• 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.

The Mass Effect Community Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

BrassDragon

Member
J

jdstorm

Banned
Poodlestrike said:
I get why they wanted to do it, have the outside looking in thing going on, but yeah, it's kind of a mess with Cerberus. I don't think they ever really did a 180, but they presented their best face for that one game and that kind of tripped people up. Maybe make Shepard's benefactors a different, but still shady, organization. The Shadow Broker maybe.
Click to expand...

For the record. I wouldn't want to rewrite the series. Maybe change the order chronologically so it goes 1-3-2 with the suicide mission the last thing you do in the series. However having Liara use all her resources as the shadow broker to bring her former crewmate/lover back from the dead is both super creepy and incredibly romantic.
 
M

Maledict

Member
See, I'd have it as 2-1-3.

2 should have been the first instalment. Shepherd isn't a spectre, there's no big bad enemy, and he has to recruit a bunch of outlaws and rogues to investigate what's going on in the human colonies as no-one else cares.

1 then follows on from 2, as the ending to 2 reveals really bad things happening.

3 is then the final act, with Shepherd as a spectre following the events of 1.

It would also allow them to use the same cast all the way through, which was a big weakness with 3 as they couldn't commit to the cast from 2. 2 makes much more sense as the intro to the series that happens before the events of number 1 in plot terms as well.
 
P

Patryn

Member
Maledict said:
See, I'd have it as 2-1-3.

2 should have been the first instalment. Shepherd isn't a spectre, there's no big bad enemy, and he has to recruit a bunch of outlaws and rogues to investigate what's going on in the human colonies as no-one else cares.

1 then follows on from 2, as the ending to 2 reveals really bad things happening.

3 is then the final act, with Shepherd as a spectre following the events of 1.

It would also allow them to use the same cast all the way through, which was a big weakness with 3 as they couldn't commit to the cast from 2. 2 makes much more sense as the intro to the series that happens before the events of number 1 in plot terms as well.
Click to expand...

This is also my preferred order, although I'd also take the Suicide Mission mechanic, excise it from 2 and put it at the end of 3. That way, they can really go buckwild and kill everyone they want without having to deal with massive amounts of consequences.
 
B

BrassDragon

Member
Patryn said:
This is also my preferred order, although I'd also take the Suicide Mission mechanic, excise it from 2 and put it at the end of 3. That way, they can really go buckwild and kill everyone they want without having to deal with massive amounts of consequences.
Click to expand...

I'm absolutely baffled they didn't repeat the Suicide Mission mechanic on a larger scale at the end of ME3.

But then again, it's the end of ME3.
 
M

Maledict

Member
ME1 also suffered from the issue that many first parts do in a trilogy, where you're not sure you'll get a part 2 and 3.

Namely, it set a universe up full of interesting things - and then solved them all in the space of one game.

Rachni? Check.
Geth & Quarians? check.
Krogans reproducing? check.

Each of those would be a major plot device on it's own in a game, and yet they were crammed into ME1, sometimes at the cost of the overall series. They should have been spaced out more to give them room to breathe.
 
P

Patryn

Member
BrassDragon said:
I'm absolutely baffled they didn't repeat the Suicide Mission mechanic on a larger scale at the end of ME3.

But then again, it's the end of ME3.
Click to expand...

Imagine it, but with the full range of characters potentially available to you. Include the entire surviving crews of all the games and it'd be glorious. Hell, maybe even have choices involving deploying the Earth Fleet, the Rachni, the Turians, etc. Make it so that your choices of what war assets you brought to the table really mattered.

Would also have made your choices over the entire series really mean something, because some players would have almost no options for some roles, and others would have an over-abundance.
 
S

Steve.1981

Unconfirmed Member
Maledict said:
ME1 also suffered from the issue that many first parts do in a trilogy, where you're not sure you'll get a part 2 and 3.

Namely, it set a universe up full of interesting things - and then solved them all in the space of one game.

Rachni? Check.
Geth & Quarians? check.
Krogans reproducing? check.
Click to expand...

I haven't played through the trilogy in a while and I don't have a great memory, but as far as I can recall none of those things were solved in ME1.
 
P

Patryn

Member
Steve.1981 said:
I haven't played through the trilogy in a while and I don't have a great memory, but as far as I can recall none of those things were solved in ME1.
Click to expand...

