Support NeoGAF

[Tellaerin]

Well, Firefly fits in with the "scattered remnants of galactic society" motif. Bunch of backwater planets, colonies, moons, cut off from the rest of civilized space, turned into a sort of No Man's Land, with its inhabitants trying to eke out a living with whatever they can scrape together. With, of course, the inevitable mercenary and gangster groups moving in to establish control.

ME has already done this as minor sidequests with typically one-off characters, but always had the larger Reapers story to tell, so these had to take a backseat. But one big reason why people loved the trilogy was for those genre moments. Mass Effect wasn't just a sweeping space opera, because it pulled in a lot more than that.

And hey, the large story is done. It's time to start filling everything else out. Would anyone expect BioWare to focus a trilogy on the Mal Reynolds archetype? Not really. But there's a definite precedent for them to do exactly that.

Plus, it'd be really interesting to see what happens when the high-technology of the mass relays, Repears, biotics, or whatever, gets mashed together in an almost post-apocalyptic, outlaw's paradise.

EDIT: essentially, what I'm saying, is "Focus it DOWN, not OUT."

To put things in better perspective, I should probably mention that ME1 is my favorite game of the trilogy. I loved the fact that it drew liberally on what I consider the golden age of science fiction cinema - the late 70's to mid-80's - for inspiration, and it showed in everything from themes and visual design to the soundtrack.

One of the things that stood out for me about ME1 was that it was a rare example of a "bright future" setting in videogames. For once, the vast majority of the 'verse wasn't gritty and grimy and beaten all to shit, people and machines alike. There was an optimism there that you don't see in most games. I enjoy cyberpunk and post-apocalyptic sf stuff too, but it seems like those are the default settings for games. I get the impression developers think "bright future" settings are "boring", and don't provide enough opportunities for adventure or drama. ME 1 showed that you could set a game in a future that wasn't a run-down shambles and still keep things engaging. They seemed to gradually move away from that in the sequels, aesthetically and thematically, and it was something I was a little bummed about.

With that being the case, maybe you can see why the idea of playing as a bunch of freebooters in a post-ME3 universe that's gritty and lawless and generally gone to shit isn't as appealing a thought for me as it might be for some other fans. : /

 

[prag16]

Since Shepard is essentially a stand-in for the player character I'm sure Bioware doesn't want to upset the player by having other party members chew you out for making controversial decisions. Otherwise the player can go "Oh, that character was mean to me, I'll bench him/kill him off later in the story".

Meh, what's wrong with that? Coulda used more squadmate backtalk, and also could've used a deeper influence system with regard to the crew. Hell, KOTOR2 did this several years ago.

 

[TheChaos]

Meh, what's wrong with that? Coulda used more squadmate backtalk, and also could've used a deeper influence system with regard to the crew. Hell, KOTOR2 did this several years ago.

Oh, I agree with you. Mass Effect is just not really known for its deep dialogue trees, branching storyline paths, or dynamic customization options.

 

[Guri]

After completing Mass Effect 3, I was so turned off by the franchise I just wanted it to end. To be clear on how much I was disappointed, ME was one of the best new IPs of the past generation for me. And then, I just finished the third to see the ending.

But now, I decided to replay on my PC the full trilogy. I'm not doing every sidequest, just the ones I know will really have consequences later. And I noticed even more how the franchise changed throughout the trilogy. Like someone said before, the armours in ME1 were more sci-fi, while in 2 and 3, everything is more military-like. Casey Hudson said the changes were always something he planned to do. Well, I hope the new team disagrees that's what Mass Effect is all about.

I believe improving the combat mechanics from 1 to 2/3 didn't have to necessarily mean changing the focus of the whole game. Level designs turned into arena-like places, which basically started with the Bring Down the Sky DLC. Of course, I do remember the exhaustive and repetitive inside areas of Mass Effect 1, which were basically copy and paste. Still, we had more open areas and more focus on exploration.

Of course, the change of focus was also related to chasing the shooter fans, much like many games from the last generation, but, and I may be very optimistic here, I believe this is slowly changing and devs are realising they can have deeper mechanics and still profit from these decisions. The first Mass Effect trilogy would still be successful if it didn't change focus that much.

