Next Mass Effect marketing write-up leaked

[lilhasselhoffer]

So back to the topic at hand, rather than dragging the Witcher into this...


I'm still firmly in the crowd that says Origin isn't being installed on my PC. EA has done some shady crap, that has put me off of any of their new products since Crysis 2.

To that end, anyone else seeing the same thing happening here? Bioware released ME1, and it was obtusely an RPG with guns littered throughout it. ME2 was a shooter, with baked in RPG elements. Both of these games stood on an excellently realized, if somewhat generic, story. Based upon what I've observed of ME3, it's a shooter which begrudgingly has RPG elements to make you do all of the quests (read: to get a better ending). The story was decent, but the crap ending poisoned anything good the story had done.

Similarly, Bioware released Dragon's Age Origins and Awakening. They were traditional RPGs, and sold on mechanical depth. Dragon's Age 2 came along, and sold on streamlining everything. Smaller world, removing complex RPG mechanics, and selling all of this with more (if not more coherent) story). Now Inquisition comes out with significantly less of everything, but "makes up" for it by adding in half hearted new mechanics which seem aped directly from other games. It seems like the more EA influences a developer, the more homogenized a game becomes. While highly polished it may be, Mass Effect 4 seems to be simply aping their own work from Inquisition, but changing the names of things. It seems as though EA is so adverse to risk that literally reskining a previous work by the same developers is acceptable. If that isn't a massive and painful removal of what made Bioware unique I don't know what is.


It's my stance that no game can stand alone on story (they call those movies), nor can it simply be fun to play (love you Super Meat Boy, but only in ten minute bursts). EA generally forces developers to homogenize gameplay until nothing special remains. They keep a tight leash on budget, so stories are lost behind a wall of money. Bioware may have lasted longer than most, but this seems to be the greasy tentacle of EA finally sliding its way into the Bioware skin, and wearing it until all their good will is used up on crappy sequels. I hope I'm wrong, but as yet I don't see EA changing anything until it becomes less profitable.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Come on Ford, your "evidence" that The Witcher 2 was designed for consoles is Xbox360 controller support? Alot of games have had that. Some people like to play their PC games with a controller. That's simply appealing to everyone. Think of reviews where there is no controller support, and they got blasted from reviewers.

And you saying it takes 11 months to "port and pass Microsoft's validation process" just refutes your claim. It's exactly what CDPR said at the time of PC release, that they would be porting to consoles, but it would take some time and alot of work. And it took 11 months to port.

EDIT: It actually wasn't even ported. It was built from the ground up for console, with the announcement not coming until E3 2011, AFTER the PC game was already a hit: http://gamerant.com/the-witcher-2-assassin-of-kings-xbox-360-trung-89732/

And here, a month before E3 they aren't even sure about it yet or exactly how to go about it: http://news.softpedia.com/news/The-Witcher-2-Goes-Gold-Console-Version-Still-Possible-197303.shtml

Let me rephrase and use an example: Mass Effect was designed by Bioware explicitly for Xbox 360. A third party was brought in to port it to Windows and they did an excellent job (better than Bioware did on the sequels even). The engine (Unreal Engine 2.5) had native support for both Windows and Xbox 360 and they were co-developed. Witcher 2 did not have the luxury of an engine that natively supports both platforms so it took them significantly longer to port (and also why they said no to PS3 port). At the same time, the process was made much easier by being Xbox 360 controller centric in the first place. Witcher 2 did not benefit from being controller centric just as Mass Effect 2 and 3 didn't. Witcher 2 did not get the keyboard/mouse attention Mass Effect and Witcher got. That is one reason why it stunk of consolitis (honorable mention goes to the relatively small environments). Back on topic, I suspect Mass Effect 4 won't have that problem because Frostbite does a good job at supporting both inputs. If Bioware stays true to the engine, it may even have keyboard/mouse bias.


@lilhasselhoffer: everything +1. You might be completely right about risk aversion. After winning the poo award twice and numerous other major foul ups (e.g. SimCity, Mass Effect 3 ending, SWTOR having to turn FTP so fast, and so on), EA appears to have tightened the shackles on all of their studios.

 

[Muhad]

I hope they put a first-person view in the game and create a version for the PC without doing a port.