No, you're right. The closest that any of those things to being solved was the Rachni, where you can either kill them off or free them, but if you free them that still leaves a giant hanging thread.
 
M

Maledict

Member
Sorry I shouldn't have said solved. I meant more ' encountered and tackled'. It was the way the game set up these huge, huge events that defined the entire galaxy - and then had you run into each of them during the game. Just one would have been huge, but all of them made it feel a bit squished to me and I fee they could have been spread out if they had the guarantee of the trilogy. Would have allowed them to do the Rachni properly as well in the final.

New authors often have exactly the same problem when they start their trilogy - blowing all your big shots early on.
 
P

Patryn

Member
Maledict said:
Sorry I shouldn't have said solved. I meant more ' encountered and tackled'. It was the way the game set up these huge, huge events that defined the entire galaxy - and then had you run into each of them during the game. Just one would have been huge, but all of them made it feel a bit squished to me and I fee they could have been spread out if they had the guarantee of the trilogy. Would have allowed them to do the Rachni properly as well in the final.

New authors often have exactly the same problem when they start their trilogy - blowing all your big shots early on.
Click to expand...

How was the Quarian/Geth thing encountered? Pretty much the only Quarian you encounter in ME1 is Tali.

Obviously you run into a lot more Geth, but you never really delve that deep into their conflict.
 
The Lamonster

The Lamonster

Member
Maledict said:
ME1 also suffered from the issue that many first parts do in a trilogy, where you're not sure you'll get a part 2 and 3.

Namely, it set a universe up full of interesting things - and then solved them all in the space of one game.

Rachni? Check.
Geth & Quarians? check.
Krogans reproducing? check.

Each of those would be a major plot device on it's own in a game, and yet they were crammed into ME1, sometimes at the cost of the overall series. They should have been spaced out more to give them room to breathe.
Click to expand...

ehhh I disagree with this. Curing the genophage in ME3 was a huge deal, and so was the Geth/Quarian resolution in that game.
 
prag16

prag16

Banned
Patryn said:
Imagine it, but with the full range of characters potentially available to you. Include the entire surviving crews of all the games and it'd be glorious. Hell, maybe even have choices involving deploying the Earth Fleet, the Rachni, the Turians, etc. Make it so that your choices of what war assets you brought to the table really mattered.

Would also have made your choices over the entire series really mean something, because some players would have almost no options for some roles, and others would have an over-abundance.
Click to expand...

Yeah, after the suicide mission in ME2, this is what I was really hoping for in ME3. I really liked the idea of getting more than the customary 2 squadmates involved (even if some of them were just "holding the line" when given no other role). I would have liked to have seen something like that in the ME3 final act. Having some way of deploying fleets and war assets too would have been awesome as well. Oh well. Maybe they'll incorporate some ideas along those lines in Andromeda if we're lucky.
 
DOWN

DOWN

Banned
I can't believe the only way I can play Mass Effect 3 multiplayer is by setting up a last gen console smh
 
M

Maledict

Member
DOWN said:
I can't believe the only way I can play Mass Effect 3 multiplayer is by setting up a last gen console smh
Click to expand...

why can't you play on PC? The base game is dirt cheap and there's still ana ctive community. Me and my friends played it a couple of months ago from scratch, and it was still a great blast.
 
S

Steve.1981

Unconfirmed Member
Stopped reading that Reddit post when it got to the settlement building. Can't say I'm looking forward to any of that, at all, but I guess it makes sense given one of the main goals in the game is to find a new home for humanity (and others, hopefully) to "settle" in.

I know I sound selfish, because other people obviously enjoy it, but I really wish this current thing of settlement building in RPGs would just die out. It was the worst part of Fallout 4, for me. I didn't enjoy it one bit, it felt like a waste of time that would have been better spent getting to know more characters or going on more side quests. And in Inquisition, I never bothered doing any decorating around Skyhold. I honestly couldn't care less what kind of curtains were hanging over the windows, or what my bed looked like.

I guess if this stuff has to be in there, I just hope Andromeda will still give us all the great Bioware character stuff as well.
 
DOWN

DOWN

Banned
Some stuff in Andromeda sounds ripped from the grinding MMO under-written fetch stuff in Inquisition. Hopefully it's much more than that.
 
M

Maledict

Member
Steve.1981 said:
Stopped reading that Reddit post when it got to the settlement building. Can't say I'm looking forward to any of that, at all, but I guess it makes sense given one of the main goals in the game is to find a new home for humanity (and others, hopefully) to "settle" in.

