Game News Mass Effect Universe better than Lightsabers+Jedi Powers?

Click here and disable ads!

Mind you when it was released I think it was suposed to be console only and popamole trend starteted growing.

I agree with that. Definitely had the opinion that ME universe was more impressive then SW one when I was playing the first ME. They've gone downhill from there though, so I'm not quite sure anymore. Maybe this says something about just making a single story and then just letting it dangle like that. The Matix would have remained super cool without Matrix 2 and 3. Probably what makes masterpieces like Bladerunner so great too. They came, gave us a glimpse and an amazing world that we don't get a full picture about and then it ends and leaves the rest to your imagination.

The setting in ME is competently done, even though it is all highly derivative. The problem is Bioware still hasn't managed to ever successfully plot a main narrative arc in the universe.

ME1 just about chugged along in comfortable B-movie implausibility (why did the space squid lose its shields when sheperd defeated cyber-Saren? Who cares! etc.) But it had stupid antagonists in both Saren and the Reapers.

ME2 had lots of very well done characterization, scene building and stuff like that regarding your NPCs (bit angst battaliony, but w/e), but again the plot made no sense, from Sheperd's body surviving an impact onto a planet, to the stupid cookie cutter villain of the week collectors, to the stupid human-reaper climax.

ME1 just about passed because you could just about let the plot get a pass. ME2 passed because you ignored the main plot (which was just treading water), and looked at the (much better written) side-material. However, I'm pretty sure almost all ME3s material is going to be intimately linked with the now completely furbared plot (I too wonder how exactly a galaxy that almost lot to one reaper + cronies, and how the game kept telling you "you must stop the reapers coming or we all die!" will somehow prevail against hundreds of reapers, and I'm sure there will be worse implausibilities to come), and you won't get many pretty side-quests because you really need to save the galaxy etc. So ME3 might just sink under its own plot. I look forward to reviewing it.

I don't even know if you're trying to be ironic, genuinely misunderstood, or are just dumb in your blind hatred for Mass Effect (which I do not try to defend in any way).

You know an alien invasion that made more sense than this one? Mars Attacks. Even the random destruction of monuments...

From Ashes - 628MB Day 1 DLC for $10

http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/323/index/9382439
http://www.gameranx.com/features/id...ss-effect-3-strips-core-content-for-paid-dlc/

"It confirms that BioWare is bucking the trend it set with Dragon Age and followed up with its sequel and Mass Effect 2 by making the content a separate purchase for anyone who picks up the standard (non-Collector's or Digital Deluxe) edition of Mass Effect 3.

Previously in Mass Effect 2 and Dragon Age, the only in-game content associated with the Collector's Editions were additional armor and weaponry. As I mentioned earlier, content as large as the DLCs including Zaeed and Shale were always included free of charge. Dragon Age 2 went a small step further, by restricting The Exiled Prince DLC to "Signature" copies of the game, which all pre-orders were upgraded to.

This has changed.

With Mass Effect 3, we now have to pay for content that's been developed concurrently with the rest of the game, but released separately for extra profit—and to make the Collector's Edition look more attractive to buyers.

It's understandable for DLC to be released separately and sold for an additional cost when they're developed as extensions to a pre-existing game or as 'added value items' impertinent to the core experience. However, it's unacceptable for core elements (in my very subjective opinion, this content has been vital in the past) of the game to be stripped out of the main game just so they can be sold separately for an extra price.

To draw an analogy, it's like selling a watch with one hand missing."

You weren't as grumpy back when DLCs were called 'expansion packs'.

Expansion packs were once serious business and usually included a lot of shit, unlike modern DLC approach. Moreover, 100 years ago it was quite uncommon to fragment the final product to little pieces and to sell them in parallel with standard release.

VD actually complains about DLCs having too much content. I realize that back then expansion packs/DLCs weren't released on day 1, but what would change if they were?

That stuff is old news, really old. Why is there such a fuzz about it now?

Is that supposed to be funny or something?

Retarded biodrone or astroturfer?

What's wrong? Suddenly it's wrong to have a different opinion? Why don't you go ahead and 'end of line' me?

Yeah, let's all enjoy a future where games will become as F2P MMOs, except that the client will cost 60 bucks.



Also:

DING DONG BANNU MTHAFUCKA, DING DONG BANNU.

DING DONG BANNU END OF THE RINE
THE RINE ENDS HERE
----------------------------------
Nah, but seriously. It's not that you have a different opinion, but that you are just wrong. DLCs and especially DLCs in biowarian business model have nothing to do with expansion packs.

No punishment other than than having the entire Ringworld driven up his ass is harsh enough for this 'tard.
Driven sideways.

Fucking human derper. I wonder if he has 3 eyes.

Star Wars and Mass Effect compete more on quantity than quality, and SW dwarfs that of the ME. It is just that with the third chapter to this epic saga impending, the possibilities alone of what may transpire is what drives up its MAJESTIC prestige. I'm reading Dune right now and even in its first chapter, I find what I read more original and consistently interesting than what the derivative ME could even hope to come up with. I find what is contained within Star Control 2 more interesting than Mass Effect regurgitation of all popular preceding SF tropes.

