Halo 3, although I have no idea how that ended, is probably a bad example because of Halo Wars, Halo Reach and Halo 4.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Mass Effect 3 Spoiler Thread |OT2| Taste the Rainbow
- Thread starter Patryn
- Start date
Halo 3, although I have no idea how that ended, is probably a bad example because of Halo Wars, Halo Reach and Halo 4.
diamondstar
Member
So with ME3 barely hanging on to Top 10 in a slow sales month
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2012-05-10-game-sales-plummet-by-32-percent-in-us-during-april
And ME3 barely making Top 10 in XBox Live activity since launch
http://majornelson.com/2012/04/17/live-activity-for-week-of-april-9th/
Can we conclude that taking resources and time from single player to build multiplayer was a bad idea?
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2012-05-10-game-sales-plummet-by-32-percent-in-us-during-april
And ME3 barely making Top 10 in XBox Live activity since launch
http://majornelson.com/2012/04/17/live-activity-for-week-of-april-9th/
Can we conclude that taking resources and time from single player to build multiplayer was a bad idea?
You crazy? I love multiplayer, i've put more hours into that than singleplayer.
diamondstar
Member
I guess you and your fellow ten percenters are keeping ME3 from dropping out of the top 10.
Multiplayer is fine, I enjoyed it but not at the expense of single player. I'm just saying I think it is more clear the EA/Bioware clearly dropped the ball with ME3.
I don't even play on Xbox, so whatever.
And multiplayer is played enough so that around 22.84 millions matches were played. Although i have no idea if that only include Xbox or not, since the same pic only showed the top N7 rating of Xbox. The top Xbox player would only be #9 on PC. :lolhttp://blog.bioware.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/MP-Telemetry.jpg
PinkCrayon
Member
no because the multiplayer was made by a separate team.
I think there were bigger issues with the development of the game than the multiplayer that honestly didn't require a lot of time with 99% of assets directly pulled from the campaign (and development on the online code was handled by Bioware Montreal, not Edmonton)
The game needed another year in development and less input from EA's marketing and focus testing groups for the game to be excellent in my book.
Freeza Under The Shower
Member
I think the ending of the single player is a much bigger cause of the game losing steam than anything else. Why bother with the mp when it only reminds you of that awful ending?
and that as well.
Try a melee focused Geth Infiltrator someday, they pretty much own anything. Make Silver too easy. Havent dare trying Gold with it yet.
Mutanthands
Member
Honestly, Bioware didn't need muddling from EA to ruin the ending. That was all on the top guys on the team. If EA marketing was involved, we would have gotten a traditional ending with a clear path to sequels, don't you think?
I can't think of a more logical reason as to why Jessica Chobot was fully rendered in game and Tali appeared as a stock photo. It's stuff like that I'm talking about, as well as some of the direction and the marketing for the game. The ending was a casualty of the limited dev time.
Scapegoat
Member
They should have used Chobot's face for Tali with her mask off. Even better, they could have it if you get the Geth to make peace with the Quarians they could upgrade their suits and immune systems or something and so Tali would spend the rest of the game with her helmet off. Oh, and also Chobot would do the rest of Tali's dialogue cause her voice was like that because of suit speakers or synthesizers or something.
For the fans.
Complistic
Member
2 years is a limited production time for a RPG of ME's scope.
The scope of ME was cut back when they made ME2. They were able to make a great game out of ME2 in the 2 years they had.
Nothing wrong with the game was caused by MP.
Sometimes I think people are overestimating the involvement EA had in the production of mass effect. Like, sometimes it feels like it gets construed that bioware is the battered wife while EA is the drunk husband asking for more. I just don't think that is the relationship of developer and publisher.
I'm sure a lot of it is a change in mindset with the heads of the studio, but I refuse to believe it was Bioware's idea to put Chobot in the game.
Metroidvania
People called Romanes they go the house?
Supposedly it was Ray Muzikya (sp) who personally asked her to be in the game.
I wonder if this was done before or after they decided to kill Emily Wong on twitter.
And I agree that it was on Bioware's end, not EA's. EA may have killed the production cycle time, but Bioware should have been aware of how to write a damn ending. The game was arguably fine (not amazing after the initial wowness wears off and the other flaws become apparent) except for the last elements of the plot line.
I agree with this. It was rudimentary but entertaining until the post-beam stuff.
The Broken Ska Record
Member
I did really like the Quarian/Geth bit, but coupled with the Genophage seemed like Shepard was the cure for everything relating to the Galaxy's biggest issues.
Well the separate team could've been added to the main team. Of course it's not a simple question of adding more programmer = better program in less time, but when you hear that Martin Sheen was still recording lines slightly over two months before the game was finished, because they ditched an indoctrination ending shortly before that because they couldn't get it working from a gameplay perspective.. Then it's quite clear that they were starved for time or resources. And having the other team prototyping and testing could've helped in this regard.
Sadly if Legion died in ME2, they handled the Legion replacement very poorly. Made it that much easier for me to gethicide everyone.
riceandbeans
Member
I think the complaints sound fair. We wouldn't have the Galactic Readiness bullshit mess up the single-player if it wasn't for EA forcing their "Play Anywhere" thing, originally Javik was a regular crew member in the story who mysteriously turned into DLC, and a strict deadline doesn't help much either.