I know I sound selfish, because other people obviously enjoy it, but I really wish this current thing of settlement building in RPGs would just die out. It was the worst part of Fallout 4, for me. I didn't enjoy it one bit, it felt like a waste of time that would have been better spent getting to know more characters or going on more side quests. And in Inquisition, I never bothered doing any decorating around Skyhold. I honestly couldn't care less what kind of curtains were hanging over the windows, or what my bed looked like.

I guess if this stuff has to be in there, I just hope Andromeda will still give us all the great Bioware character stuff as well.
Click to expand...

It's like crafting. Not a single game has made it work for single player RPGs, yet it's always thrown into the mix. It always ends up being at least 2 of the three

1) Useless
2) A horrendous pointless grind
3) Overpowered and better than any gear you can find

I really don't want a crafting element in ME4.
 
S

Steve.1981

Unconfirmed Member
Maledict said:
...crafting...Overpowered and better than any gear you can find...
Click to expand...

I always craft my own gear when it's an option, for this very reason. I'd keep some form of crafting (at least upgradeable weapons and armour) in the mix but you're right, it's another thing that doesn't actually have to be there all the time.

DOWN said:
Some stuff in Andromeda sounds ripped from the grinding MMO under-written fetch stuff in Inquisition. Hopefully it's much more than that.
Click to expand...

Yeah the balance between good interesting side content and dull filler was a wee bit off in Inquisition. I never solved all those Astrariums, or collected all the bloody Shards (Aint nobody got time fo that). I did close all the Rifts though, that seemed like something the Herald should be doing at least...even if it was a touch repetitive. Hopefully they get the balance right this time.
 
G

Garlador

Member
Patryn said:
It'll still run you another $60+ for the DLC.
Click to expand...

More than any remaster, the simple lack of an affordable, convenient all-in-one package for the trilogy, even on PC, is a huge detriment towards me getting the game on PC. It's a staggering amount of premium content, even if you only stick with the story stuff.
 
M

Maledict

Member
Oh absolutely. The lack of a remaster is a disgrace, and playing them on the PC is just not possible for sane people who won't spend hundreds of dollars rebuying a game and the DLC.

I just mention the PC version for multiplayer because it's so dirt cheap and the community is still active, and it's something my gaming group did a few months back. If *all* you want to do is multiplayer then the PC version is really the only option right now. Thankfully it doesn't have that high system requirements.
 
DOWN

DOWN

Banned
I guess I'll play Inquisition multiplayer for now. Until the mood strikes me to get the old Xbox 360 set up again since Microsoft and EA can't get their shit together for a remaster or backwards compatibility
 
P

Patryn

Member
DOWN said:
I guess I'll play Inquisition multiplayer for now. Until the mood strikes me to get the old Xbox 360 set up again since Microsoft and EA can't get their shit together for a remaster or backwards compatibility
Click to expand...

I think Microsoft is still having issues with getting BC to work with multi-disc titles.
 
JohnnyFootball

JohnnyFootball

GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
Garlador said:
More than any remaster, the simple lack of an affordable, convenient all-in-one package for the trilogy, even on PC, is a huge detriment towards me getting the game on PC. It's a staggering amount of premium content, even if you only stick with the story stuff.
Click to expand...

The Bioshock trilogy is fixing to get a remaster. That would leave Mass Effect as one of the bigger trilogies to not get a current gen re-release.

But then again, its an internet forum and GAF must be the only place that demand exists. Nobody really wants the Mass Effect trilogy anyway.
 
L

Lucreto

Member
JohnnyFootball said:
The Bioshock trilogy is fixing to get a remaster. That would leave Mass Effect as one of the bigger trilogies to not get a current gen re-release.

But then again, its an internet forum and GAF must be the only place that demand exists. Nobody really wants the Mass Effect trilogy anyway.
Click to expand...

GAF the only place demand exists? There is a year old thread on the Bioware forums with 17,900 views and nearly 400 posts. I have seen nearly in every Facebook, Twitter etc people asking for a remaster. Dozens of topics in lots of different forums saying they want one. Even with the increasing likelihood of it not happening there was enough demand from people for EA to say its not happening.

There is a demand for it, it may not be overly massive but people do want it.

