[Megathread] Mass Effect 3

[zealo]

The animations were boring and lazy, the mechanics were boring and lazy, the tactical part was the only good thing, and you must understand that the people who prefer tactical combat are such a niche that it's not worth bothering just for them tbh.

And yeah combat wise both DA2 and DA:I were improvements in every aspect other than tactical.

There are still plenty of people who enjoy that kind of combat style, its just that they aren't being catered to in the AAA business anymore. Still, people like me still have titles like Tides of Numenera and Pillars Of Eternity to look forward to.

[Skorpionss]

There are still plenty of people who enjoy that kind of combat style, its just that they aren't being catered to in the AAA business anymore. Still, people like me still have titles like Tides of Numenera and Pillars Of Eternity to look forward to.

Like I said, there are so few of you nowdays, with Gaming going more and more casual action style that AAA Companies don't see themselves making a profit just off of you... I still think Bioware at least tries to be inclusive, and although it's not very good, they implemented some form of tactical combat in both Mass effect 3 and DA:I.

[zealo]

Like I said, there are so few of you nowdays, with Gaming going more and more casual action style that AAA Companies don't see themselves making a profit just off of you... I still think Bioware at least tries to be inclusive, and although it's not very good, they implemented some form of tactical combat in both Mass effect 3 and DA:I.

There's still profit to be made, it just isn't at the AAA scale anymore. Both of these titles had over 70,000 backers and that's excluding all the people that are likely to buy in once its done. These publishers said the same thing about space simulators and look at what happened affter the successful funding of Star Citizen.

Publishers know what will sell to the masses but when it comes to more niche markets, they are not always hitting it right.

[May90]

Whatever you do, do not go anywhere near D&D cRPG's if you think that about DA:O.

Why? It is no secret that in those games combat is completely outdated as well. Not that it is bad, it was good for the time, but the technology improves, you know... DAO tried to emulate that old combat style with a more modern approach (combat that is not turn based, that doesn't use table game rolls and so on), but I agree with Gravath: this combat just doesn't work any more. Not that DAI combat is perfect, but it, at least, feels modern, fresh. If you've played Baldur's Gate, KotoR and Neverwinter Nights series, then DAO offered same thing again, essentially, while DAI tried to invent something relatively new.

Overall, personally, I liked the Mass Effect series combat the most among all Bioware games, I just felt much more involved to it, while in Dragon Age 1/2 and in older D&D games it felt more like some kind of Chess and broke immersion somewhat.

[zealo]

Why?

Because DA:O was an rpg made that was extremely heavily inspired by older cRPG's in combat style yet wasn't bogged down by all the limitations of the D&D rulesets. If you find that "bad" there is no point in even bothering with anything done before 2007.

Honestly, there is a bit of a difference between something being bad and being overdone or old.

[Deleted]

Because DA:O was an rpg made that was extremely heavily inspired by older cRPG's in combat style yet wasn't bogged down by all the limitations of the D&D rulesets. If you find that "bad" there is no point in even bothering with anything done before 2007.

The DA:O combat is bad, whether you like it or not. Being old doesn't mean it's good.

[May90]

The DA:O combat is bad, whether you like it or not. Being old doesn't mean it's good.

Well, I do not exactly agree with this sentiment since I personally enjoyed DAO combat quite a lot. It is outdated, and you could say that it is bad by today's standards, but calling it just bad without any addition is a bit shortsighted, IMO. However, I agree, it is inferior to DAI combat, maybe not in polish and execution, but in the overall focus of the system.

While DAO is not based of D&D rules, it uses a somewhat similar system, not a turn-based system and without rolls, but still overall it is quite similar. That system doesn't work really well for computer games, IMO, since it makes the combat seem unnatural: you never just passively stand and hit the opponent for a minute in real life, you dodge and parry, you move around all the time. I much prefer systems like that in Mass Effect where you are right in the middle of the action and, yet, still have some room for tactical positioning and clever ability use.

I totally adored Neverwinter Nights 2 for its customization, I don't think any other game even comes close to the variety of builds possible there (and it especially shined in the Storm of Zehir expansion, where you create 4 totally arbitrary characters - there is just infinity of principally different build combinations). However, the combat itself wasn't that great, it was fun to me only in the sense that it demonstrated how effective my build(s) was, I got an insane amount of satisfaction from beating some boss and realizing that this was only possible because of a well designed character build. Like, pretty much, in WoW: combat is crap, in my opinion, but it provides satisfaction from learning complex rotations and then using them and seeing the performance increase. Whilst, say, in Guild Wars 2 you actually participate in combat and don't just see your performance, but feel engaged in the process all the time. Both approaches are interesting, but in terms of the combat itself the latter totally wins, I think.

[Deleted]

Well, I do not exactly agree

You live in a poor country and haven't had much exposure to videogaming, oh how sorrowful.

[May90]

You live in a poor country and haven't had much exposure to videogaming, oh how sorrowful.

If the USA is a poor country and gaming since 1991 is not much exposure, then my life is done...

[Aqueous]

The DA:O combat is bad, whether you like it or not. Being old doesn't mean it's good.

"Bad" is subjective. More appropriate would be to say you don't like it.