 

[Muhad]

Speaking of shady crap, read up on Windows 10.

 

[Flogger23m]

So back to the topic at hand, rather than dragging the Witcher into this...


I'm still firmly in the crowd that says Origin isn't being installed on my PC. EA has done some shady crap, that has put me off of any of their new products since Crysis 2.

To that end, anyone else seeing the same thing happening here? Bioware released ME1, and it was obtusely an RPG with guns littered throughout it. ME2 was a shooter, with baked in RPG elements. Both of these games stood on an excellently realized, if somewhat generic, story. Based upon what I've observed of ME3, it's a shooter which begrudgingly has RPG elements to make you do all of the quests (read: to get a better ending). The story was decent, but the crap ending poisoned anything good the story had done.

Similarly, Bioware released Dragon's Age Origins and Awakening. They were traditional RPGs, and sold on mechanical depth. Dragon's Age 2 came along, and sold on streamlining everything. Smaller world, removing complex RPG mechanics, and selling all of this with more (if not more coherent) story). Now Inquisition comes out with significantly less of everything, but "makes up" for it by adding in half hearted new mechanics which seem aped directly from other games. It seems like the more EA influences a developer, the more homogenized a game becomes. While highly polished it may be, Mass Effect 4 seems to be simply aping their own work from Inquisition, but changing the names of things. It seems as though EA is so adverse to risk that literally reskining a previous work by the same developers is acceptable. If that isn't a massive and painful removal of what made Bioware unique I don't know what is.


It's my stance that no game can stand alone on story (they call those movies), nor can it simply be fun to play (love you Super Meat Boy, but only in ten minute bursts). EA generally forces developers to homogenize gameplay until nothing special remains. They keep a tight leash on budget, so stories are lost behind a wall of money. Bioware may have lasted longer than most, but this seems to be the greasy tentacle of EA finally sliding its way into the Bioware skin, and wearing it until all their good will is used up on crappy sequels. I hope I'm wrong, but as yet I don't see EA changing anything until it becomes less profitable.

Origin is no worse than Steam. It does have some benefits, like quicker downloads, a refund system & a clean store without social media garbage. ME1 had a horrible inventory system, and the weapons were mostly the same save for some dated stat changes that were problem done in a .ini file. ME2 became a bit too much like a shooter. ME3 had the worst side quests and story missions had to be completed in a linear fashion. But it was still a good game overall. I think ME games should be action RPG. More space exploration & more detailed features for it would be wonderful. That was sadly missing in ME2/3.

But if any of the stuff posted in the OP is true it seems like ME4 will be a grind fest. Which is not what I am looking for.

 

[lilhasselhoffer]

Origin is no worse than Steam. It does have some benefits, like quicker downloads, a refund system & a clean store without social media garbage. ME1 had a horrible inventory system, and the weapons were mostly the same save for some dated stat changes that were problem done in a .ini file. ME2 became a bit too much like a shooter. ME3 had the worst side quests and story missions had to be completed in a linear fashion. But it was still a good game overall. I think ME games should be action RPG. More space exploration & more detailed features for it would be wonderful. That was sadly missing in ME2/3.

But if any of the stuff posted in the OP is true it seems like ME4 will be a grind fest. Which is not what I am looking for.

You fail to get my point. I object to Origin because it's a product of EA. If Origin optimized my computer, allowed me to stream games rather than downloading them, and made my IQ rise by 20 points I'd still not download it. EA is a company that makes bad decisions, apologizes by giving consumers the finger, then tells us we're scum because illegal downloading is causing the video games industry to crash. Allowing a company like that to get my money is immoral, so I don't support any of their products.

Expanding on my previous points, you and I seem to agree almost entirely. ME1 and 2 were rough, but they had character. ME3 was polished to a mirror shine, yet nobody wants to hang a polished turd in their bathroom and call it a mirror.


On the off chance that people forgot it, ME2 was the guinea pig for locked on disc content that needed to be purchased if you bought the game used. I paid for the game day one, downloaded it from the disc, then spent a couple of hours downloading the content because EA required I prostrate myself before them to prove my loyalty. Combine that with half a dozen different preorder options, and you've got clear evidence that while EA was letting Bioware write the game EA was making their puppets dance. ME1 was allowed to have a complete game on day one, and even release a damn fine bit of free DLC. Nothing in ME2 was free, even some bass-ackwards clothing that characters could use. ME3 charged you for anything and everything short of a nominal ongoing fee for polygon rendering engine leases.