About the Mako vs. Hammerhead, I... still don't know. I mean, they tried to create some kind of "challenge" with those uneven mountains for Mako, which meant more frustration than joy for reaching some places. That was simplified with the Hammerhead because it turned into a simple navigation vehicle without any real challenge. No, I don't consider it to be a combat vehicle because everything was very automated. The one good point of Hammerhead is that it can fly, which is more "cool" for a sci-fi universe, but I think that, if that could make into a Mako-like vehicle and improve the driving mechanics in some ways, it would be better.

Finally, I do believe the Asari race is great and should stay as a "primary" race. They have a rich universe of their own and we can still explore a lot of it. And I approve new races, as long as they're not designed to be races you just fight with (like Vorchas).

I hope the new game gives back the feeling of exploration and discovery, with deeper mechanics. Suggestions like an influence system, grey morality system, harder consequences are great. I also hope they improve the combat mechanics in ways that give more room for freedom (not always cover -> shoot/use power) and, please, let us have back a wider use of colour palettes.

 

[Nostremitus]

I'm playing through ME1 now...

I'd have to rank them as ME2>ME3>ME1...

I've been pretty bored with the original on my first play through... I've played through 2 and 3 multiple times, so it's not that I already know the story...


Just my two cents on the trilogy. They should keep all of the combat advances made in three, but aim for the pacing of 2.

 

[RedSwirl]

To put things in better perspective, I should probably mention that ME1 is my favorite game of the trilogy. I loved the fact that it drew liberally on what I consider the golden age of science fiction cinema - the late 70's to mid-80's - for inspiration, and it showed in everything from themes and visual design to the soundtrack.

One of the things that stood out for me about ME1 was that it was a rare example of a "bright future" setting in videogames. For once, the vast majority of the 'verse wasn't gritty and grimy and beaten all to shit, people and machines alike. There was an optimism there that you don't see in most games. I enjoy cyberpunk and post-apocalyptic sf stuff too, but it seems like those are the default settings for games. I get the impression developers think "bright future" settings are "boring", and don't provide enough opportunities for adventure or drama. ME 1 showed that you could set a game in a future that wasn't a run-down shambles and still keep things engaging. They seemed to gradually move away from that in the sequels, aesthetically and thematically, and it was something I was a little bummed about.

With that being the case, maybe you can see why the idea of playing as a bunch of freebooters in a post-ME3 universe that's gritty and lawless and generally gone to shit isn't as appealing a thought for me as it might be for some other fans. : /

I guess both ideas are equally viable, and you could definitely have a new age of exploration after ME3. They could even do something akin to the old Age of Exploration, or the Age of Imperialism. I just don't like the idea of making stuff surrounding Earth again. I don't want to dwell to much on Earth anymore.

I just hope it's something other than what ME2 and ME3 became. You're right that Mass Effect started as a sort of 70's and 80's style of sci-fi but eventually turned into a standard military shooter in space that happened to have better-written characters than Gears of War.

 

[Gumbie]

Reading through this thread got me thinking about how damn good ME2 was. I was lttp on ME1 and liked it quite a bit but when I finished it and picked up 2...it was magical. I'll be 30 this year and that's the first game in a really, really long time that took me back to being a kid and getting completely sucked into the lore. I loved every minute of ME2.

 

[prag16]

Reading through this thread got me thinking about how damn good ME2 was. I was lttp on ME1 and liked it quite a bit but when I finished it and picked up 2...it was magical. I'll be 30 this year and that's the first game in a really, really long time that took me back to being a kid and getting completely sucked into the lore. I loved every minute of ME2.

That's how I felt about the series. The last time I really got sucked into the world of a game was KOTOR, until Mass Effect (likewise, the second game is the one that really drew me in; I've only played through ME1 twice; I've played through 2 and 3 four plus times each).

 

[GlamFM]

I'm playing through ME1 now...

I'd have to rank them as ME2>ME3>ME1...

I've been pretty bored with the original on my first play through... I've played through 2 and 3 multiple times, so it's not that I already know the story...