Reading the leaked script bits and listening to the cut content, it sounds like the game didn't have enough time to bake and resources may have been stretched thin.
Sapphire Dreams
Member
Guys it just hit .
isn't it ironic that Conrad Verner had the best story arc of all the characters ?
isn't it ironic that Conrad Verner had the best story arc of all the characters ?
Clockblockers
Member
Yeah, I haven't read through everything because I wanted to avoid spoilers, but I thought this was a great game with some weaknesses that I loved up until the end. I just wish they handled the ending better.
The Broken Ska Record
Member
I guess it's good if the conditions lined up.
PinkCrayon
Member
They had over 2 years to make ME2. That's why it was so polished. ME3 was made in 18 months, that's why they couldn't even come up with a decent ending.
I don't think the lack of time was the reason the ending sucked. It was more because Walters and Casey didnt want feedback from the other writers, am i right?
All the bugs that both the singleplayer and multiplayer have on the other hand... definitely due to a rushed game where they didnt even bother to fixed most of them before the release. ME2 had some bugs when i bought it last year(mostly Shepard getting stuck in midair for some reason), but that's nowhere near what ME3 have.
RedRedSuit
Member
Partially, yes. Partially the endgame suffered because war assets (that is to say, the rest of ME1-ME3) had so little visible impact on it. That had to be a result of lack of time. They undoubtedly wanted an ME2-like effect of war assets on the ending, but it's hardly there at all.
Both sequels were released about 26 months after their predecessor so that's not that valid a reason. Obviously I wish they'd delayed ME3 a few months at least now though.
Mass Effect: November 20, 2007
Mass Effect 2: January 26, 2010
Probably right around 2 years development time since it takes about 2-3 months for certification.
She got Internet Famous for licking a PSP back in the day...
Ronabo
Member
I just did this too. I didn't even know it could happen. Weird thing is I'm full Paragon and almost full Renegade. I at first wanted to destroy the Geth. Then I changed my mind when Legion said it wasn't justice. But it still happened anyways. Kinda bummed.
I heard that you kinda need to do have done a perfect Paragon run in ME2 to be able to save both party in ME3.
I ask this in a other thread but I'm like 23 hours in on Insanity mode and I think I'm at the half way point. If somebody can tell me how far I am in, I appreciate it.
I'm at the part after Cerberus attacked the Citadel. And just discover the docking bay map with all the refugees are staying at the first time. I guess I missed a couple of missions after finding this area just now.
Ronabo
Member
That may be true then. Because on my male true ParagonShep play through I saved them both.
PinkCrayon
Member
No, you can get it through a renegade run as well.
Yeah, it's not really morality-related, just 'positive outcomes'-related. In my Renegade run I destroyed the heretics, yelled my way into Tali and Legion's good books and got Tali off the hook by bitching out the Admirality in ME2, then baited Zaal'Koris into accepting a pickup and took care of the fighter squadrons in ME3 and got the peace options at the end. It was satisfying telling the Quarians that if they insisted on attacking the Geth, I'd stand there and watch them burn.
Jaffaboy
Member
Well Halo Reach and Halo Wars and prequels, and yes, Halo 4 is a sequel but the original trilogy could still stand strong with no other additions as there is quite a satisfying ending that makes sense. There is a secret ending, pretty much identical to Mass Effect 3 but it's done in a way that makes it blatantly obvious that the hero is alive and well, but also adds mystery of what is going to happen next, if anything (obviously we now know there is in Halo 4) but it doesn't matter if it isn't revisited. Mass Effect 3 just made no sense, has no closure, and the secret ending just creates even more speculation to add to the current speculation. Not that anyone is really speculating heavily now anyway.
riceandbeans
Member
The original intention of the secret ending, going by the leaked scripts, is that Shepard dies during Synthesis and Control and he lives if you have a high enough EMS in Destroy. Nothing in the leaked script said anything about dreams or anything like that which is why I ignore the theory videos.
The only speculation I'm seeing is that Destroy, not Synthesis, was/is suppose to be the best intentional ending. Maybe it was suppose to be before they cut the Indoctrination sequence considering Reapers are half organic and half synthetics and made them all similar. I think they did that so no one would be dissapointed their decision was wrong.
Extra Sauce
Member
Okay guys, I'm here now. Can you tell me specifically why the whole "Reapers are a measure taken by an artificial intelligence to prevent organic life from permanently destroying itself" thing does not make sense? Thank you.
I thought the ending was bad, I was hoping it would be like Mass Effect 2 where what you did affect the outcome, but 3 colors endings are just downright lazy.
Still, I don't think it breaks the game. It's not as if the fact that successfully liquifying human to make a giant Human Reaper in Mass Effect 2 was supposed to be an automatic win button for the reaper was the paragon of story telling.
Still, I don't think it breaks the game. It's not as if the fact that successfully liquifying human to make a giant Human Reaper in Mass Effect 2 was supposed to be an automatic win button for the reaper was the paragon of story telling.
Escape Goat
Member
I just learned Jack's real name when I took Liara to Grissom Academy. Neato.
Its Jennifer.