EA stank is what kills companies. They buy up developers, and allow them to release a couple of games that "demonstrate that EA isn't corrupting them." After the grace period is over, games are whored out for money; whether the whoring is DLC, atrocious mobile "spin-offs," or simple pay to win microtransactions you can smell the rot of EA. Whenever people grow wise to the tactic, EA makes the developers do the impossible. Upon their inevitable failure, the developer is forced to claim responsibility, and EA shutters studios as a cost saving measure. In the mean time, somebody else has released a new series, that EA can financially subsume with the money accumulated from the recently shuttered studio.


I'll take bets now. Within the next five years a second Cities: Skyline will be released. Upon the second curb-stomping, EA will throw an enormous amount of money at the developers to buy them out. We'll see a Simcity: Skylines game, that EA pours money into, but has DLC supported by outside companies who want brand recognition (similar to the "free" DLC for Simcity). Anyone want to bet against this? What say we be fair; I'll wager a copy of Battlefield 3 and 4 against any takers. By that time the servers will be retired, but at least the game will be playable. How about a copy of Mass Effect 5? I'm betting that it will be homogenized into a series of counterstrike like instances, where you need to expend real money on anything bigger than a pistol. The framing device will be that you are a shock trooper of some sort, and that your battle win you planets (off screen), which will provide you resources once ever 24 hours. Those resources will let you craft new weapons, but the crafting cost will be 200 rare resources for the simplest items. They'll, of course, let you spend real money to buy those rare resources immediately. It'll be the bastard child of the Dead Space 3 crafting system, a generic team shooter, and have enough forced retention (due to resource collection) that absolutely everybody will play the game for months on end.


Cynicism aside, hopefully Bioware and Mass Effect buck the EA taint. I seriously doubt it based on Dragon's Age and this press release. Greater homogenization does yield a more consistent product, but sometimes you just can't stomach oatmeal. Sometimes you've got to eat an Avocado. It's bizarre and inconsistent, but it's got enough uniqueness that any of the flaws are easily overlooked by its heart. EA removes heart, drives games into the ground, then blames consumers for everything.

 

[BumbleBee]

too much complaining.

the next Mass Effect is going to be awesome.

 

[Vayra86]

too much complaining.

the next Mass Effect is going to be awesome.

Well we can safely say, if you loved DA:I for all its 'gameplay', yes you will probably love ME4.

But that would really be a sign of poverty in the minds of gamers.

 

[newconroer]

So...no cooperative story /campaign?

 

[FordGT90Concept]

In a Saints Row sense? No.

 

[BumbleBee]

Well we can safely say, if you loved DA:I for all its 'gameplay', yes you will probably love ME4.

But that would really be a sign of poverty in the minds of gamers.

Bioware Montreal is making this game not Edmonton. I don't know why you assholes keep bringing up Dragon Age for. Casey Hudson play tested a build before he left SO HAVE SOME FAITH.

 

[rtwjunkie]

Bioware Montreal is making this game not Edmonton. I don't know why you assholes keep bringing up Dragon Age for. Casey Hudson play tested a build before he left SO HAVE SOME FAITH.

Well, DAI gets brought up because it's the crap that EA wants. And what EA wants from its owned studio is what EA gets.

 

[BumbleBee]

I don't care if EA tries to sell me 100 season passes. I will buy them all lol

it's Massy Fect

the game can still be amazing even with all the pre-order and post launch DLC hooks and having a new team with a new vision can be a good thing.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Bioware Montreal is making this game not Edmonton. I don't know why you assholes keep bringing up Dragon Age for. Casey Hudson play tested a build before he left SO HAVE SOME FAITH.

Montrael was only responsible for the multiplayer component of ME3.

Maybe he left because it was rubbish?

 

[BiggieShady]

We have seen so many times that a game can be optimized for PC and yet have controls and UI made through and through with a controller in mind.
In my opinion, a proper PC game should either have UI that works well with both mouse and controller, or two separate UI sets specialized for each control type with automatic switching between them.
Great example is mod SkyUI for Skyrim, that shows how little is necessary to adapt existing user interface to make it mouse friendly.