Just my two cents on the trilogy. They should keep all of the combat advances made in three, but aim for the pacing of 2.

Amen.

 

[ThoseDeafMutes]

Amen.

Thirded.

 

[Bisnic]

I'd pay anything to play ME2 with ME3's combat, powers customization and choices of weapons. ME2 was so stupid with only 2 choices of pistols or snipers for example.

If ME2 had that, I would have no reason to play ME3 again.

 

[Blue Ninja]

ME1 can get pretty boring on replays. It's only when you reach Virmire that stuff starts picking up.

So if you want to be real specific, I'd say ME2>Final part of ME1>ME3>Rest of ME1.

But yeah, what you describe sounds great. Just get some of the ME1 exploration in there as well, but focus on fewer, more detailed worlds.

 

[prag16]

Something else I really liked in ME2 was the suicide mission; basically the idea of having more than 2 of your squadmates in action at a time. Having the rest sit on their asses in the shuttle during missions is lame. Giving them all various jobs was a cool idea, even if the concept wasn't really explored to its full potential.

I was hoping for more of that in ME3, and we didn't get jack squat. It's another thing I wouldn't mind seeing in the next game.

 

[DedValve]

Replaying the entire trilogy (I bought citadel on sale so I'll end it with that, omega is not worth the $15).

Just got to Ilium and met Giana parisini for the second time. This time I aid her and get into a conversation with her and she talks about her work. She says a lot of people are studying dark energy lately

Damn, all the writing on the wall in ME2, they should have just gone through with it. Such an interesting concept too.

 

[Bisnic]

Something else I really liked in ME2 was the suicide mission; basically the idea of having more than 2 of your squadmates in action at a time. Having the rest sit on their asses in the shuttle during missions is lame. Giving them all various jobs was a cool idea, even if the concept wasn't really explored to its full potential.

I was hoping for more of that in ME3, and we didn't get jack squat. It's another thing I wouldn't mind seeing in the next game.

We got it in ME3... in the Citadel DLC.

Better late than never I guess. :lol

 

[APZonerunner]

Something else I really liked in ME2 was the suicide mission; basically the idea of having more than 2 of your squadmates in action at a time. Having the rest sit on their asses in the shuttle during missions is lame. Giving them all various jobs was a cool idea, even if the concept wasn't really explored to its full potential.

I was hoping for more of that in ME3, and we didn't get jack squat. It's another thing I wouldn't mind seeing in the next game.

It's explored (with no interactivity) in the Citadel DLC; anybody you don't pick for your main squad for the one main mission splits into two different larger squads, and you can see them moving through bits of the level you can't get to, killing enemies and stuff. It was cool to see, especially since it was everyone - ME1, ME2, ME3 cast.

They call the squads "Mako" and "Hammerhead" on comms as well, which is cute.

But, yeah - more of that would be nice.

 

[heliosRAzi]

Imagine the final mission on Earth. You're pushing through the Reaper forces going over bridges and through blown out buildings. If you look underneath the bridge or out of the balcony, you can see the rest of your crew fighting alongside the elcor and turians. Asari squads are cutting down Brutes and Banshees.

It could have been great

 

[Bisnic]

It's explored (with no interactivity) in the Citadel DLC; anybody you don't pick for your main squad for the one main mission splits into two different larger squads, and you can see them moving through bits of the level you can't get to, killing enemies and stuff. It was cool to see, especially since it was everyone - ME1, ME2, ME3 cast.

They call the squads "Mako" and "Hammerhead" on comms as well, which is cute.

But, yeah - more of that would be nice.

Er... it wasn't everyone. Just Wrex and your ME3 crew. The ME2 crew is only available for the arena matches.

 

[Enduin]

I wonder if BioWare has taken note of GTAV and the way they handled character swapping Franklin/Michael/Trevor in game/fights.

I was just thinking that say ME4 has 6 characters total, which I think is a good number, you and 5 squadmates, if they would set up missions where you used all your people but in two teams and you could swap out from your MC to one of the other main companions. In effect controlling two separate squads at once and on the fly.