[Mirishka]

I enjoy all 3 games. Origins had a handful of truly memorable companions (Alistair, Shale for example) and great tactical combat. Not the most original story (at all) but the sequels did a great job of improving that and letting the lore flourish.

Dragon Age 2 was very strong from a character/personal story standpoint (one of the reasons I play so many of Bioware's games) and that compensated for its redundancy in environments for me. Sarcastic Hawke is one of my all time favorite player characters.

Overall Inquisition is the strongest of the three, IMO. It did a great job of tying most tasks back to the theme of advancing the inquisition. It has its flaws though, like a limit of 8 active abilities when its easy to have significantly more (my lvl 23 warrior has 11 or 12) and non-interactive static NPCs, which is a huge pet peeve of mine.

- - - Updated - - -

Don't try to fool anyone, Origins was average at best but people overrate it because "muh selfinsert". As halfassed as DA:I is, it's still leagues above DA:O.
Bad combat, Oblivion-style of talking to people while staring into their souls, boring plot that forgot itself until the last mission, random pointlessly boring sidemissions, aged inventory system cluttered with way too much shit that only exists to slow you down - and then some.
DA:O had a lot of faults, no masterpiece. DA:I is the improved form.

You really need to go read up on how opinions work.

[zealo]

If the USA is a poor country and gaming since 1991 is not much exposure, then my life is done...

You haven't been playing games since Pong, you lack exposure.

Seriously though, i think people should just play games like path of exile, torchlight 2 and diablo instead if they find classical cRPG's boring, would be much more up their alley.

aRPG's aren't my favorite kind of game but i won't call well made games bad just because i don't like them.

[Deleted]

If the USA is a poor country and gaming since 1991 is not much exposure, then my life is done...

I would say that being on the edge of bankruptcy is indeed being poor.

[May90]

You haven't been playing games since Pong, you lack exposure.

Seriously though, i think people should just play games like path of exile, torchlight 2 and diablo instead if they find classical cRPG's boring, would be much more up their alley.

aRPG's aren't my favorite kind of game but i won't call well made games bad just because i don't like them.

Fair point. Even if the system is outdated, it doesn't make it bad, it just makes it outdated.

I would say that being on the edge of bankruptcy is indeed being poor.

Hmm... You seem to know something we don't.

[zealo]

I would say that being on the edge of bankruptcy is indeed being poor.

The US isn't in a weak financial position. And if they do go down they will pull the rest of the world down with them into a crisis.

If anything, people should be far more worried about Russia at this time, which supply large parts of Europe with gas.

[Aberrict]

So ya I can't believe wasn't mentioned earlier, but here are the new shirts Bioware Montreal received. Pathfinder and Ark sounds like we're going exploring and colonizing worlds found through unopened Mass Relays. Which would make sense if the game is post-ME3 since the Reapers did a number on a lot of planets. It would fit if they put DA:I's influence system in for different solar systems or planets. I think it'd be great to play as an explorer in the Mass Effect universe and it's a great way to expand known galaxy and add new species and places.

[May90]

Makes sense. The only way they could make a new game as epic as previous ones, without resorting to the old good "Everyone thought the evil has been truly defeated, but they were just the masters of the real enemy", would be exploring new Relays. They better have a good explanation on why those Relays haven't been accessed for the last billion of years though. Most likely the Reapers closed them for some reason, maybe fearing for themselves? I think it would be quite epic if those relays led to another Galaxy in which someone just as powerful resides.

Like in the Mistborn trilogy, where everyone thought that The Ruler was the ultimate dictator oppressing his people, while it turned out he did it only to protect them from the real enemy which was released after his death.

[Deleted]

Like in the Mistborn trilogy, where everyone thought that The Ruler was the ultimate dictator oppressing his people, while it turned out he did it only to protect them from the real enemy which was released after his death.

Reminds me of Tengen Toppa, where the big bad turned out to be super evolved spaceghosts that kills everyone that evolves too far.

[Aberrict]

Makes sense. The only way they could make a new game as epic as previous ones, without resorting to the old good "Everyone thought the evil has been truly defeated, but they were just the masters of the real enemy", would be exploring new Relays. They better have a good explanation on why those Relays haven't been accessed for the last billion of years though. Most likely the Reapers closed them for some reason, maybe fearing for themselves? I think it would be quite epic if those relays led to another Galaxy in which someone just as powerful resides.

Like in the Mistborn trilogy, where everyone thought that The Ruler was the ultimate dictator oppressing his people, while it turned out he did it only to protect them from the real enemy which was released after his death.

The Council banned the opening of Mass Relays that had no discovered partner after doing so led to encountering the Rachni and the ensuing centuries long war with them. This is what also caused the First Contact War between Humanity and the Turians. Human explorers were opening every Relay they could find and one group ran into a Turian patrol. Who opened fire to stop them from doing so.

[Nazrark]

The Council banned the opening of Mass Relays that had no discovered partner after doing so led to encountering the Rachni and the ensuing centuries long war with them. This is what also caused the First Contact War between Humanity and the Turians. Human explorers were opening every Relay they could find and one group ran into a Turian patrol. Who opened fire to stop them from doing so.

This is exactly correct. So it seems that we might run into a more advanced race that will go to war with us. A race that hasn't used the Relays.