 

[WhiteLotus]

wait wait wait wait...

guys hold on...

where's the zombie mode?

 

[Frag_Maniac]

Come on Ford, your "evidence" that The Witcher 2 was designed for consoles is Xbox360 controller support?

Yep, Ford often likes to post somewhat creatively, and the "industry insiders" he spoke of were not sourced.

As I said, I'll believe this if and when Bioware actually confirms it. Until then it's mere hearsay and speculation.

 

[BumbleBee]

Montrael was only responsible for the multiplayer component of ME3.

Maybe he left because it was rubbish?

and they did a great job. I spent months playing that multiplayer and I was a skeptic going in.

it was more than just Horde mode it had objectives, new maps, consumables, gear, battle pack stuff, more advanced character building than single player and the action was more intense.

people seem to like the Strike missions in Destiny.

 

[rtwjunkie]

and they did a great job. I spent months playing that multiplayer and I was a skeptic going in.

it was more than just Horde mode it had objectives, new maps, consumables, gear, battle pack stuff, more advanced character building than single player and the action was more intense.

people seem to like the Strike missions in Destiny.

I gotta agree with you there. I don't play MP games as a rule, but ME3 MP was damned FUN!!!

 

[BumbleBee]

new celebrity voice actors? is this a new trilogy? space combat? new classes? improvements to AI and issuing orders? new model for male protagonist? more consequences? I have so many questions about the story, characters, voice actors and music

I can't wait for E3!!

 

[FordGT90Concept]

It has to be an all new cast because all of the characters from ME (baring the long-lived ones like maybe Liara and maybe Grunt) would be dead as per "far removed by time and space from Commander Shepard’s heroic acts." I almost expect Liara to make an appearance as a matriarch.

 

[BumbleBee]

I wonder if the game will even have an import game feature because it's a new protagonist.

import your ME3 save and see a statue of your Shepard? I think that would piss people off lol

 

[FordGT90Concept]

I think it will or at least have a Dragon Age Keep-like recreator for building the history/lore of the galaxy. Image how pissed off people would be if nothing came from the original ME trilogy?

 

[Frag_Maniac]

Since this takes place in a different and bigger galaxy, I see no point in revisiting ANY of the main Shepard circle characters or story elements of past titles, even via reminiscing. They'll be pretty busy as it is just creating enough new content to fill a larger game world.

My one question though is whether the name "Mass Effect" will even make sense, since the Protheans seem to have dwelled primarily in the Milky Way galaxy, and supposedly they created the Mass Relays after which the game is named.

That said, since little is known about the Protheans, if they're to continue calling it "Mass Effect", I really wouldn't mind ME4 being a prequel that at least touches on the Protheans and fills a lot of the holes in the history of them.

Perhaps they could for instance show recordings of an ancient race in this other galaxy that they evolved from, whom developed the tech to travel to other galaxies. The Protheans that came from them then creating a less powerful version of it for intergalactic travel.

This parent race could even be that which created the Reapers, and then destroyed and/or pushed into hiding by them, hence the Leviathans seen in the DLC. Whatever their path forward, it seems they'll have to at least equal somehow the 3 building blocks of prior titles. Protheans, Mass Relays, and Reapers.

Without that there wasn't really a need for Shepard and his crew, and it would have been a mere boring exploration and trading game.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

My one question though is whether the name "Mass Effect" will even make sense, since the Protheans seem to have dwelled primarily in the Milky Way galaxy, and supposedly they created the Mass Relays after which the game is named.

Protheans were a slave race to the Reapers. The Reapers were created by the Leviathans. As explained in the first game, the "mass effect" is the principle by which ships are propelled and mass relays function. It is doubtful the Reapers ever left the Milky Way galaxy but it still needs to be explained how council races end up on a ship exploring an uncharted galaxy. It could, perhaps, be explained that the ship that left for other galaxy was effectively an "ark"--a last ditch attempt to get some members of the council races out of the galaxy should the Reapers succeed in wiping it out again. If that's the case, the beginning of ME4 could easily start during the events of ME3. The lore, therefore, would be known but have little bearing beyond the intro (I very much expect this to be the case).