It wouldn't be in effect every mission, but a good portion of them, especially when it makes sense to send more than just 3 people alone into a fight. And while technically you could hop to any squadmate, I think it would be best to have a dedicated second in command that you always play as to establish a sort of chain of command both in the story side of things but also in combat.

ME1-3 was kind of odd in that everyone was more or less equals, though mostly because life aboard the Normandy was kind of poorly handled. There was little sense of rank or anything aboard the ship outside nameless people saluting you and saying Commander. Even if some squadmates held some kind of rank it never came up in any way in there interactions with one another. Pretty much everything was in reference to Shepard's rank and nothing else.

I would like see ME4 just have you and your squadmates on the ship and maybe at most 1-3 other people max who play a larger role and have a much greater presence aboard.

I guess I want a Zoe to your Malcolm Reynolds. When you're around you're in charge no questions asked, but otherwise companion X takes no shit.

 

[Mr. Poolman]

We got it in ME3... in the Citadel DLC.

Better late than never I guess. :lol

Agreed

"This is why I love hanging out with you guys, why shoot something once when you can shoot it 46 more times?"

 

[EatChildren]

ME2's pacing was pretty bad, in my opinion. For me ME2 is the poster child of numerous mostly excellent tangent missions thinly strung together with a meandering and largely unfinished core narrative. I get what BioWare was doing with it, but I don't think they succeeded, instead providing a ton of memorable missions that could have operated as stand alone DLC (in fact, Kasumi and Zaeed proved this to be true), and not much more. Loved the Collector stuff we got, but it was like...three missions outside of the intro, and not a lot of development there. Maybe it was two, excluding the end?

BioWare wanted the focus to be on recruiting the galaxy's most badass bros and brodettes for the ULTIMATE SUICIDE MISSION. The former was fine, but the importance of the latter was never felt.

 

[Kurtofan]

It depends if you include the dead reaper as collector stuff, I guess. If not, then it's just Horizon, Collector ship and ending.

 

[prag16]

We got it in ME3... in the Citadel DLC.

Better late than never I guess. :lol

It's explored (with no interactivity) in the Citadel DLC; anybody you don't pick for your main squad for the one main mission splits into two different larger squads, and you can see them moving through bits of the level you can't get to, killing enemies and stuff. It was cool to see, especially since it was everyone - ME1, ME2, ME3 cast.

They call the squads "Mako" and "Hammerhead" on comms as well, which is cute.

But, yeah - more of that would be nice.

Yeah, this was pretty good, but as was said, lacked any interactivity or customizability.

 

[Patryn]

The Suicide Mission as a mechanic was fundamentally flawed. While it's an interesting idea (anyone can die at any time!), its place in the second part of the trilogy was all wrong. It, more than anything else, is probably why the majority of the ME2 squad is not playable in ME3.

Frankly, they should have pocketed the idea. Imagine if the Suicide Mission occurred in ME3, and involved you sending in all your people (ME1, 2 and 3). Imagine if one of the factors revolving around who lives or dies is based on your galactic readiness rating? Allowing for a range of possibilities at the end isn't a big deal.

 

[Jibbed]

The Suicide Mission as a mechanic was fundamentally flawed. While it's an interesting idea (anyone can die at any time!), its place in the second part of the trilogy was all wrong. It, more than anything else, is probably why the majority of the ME2 squad is not playable in ME3.

Frankly, they should have pocketed the idea. Imagine if the Suicide Mission occurred in ME3, and involved you sending in all your people (ME1, 2 and 3). Imagine if one of the factors revolving around who lives or dies is based on your galactic readiness rating? Allowing for a range of possibilities at the end isn't a big deal.

Agreed.

ME3 would've worked much better as a series ending if the squad 'suicide' mechanic was present in the last hour or two of the game. The ending as it stands now would be considerably more satisfying if you managed to keep everyone alive (or equally upsetting if you didn't).

 

[Griss]

To put things in better perspective, I should probably mention that ME1 is my favorite game of the trilogy. I loved the fact that it drew liberally on what I consider the golden age of science fiction cinema - the late 70's to mid-80's - for inspiration, and it showed in everything from themes and visual design to the soundtrack.