Some DLCs are expansions packs, some are cash grabs. There is a difference between a proper expansion, developed after a game is released, extending the story, and improving gameplay based on the feedback received (like Deus Ex DLC did, for example) and a quest removed from the game to be sold separately.

Exactly, this isn't an add-on of old that got released months if not years after the "vanilla" game adding new content because the/publisher decided they want to add new content they did not have time to add before the game was released. This is basically another attempt at nickel-and-diming by luring the sheeple into buying content that was developed concurrently with the rest of the game but the developer/publisher decided "hey this shit is so good we should charge extra for it!" and cut it out of the main game releasing it as a standalone product.

No he's not. The size of the Day-1 DLC just makes it painfully obvious to everyone that it was developed tandem with rest of the game and not during the 1-month period between mastering gold and opening day. That content should be in the game, end of story. This is just what some people predicted when DLCs were first coming around and fucking retards like you told us to relax: "Nuh-uh, it's just horse armour, cosmetic little stuff, no worries!"

For example: Baldur's Gate was released on 30th November 1998. As it was successful, Bioware wanted to cash-in with the popularity - but BG2 would take two years to finish (26th September 2000) so an expansion pack, using mostly old art assets, was done which introduced few new weapons, raised the level cap and brought in couple of new areas and quests, plus improved the GUI slightly. Even though it recycled much, it still took Bioware until 30th April 1999 to release it - four months of work. Similarly, ToB followed BG2 in 21st June 2001 - nine months later, though it's probably the largest expansion pack I can think of.

Publishers just noticed that it's simpler and more profitable to fleece customers with many small investments than few large ones. Thanks to idiots like you, it works.

And Durlag's tower was a pretty cool expansion, probably better than the original game and well worth the money.

Suddenly it all makes sense.

No but it's wrong to be retarded and you are retarded.

It's funny to see how codexers commit the same logical fallacies as people on BSN, yet can still act as smug ever. The only ones presenting valid points are VD and GarfunkeL.

I think it's too early to judge whether the mentioned DLC is a cash grab or not. I just wanted to point out, that if they released it some months later, nothing would effectively change. Let's say game X costs $50. Now the developers can either add DLC Y permanently, and the marketing department calculates this move would change the game's price to $60, or they can release the game at its basic price, and release DLC Y as a separate product at day 1, costing $10. Which is better and why?

I realize this is not exactly how it works, but you get the idea. It is not the idea of DLC that should be criticized; it is their quality that is on a steady decline.

Setting pointless ad hominems aside, there is no difference between DLC and expansion pack. The only ones that decide what 'should' be in the final game are the developers. If they decide to rip a quest out and sell it as a DLC later - it's probably a crappy DLC, and a crappy game. I know it's a bit like a junior highschooler saying that true communism has never existed - but the idea behind DLC was never (or perhaps there are rare exceptions) properly implemented.

Would you hate these expansion packs if they were sold as DLC? You wouldn't, because they would be quality DLC. See, codexers actually believe it is appropriate to spout vulgarities anytime they see the keyword 'DLC', regardless of the context.

It's not. Something that was made during the development of the game but is being sold separately IS a fucking cash grab, plain and simple. Is there a reason why this adventure isn't a part of the game? Other than "we can sell it for moar money"?

Mind you, I don't care about Mass Effect 3 and I'm not planning to buy it (after trying the demo), so there are no emotions here. It's a purely philosophical debate. Bio can claim that the DLC was done later and by a different team, but it was planned well in advance, the concept art was done in advance and made it into the art book, etc.

We aren't talking about the release date. We are talking about splitting the team to develop some DLC content, which, in a nutshell, is the main title's content, set aside to be sold separately.

Nice fallacy there.

The price of a new game depends on the production values and hype, not on the amount of content. That's exactly why the Day 1 DLC bullshit is possible - it's too fucking easy to cut some content and sell it for a few extra bucks.

It's easy for a pedestrian mind to lose the forest among the trees.

Alternatively: lol, libertards.

Also, if the DLC doesn't integrate well with the rest of the game in terms of interactions and stuff (universe not reacting to the last fucking brothean), then it's shit and would benefit from the content being integrated into the game proper.

If the DLC is integral part of the main game, then you're tricked into buying an incomplete product so you can be milked for extra cash for missing essential parts of the experience.

lose/lose.

Also this.

Funnily enough I probably wouldn't be averse to inverted approach of actually selling cheap, "economy" versions of the game, reduced by, for example cutting some of the races/classes/campaigns and their specific content if they were much cheaper than the full version and full version would remain at typical price. I think it would make sense economically as it would allow you to target more people (those who wouldn't want to pay for the full version and only wanting to play, for example as a specific race(s) or class(es)) without removing the incentive to go for the more expensive version, though it would probably only be feasible for electronic distribution.

It's like with this joke about a Scotsman wanting to pay only half of the price for a match ticket because he would only watch the Scottish team.