I have seen little on people wanting a Bioshock Trilogy Remaster other than GAF,(certainly a lot less than Mass Effect) yet it looks like it will be receiving one anyway. There must be a demand somewhere if they are planning one.
 
M

Maledict

Member
Johnny was being sarcastic. There's a long running argument in this thread from some people that a remaster isn't needed because you can spend a couple of hundred dollars and get everything on the PC anyways, oh and no-one wants it anyway.

It's a bizarre argument that never made much sense, but there it is. We live in a world where darksiders 2 and prototype get remastered, but only of the most successful and critically acclaimed series of the last generation is left to rot.
 
D

diaspora

Member
masseffect24_8_201610vpddm.png
Click to expand...

Colours aren't where I want them to be, but ReShade is doing a well enough job on the DOF- subtitles aside.
 
DOWN

DOWN

Banned
The only thing holding back Remasters is EA's view on them. Mass Effect's sales say it's a prime candidate for a console remaster so if they haven't figured out Xbox One disc backwards compatibility then i find it pretty nuts they won't do it. But last we heard, they won't be doing it.
 
D

diaspora

Member
That and an unwillingness to develop and release a title using an outside engine. It's a wash anyway since its never happening.
 
T

The Artisan

Member
JohnnyFootball said:
The Bioshock trilogy is fixing to get a remaster. That would leave Mass Effect as one of the bigger trilogies to not get a current gen re-release.

But then again, its an internet forum and GAF must be the only place that demand exists. Nobody really wants the Mass Effect trilogy anyway.
Click to expand...
sarcastic post?
diaspora said:
Colours aren't where I want them to be, but ReShade is doing a well enough job on the DOF- subtitles aside.
Click to expand...
is that on PC?
 
Mediking

Mediking

Member
Maledict said:
Johnny was being sarcastic. There's a long running argument in this thread from some people that a remaster isn't needed because you can spend a couple of hundred dollars and get everything on the PC anyways, oh and no-one wants it anyway.

It's a bizarre argument that never made much sense, but there it is. We live in a world where darksiders 2 and prototype get remastered, but only of the most successful and critically acclaimed series of the last generation is left to rot.
Click to expand...

It's kinda sad cuz a ME remaster would win so much goodwill for EA. EA doesn't even see that people will actually think super fond of them if a ME remaster was announced. Nobody would call it a cash grab. A ME remaster is worthy of money!
 
G

Garlador

Member
Mediking said:
It's kinda sad cuz a ME remaster would win so much goodwill for EA. EA doesn't even see that people will actually think super fond of them if a ME remaster was announced. Nobody would call it a cash grab. A ME remaster is worthy of money!
Click to expand...

Negating my obviously fan-bias (I want a remaster), from a non-biased point of view I've noticed more demand for a Mass Effect Trilogy remaster than almost any other collection of games from last gen. From a BUSINESS point of view, that's leaving a lot of money on the table and losing out on a lot of goodwill and fan support.

As I've said before, EA has a habit of making me upset with them for their business practices and DLC and I often don't feel good paying for their games or online passes or season passes or microtransactions or overpriced DLC or retailer exclusive or collector's edition-only content... but the ONE time I would HAPPILY give them my money and they seem to have no interest.

It's like they're allergic to love, money, and success for some reason.
 
D

diaspora

Member
The Artisan said:
downsampling?
Click to expand...
Corky said:
What is downsampling

Downsampling, also called OGSSAA : Ordered Grid SuperSampling AntiAliasing, is in this case the concept of rendering the game at a much higher, custom made, resolution than your monitor is capable of displaying and subsequently having the GPU rescale the image ( as in downsample ) to that of your monitor's native resolution to which the end result is a "cleaner", sharper and less aliased image.
Click to expand...
.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Exodus ( Mass Effect creators ) - Sci-Fi RPG - Mara-Yama Trailer
2
50
3K
AJUMP23 replied
I hope the next Mass Effect Ditches the open world.
30
2K
Majormaxxx replied
Chernobylite 2: Exclusion Zone – Official Reveal Trailer - Coming to Consoles and PC in 2025
12
958
M1chl replied
IXION coming to PS5, Xbox Series in 2025
News Trailer
2
717
Dr.Morris79 replied
Suicide Squad Kill the Justice League Endgame Gameplay Loop Details Revealed; Year 1 Package Info Coming Soon
2
54
5K
Krappadizzle replied
Top Bottom