One of the things that stood out for me about ME1 was that it was a rare example of a "bright future" setting in videogames. For once, the vast majority of the 'verse wasn't gritty and grimy and beaten all to shit, people and machines alike. There was an optimism there that you don't see in most games. I enjoy cyberpunk and post-apocalyptic sf stuff too, but it seems like those are the default settings for games. I get the impression developers think "bright future" settings are "boring", and don't provide enough opportunities for adventure or drama. ME 1 showed that you could set a game in a future that wasn't a run-down shambles and still keep things engaging. They seemed to gradually move away from that in the sequels, aesthetically and thematically, and it was something I was a little bummed about.

With that being the case, maybe you can see why the idea of playing as a bunch of freebooters in a post-ME3 universe that's gritty and lawless and generally gone to shit isn't as appealing a thought for me as it might be for some other fans. : /

Top post.

For me, they need to keep that spirit alive for it to remain 'Mass Effect'. Like you, it was the game's specific and conscious appeal to the young boy in me who loved 80's sci-fi that got me into the game in the first place.

The last thing we need is another sci-fi as western game. That would be a colossal mistake. What would I personally like? New story, same feel, different time period, focus on alien races rather than humans, with lots of new races or entirely new races in a new era, and tons of gorgeous planets to explore. There. Done.

 

[JohnnyFootball]

The Suicide Mission as a mechanic was fundamentally flawed. While it's an interesting idea (anyone can die at any time!), its place in the second part of the trilogy was all wrong. It, more than anything else, is probably why the majority of the ME2 squad is not playable in ME3.

Frankly, they should have pocketed the idea. Imagine if the Suicide Mission occurred in ME3, and involved you sending in all your people (ME1, 2 and 3). Imagine if one of the factors revolving around who lives or dies is based on your galactic readiness rating? Allowing for a range of possibilities at the end isn't a big deal.

I have to admit that I couldn't agree more with this. The suicide mission did indeed probably make it such that the ME2 cast wouldn't playable in ME3 and that idea should have been shelved.

Then again, ME3 needed Drew Karpyshyn I felt he could have provided a much better story that enabled Walters to stick to his strength.

Let's be honest the whole idea behind the crucible was weak.

 

[Griss]

The Suicide Mission as a mechanic was fundamentally flawed. While it's an interesting idea (anyone can die at any time!), its place in the second part of the trilogy was all wrong. It, more than anything else, is probably why the majority of the ME2 squad is not playable in ME3.

Frankly, they should have pocketed the idea. Imagine if the Suicide Mission occurred in ME3, and involved you sending in all your people (ME1, 2 and 3). Imagine if one of the factors revolving around who lives or dies is based on your galactic readiness rating? Allowing for a range of possibilities at the end isn't a big deal.

Exactly. That's why I think that even though ME2 had specific moments and missions that were the best in the series, as an overall game it was massively flawed, was where the series started to go wrong, and left the writers in an impossible place narratively for a whole host of reasons, such as:

-Hard to ramp the tension up any further from a suicide mission. That's the climax of any story, really. Misplaced in the second of three games.
-So many people could die that it made it impossible for them to deal with such characters as playable in the third game.
-The fact that you knew early on in ME2 that the suicide mission was your goal left the recruitment phase as the entire game, leaving the game's narrative feeling like 90% filler.
-Introduction of Cerberus and a whole new set of themes including racial (well, species-cial) themes that either didn't belong in the series or could have been explored better (and were) using the quarians and geth. Cerberus damn near ruined the overall story of the trilogy for me.

 

[Coffee Dog]

ME1>ME3>ME2

I'm in the minority in this, but both ME1 and ME3 had things that they excelled at (main plot and combat/core mechanics, respectively) whereas ME2 had no plot and clunkier combat mechanics, doing neither element as well as other games in the series.

 

[Musolf815]

Something else I really liked in ME2 was the suicide mission; basically the idea of having more than 2 of your squadmates in action at a time. Having the rest sit on their asses in the shuttle during missions is lame. Giving them all various jobs was a cool idea, even if the concept wasn't really explored to its full potential.

