the ME3 hub over at GameInformer
http://www.gameinformer.com/p/masseffect3.aspx

Honestly though, I really don't get what people are complaining about half the time. Like the loot in ME1? I'm not sorry that's gone... Really, what were the differences between Mark I, Mark II, Mark III, Mark IV, etc, versions of a weapon? It was just a stat. ME2 introduced differences in the basic ways that the weapons worked. If you want bullet spam, go with the Tempest SMG, if you want accuracy at medium ranges and higher damage per shot then you go with the Locust. These were actual MEANINGFUL choices, not "Do I want the gun with 167 rating, or 172?"

And as for the mods, while most of those went away we still got the ammo powers. In ME3 though, they're going to have the different guns and their different behavior like in ME2, with an extensive mod system like ME1 that's more meaningful and actually changes the look of the weapon. How is this bad, and killing the RPG elements? I think it's awesome!

And as another poster mentioned, most of your stat increases were simply "Increase x by y%" type skills. ME2 had much of the same, and for fewer skills, but it also had the power evolution mechanic. This gave you a LOT more customization potential, beyond just the late game "specialization" in ME1. That only applied to Commander Shepard, and just for one skill. In ME2, and apparently ME3, this will apply to all party members and for all of their skills. If people would read beyond the singular statement of "We want to appeal to a broader audience" (which might have just been something to placate the shareholders, or perhaps a reference to trying to go more in depth with the "Previously on Mass Effect..." mechanic for all we know) they would see that ME3 is trying to offer MORE customization than either of it's predecessors. As far as I'm concerned, I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt and wait to see how awesome this game is gonna be.

 

[Kingsnake661]

It'll be awesome, and no one doubts that; we're just sad that it sounds like less and less of an RPG every time we hear about it.

It was never really much of an RPG to begin with. Atleast, not in a numbercruching, stats based, loot driven, micromaganent gameplay since. Mass Effect had a few rather poorly implement rpgish elements. Stats were... there i guess if you count weapons and ammor stats, but, there were very shallow and fairly pointless. All that really mattered was DMG for weapons. Get the gun, which i might add, there was no real devirisity too, something i'd expect in an RPG, with the most damage and win. Armor.. same deal. Best resistince wins. It's not really effect RPG micro managing when you have no real choices, Spec X gun and Collosas armor x. Win. Set or brake down the rest.

The upgrade system pretty much the same. Lots and lots of crap and most of which didn't matter. Scram Rail, Frictionles Mat. if you can't pace your shots, and the right ammor for the mobs your fighting (shredder or tunscton.)

Skills were accually pretty ok all things considered. I can't really complain other then the fact that it's wasn't really balanced. Biotics = walking gods and tech... well.. they picked locks. >.>


It was a weak RPG at BEST from the start. (game play wise anyways.) Frankly the shoter elements were kind of weak too... it really broke down at the end when you had your spec x gun, collosas armor, barrier/imminutity, whatever. At that point you walk around as an killable god and mow people down... even on insainity.

The STORY was very RPGish. Epic in scale. The charater development was good. THIS is about the only thing bioware really got right in the first game, and it was so good, i can forgive the flaws in gameplay. It was such a good story/setting/world that people i think remember it with rose colored glasses and forget how weak an RPG it really was.

Frankly, ME2's streamlined approuch to the RPG ticked some people off i guess, but, i don't really understand why. Ok, you have only, what, 3 different Assult rifles, let take that for example. Ok, 3.. no 4, if you play a soilder. (and are on hardcore for the geth rifle.) In them 4 rifles... you get more in game, accually diversity of use, then anything you'd find in ME1. The rifles were DIFFERENT. It accually adds a level of customisation that isn't there in ME1. Between that fact, ammo skills, and upgrades, you get more choices and accual tangable ingame play differences then anything you'll find in ME1. And that's just rifles. Add in the other weapons, who have the same diversity and heavy weapons, and your combat options are much MUCH more diverse then ME1, and yet, simpler at the same time...

The skills.. are basically the SAME as ME1, but simpler. There is almost NOTHING my ME1 addept can do, that my ME2 can't. But there's a heck of a lot more my ME2 adept can do my ME1 can't. And don't get me started on the classes, which are accually different in ME2, with tech having some meaning this time around....

ME2 keep, IMO, the heart of the RPG elements ME1 poorly implemented, customasion and choice, and simplified it and made it better. Simple don't always = worse.

And ME2's story was, imo, better, for the very reason it was more charter driven. I'm a charater guy. I like, no LOVE good charater development. And no, it wasn't perfect, yes, i wanted more, but it was better then ME1's charater development and a heck of a lot better then other games ive seen.

And the shoter based combat of ME2 as accually much more fun to play, and i've yet to find a way to "tank" my way through gunfire like i can in ME1.

So... my take on ME3 is, more streamlining might not be a nessearly bad thing, it worked in ME2. Better shotter combat will be welcome. But at the end of the day, for me, it's the story i care about. So long as it's a good one, i'll be happy with the game. I don't NEED the micor managing, inventory tables, or complex skills to enjoy this game. I need a soild and epic ending. And that's what i'm hoping for. ;-)

 

[Nackl of Gilmed]

If people would read beyond the singular statement of "We want to appeal to a broader audience" (which might have just been something to placate the shareholders, or perhaps a reference to trying to go more in depth with the "Previously on Mass Effect..." mechanic for all we know) they would see that ME3 is trying to offer MORE customization than either of it's predecessors. As far as I'm concerned, I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt and wait to see how awesome this game is gonna be.

Indeed. At this stage, complaints seem to be based on nothing more than some ill-defined, instinctual notion that EA's goal is to make games less good.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

I don't think you get the Mass Effect 3 issue. We all want and hope with all our little shiny gamer hearts that it will be awesome. But sentences like 'We are making it appeal to a wider audeince.' with no context, makes everyone worry like hell.

People are worrying, not hating. We hope it will be awesome too.

 

[Nackl of Gilmed]

I don't think you get the Mass Effect 3 issue. We all want and hope with all our little shiny gamer hearts that it will be awesome. But sentences like 'We are making it appeal to a wider audeince.' with no context, makes everyone worry like hell.

People are worrying, not hating. We hope it will be awesome too.

That's understandable enough. I suppose this all stems from what was bound to be a conflict between the developers and the publishers from the minute Mass Effect was conceived. I mean, it's sometimes easy to forget that what Bioware are doing with the persistent-player-determined-storyline-trilogy is basically unprecedented in the history of gaming (as far as I know). EA probably have a right to be a little nervous that this game they're supposed to be footing the bill for is specifically designed to ONLY appeal to fans of the previous games. Simultaneously, Bioware are not going to want to let those fans down after all this time. EA may want the game to have as broad an appeal as possible, but I don't think that will necessarily mean ruining it for those of us who've been in from the beginning.

 

[coldshadow]

we all know that in sci-fi trilogies the third is always the best or the worst. looks like it will be the best.