I was hoping for more of that in ME3, and we didn't get jack squat. It's another thing I wouldn't mind seeing in the next game.

The suicide mission was probably my favorite part of the series, I'd love if it was expanded on. If squad mates could get tired, it would encourage switching up the party. While it would be tense if everyone could die at any time, I think it'd make more sense for a big team split up to get stuff done rather than just three.

I hope socializing with the crew gets expanded more too; the ship feels more alive if everyone is up to something and free to talk to more often.

 

[Marvel]

ME2 will always be my favorite.

 

[DedValve]

I think the series would have worked better if ME2 was about uniting the species and not a team. The citadel has been attacked by sovereign and there is more than enough evidence to justify the existence of a reaper invasion (have it so that vigil managed to stay alive enough for the council to confirm).

The existence of the reapers is only known by the top government of each species but as the leaks and information spreads the panic happens. Shepard then must go around trying to build a galacatic army but some species are either in complete denial (turians), want something (krogan) or refuse to participate (batarians) and it's up to you to try and unite everyone.

Then the "suicide" mission would happen on two levels, a personal level and a galactic level. The personal level would be basically how it was in ME2 with you commanding you troops to do certain tasks and if they are not fit for the task they or someone else dies. On a galactic level depending on who you united and brought together it would greatly impact the final stages of war against the reapers.

For example the geth would help jam signals making it hard for the reapers to track you, the krogan would all show up in an overwhelming force at the last battle with Wrex leading the charge, the salarians would find a way to protect species from indoctrination, etc. etc. And we would actually SEE this.

The whole galactic readiness thing was such bs, it was just putting points into a slot machine. It mattered not if I got the rachni to aid me or the councils support, so long as I had a certain amount of points I was guaranteed the green ending.

 

[Griss]

ME1>ME3>ME2

I'm in the minority in this, but both ME1 and ME3 had things that they excelled at (main plot and combat/core mechanics, respectively) whereas ME2 had no plot and clunkier combat mechanics, doing neither element as well as other games in the series.

You might be in the minority but I'm with you 100%.

 

[Dennis]

ME1 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ME2

 

[Patryn]

I think I fall ME1 > ME2 > ME3, for the record. I do suspect if it wasn't for the infuriating ending, ME2 and ME3 would be about equal for me, as both have some serious flaws that really annoy me.

 

[Enduin]

Yeah I'm on ME1>ME3>ME2 side of things.

 

[RedSwirl]

I don't even fucking know man. The Mass Effect series is so engrossing yet so flawed it's never clear to me which games I like the most. This franchise is probably the one that kept pulling me back in the most this past console generation, but the games still have a shitload of problems. Basically, the first two games had really great world building, a unique sense of exploration, and fun characters to interact with. Those elements alone are probably what kept me playing the games. Everything else was fucked up in one way or another.

I guess I'd have to put down my list as: ME1 ≥ ME2 > ME3

ME1 was a fun game to explore and I saw that all its mechanics had potential even if they felt really unpolished. Even with the shitty inventory system I think ME1 ended up being more than the sum of its parts. ME2 had the exploration, world-building, and character interaction I loved from ME1 and did it better in my opinion, but the combat was a sorry attempt at a third person shooter, and instead of trying to refine ME1's mechanics it chucked most of them in favor of half-hearted replacements. ME3 was actually a pretty good third person shooter if you ask me, but lacked most of the shit I actually liked about the series. Story-wise it was really more of a send-off for the characters than anything else for me.

 

[Karak]

I don't even fucking know man. The Mass Effect series is so engrossing yet so flawed it's never clear to me which games I like the most. This franchise is probably the one that kept pulling me back in the most this past console generation, but the games still have a shitload of problems. Basically, the first two games had really great world building, a unique sense of exploration, and fun characters to interact with. Those elements alone are probably what kept me playing the games. Everything else was fucked up in one way or another.

Same here. Same here. I do admit that I loved the originals overall feel so much more than the others and the atmosphere of a bright future that did get lost later.

 

[digoutyoursoul]

Do many play the multiplayer on 360/PS3? Man I loved it, played it for over a year . I played a few rounds on a friends Wii U the other night, still really good fun.

 

[Bisnic]

Do many play the multiplayer on 360/PS3? Man I loved it, played it for over a year . I played a few rounds on a friends Wii U the other night, still really good fun.

I'm surprised you're even able to find players on the Wii U version. There is probably only a few dozens people online at the same time at best.

 

[digoutyoursoul]

I'm surprised you're even able to find players on the Wii U version. There is probably only a few dozens people online at the same time at best.

Yeah we got lucky I suppose. Feels nice with the game pad though. Might see if a lot more people are on 360 version over the weekend.

 

[RedSwirl]

I'm still just mad we never got an actual refinement of the mechanics of Mass Effect 1.

 

[Caladrius]

Not sure about the HD twins but the PC scene is fairly active.

 

[prag16]

Yeah we got lucky I suppose. Feels nice with the game pad though. Might see if a lot more people are on 360 version over the weekend.

It's been consistently available for $10-12 on Amazon brand new for a couple months now. That's probably helped the numbers.

 

[Astrates]

To put things in better perspective, I should probably mention that ME1 is my favorite game of the trilogy. I loved the fact that it drew liberally on what I consider the golden age of science fiction cinema - the late 70's to mid-80's - for inspiration, and it showed in everything from themes and visual design to the soundtrack.

Yes. This. Please go back to this. I remember BioWare saying at some point they wanted it to feel like you were playing one the great sci-fi films of that era and I hope they are listening to themselves for the next one.

 

[Enduin]

I'm still just mad we never got an actual refinement of the mechanics of Mass Effect 1.

I hope that with the new consoles and beefier hardware they won't be constrained or focused as much on confined spaces and cover shooting. ME1 had a much greater variety and location size to many of the encounters. Where as ME2/3 it was always much closer and denser areas for the most part. Even the larger areas didn't offer much in the way of open space and were packed full of cover and what not.

I hope that like DAI going for massive areas, ME follows suite with its share of expansive and open locations for use to explore and fight in. Close quarters has it's place. I mean it's set in space with ships and prefab bunkers and stations, but when you're planet side, things should be a bit more expansive. The loss of exploreable planets and the Mako really removed that need for those big areas.

 

[RedSwirl]

And I still want ship-to-ship combat of some kind. Who knows how the mechanics of space combat may have changed in the years since the Reaper War.

This is the OP from the thread I tried to start back in September on the subject:

I haven't played a lot of naval games (sea or space), but even to me, an RPG where you own a ship seems like it ought to have more to do with that ship than any of the Mass Effect games did. Other than story-based upgrades and fuel you really don't do much to affect the Normandy itself at all, and I'm still wondering why BioWare kind of ignored that.

The best example I have to go off of right now is probably FTL. If you haven't played it, it's real-time space combat (but you can pause to coordinate tactics) that actually puts you in control of your engine's power distribution between weapons, shields, and propulsion. You assign crew members to mann different parts of the ship, and you can pick what parts of a ship you can aim for if you wanna destroy a ship or just disable it. If your ship get's damaged though, you have to assign crew members to make repairs and put out fires mid-battle. You can also control pressurization of the ship, sucking out the air to put out a fire or kill intruders.

I'm not saying make the whole game about naval combat, but I think it'd be cool if sometimes you ended up in naval battles. I could see a somewhat similar system where you'd command the ship as well as give orders to individual crew members, with a full interior view of the ship displayed in 3D, and the ability to pause to give commands (a lot like Dragon Age actually).

Perhaps if you decided to board the other ship, you could pick a boarding party from among your main party members, and you could choose to either control them directly in standard Mass Effect action gameplay while an AI-controlled crew member takes the con, or vice versa.

I also think it'd be interesting if in addition to main party members, throughout the game you could also find and recruit regular crew members who serve other functions to enhance your ship (Skies of Arcadia did this, with something like 20 extra crew members to discover). You might find someone who might not be a fighter at all, but can serve as an excellent engineering chief, helmsman, or cook.

And this isn't even mentioning how BioWare missed a big opportunity to make the Normandy itself a customizable character. It'd be awesome if I could not only buy fuel/missiles/shields/land vehicles/etc., but also a custom paint job for my ship.

Basically what I want is Master and Commander: The Far Side of Mass Effect, or hell, even just Blue Sub 6 in space.

 

[doemaaan]

I hope that with the new consoles and beefier hardware they won't be constrained or focused as much on confined spaces and cover shooting. ME1 had a much greater variety and location size to many of the encounters. Where as ME2/3 it was always much closer and denser areas for the most part. Even the larger areas didn't offer much in the way of open space and were packed full of cover and what not.

I hope that like DAI going for massive areas, ME follows suite with its share of expansive and open locations for use to explore and fight in. Close quarters has it's place. I mean it's set in space with ships and prefab bunkers and stations, but when you're planet side, things should be a bit more expansive. The loss of exploreable planets and the Mako really removed that need for those big areas.

I said this in a previous post, but if they bring back vehicle exploration similar to ME1, it needs to be seriously refined. Not every planet needs it, especially when there's only 1-2 things kinda-sorta worth exploring there. Plus, with those flying airdrop vehicles like in ME2 and ME3, what's the real point of vehicles like the Mako? or even a newer version of it?

If a planet REALLY warrants vehicular travel, it better show. Remember the Hammerhead from ME2? It had the ability to gather resources from selected spots on the terrain. That's the direction I want to see them heading in. Give the land vehicles some purpose other than "travel from point A to B". Also, please don't make the levels look like they were randomly generated.

There can be a set amount of land vehicle planets throughout the game. Make them count. Give several missions, make them large and give the vehicle a real purpose.

 

[Guri]

ME2's pacing was pretty bad, in my opinion. For me ME2 is the poster child of numerous mostly excellent tangent missions thinly strung together with a meandering and largely unfinished core narrative. I get what BioWare was doing with it, but I don't think they succeeded, instead providing a ton of memorable missions that could have operated as stand alone DLC (in fact, Kasumi and Zaeed proved this to be true), and not much more. Loved the Collector stuff we got, but it was like...three missions outside of the intro, and not a lot of development there. Maybe it was two, excluding the end?

BioWare wanted the focus to be on recruiting the galaxy's most badass bros and brodettes for the ULTIMATE SUICIDE MISSION. The former was fine, but the importance of the latter was never felt.

For me, replaying ME2 can be really boring after you played the full trilogy one time. I know what characters are going to get more exposition and I try to focus on them. I still want them to survive, but I just keep skipping dialogues that don't interest me, which are a lot of them. I do think it handles sidequests and their information better than ME3, but I agree with you the main quest is too simplified.

Also, ME2 has some really specific rules and when you learn all of them, it can harm the whole narrative. Like getting every squad member before the Reaper IFF and doing their sidequests. You can talk a lot with Miranda and Jacob before doing theirs, but you can talk only once with Samara before her asking you to do her mission. And then, when you get Legion and activate him, he'll ask soon after to do his mission. It's all very dependent.

 

[RedSwirl]

I said this in a previous post, but if they bring back vehicle exploration similar to ME1, it needs to be seriously refined. Not every planet needs it, especially when there's only 1-2 things kinda-sorta worth exploring there. Plus, with those flying airdrop vehicles like in ME2 and ME3, what's the real point of vehicles like the Mako? or even a newer version of it?

If a planet REALLY warrants vehicular travel, it better show. Remember the Hammerhead from ME2? It had the ability to gather resources from selected spots on the terrain. That's the direction I want to see them heading in. Give the land vehicles some purpose other than "travel from point A to B". Also, please don't make the levels look like they were randomly generated.

There can be a set amount of land vehicle planets throughout the game. Make them count. Give several missions, make them large and give the vehicle a real purpose.

I can imagine each planet letting you drive or even fly a vehicle across a micro sandbox. Have it be laid out sort of like GTA V except each explorable planet is town-sized area, or maybe two or three town-sized areas separated by mountains and rivers.