BioWare Making Mass Effect 3 More Accessible for New Players

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

This is pretty redundant since both games have been really REALLY easy.

Challenge: Explain things to new players without use of the phrase "dumbing down".

I mean, there was all that fuss trying to explain the Federation and the Klingons in DS9.

Oh wait...

boag:

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

George Lucas didn't try to attract new viewers with Return of the Jedi.

This Statement is flawed, Remember that the original Starwars movie, was the 4th chapter, and Return of the Jedi incorporated a lot elements to appeal to more general audiences.

Star Wars wasn't originally released as Episode IV: A New Hope. It was simply released as Star Wars. It was only later on, when Lucas decided he wanted some wiggle room to go back and explore the backstory that he gave the films episode numbers.

And regardless, the fact remains that without having seen the first two films, Return Of The Jedi is not going to make a lick of sense to any viewer. How will they know who Obi-Wan is, or why he's glowing blue? From where would they learn exactly why Han is trapped in carbonite and hung up in a drug den at the film's start? Hell, would they even know why it's such a big deal that Vader is Luke's father, without having seen the prior two films?

Any good story has a beginning, a middle, and an end. Any good trilogy follows this form. Therefore, it should stand to reason that you can't hook new players/viewers at the end, then they've already missed out the beginning and middle that set everything up for the finale in the first place. I personally would much rather Bioware simply spent all their resources making sure that established ME fans get the send off they deserve.

But then, it's not like I'm bitter about how Bioware decided to end the KOTOR storyline or anything...

BioWare Making Mass Effect 3 More Accessible for New Players

*Readies near-incoherent rage-fuelled diatribe*

God Damn it Bioware! I trusted you not to dumb it down anymor-

It only relates to NPC-interaction and exposition dumping

Oh.

Well shit, I was getting ready to get all worked up too.

Guess I'll go find something else to be butthurt about.

EDIT:

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:
But then, it's not like I'm bitter about how Bioware decided to end the KOTOR storyline or anything...

Just what I needed my good man!

I'll fume over that for an hour or two.

D0WNT0WN:

BioWare Making Mass Effect 3 More Accessible for New Players

Does anyone else hate the phrase "More Accessible for New Players" as much as I do, it pretty much translates to "We making the game easier for people who are under twelve, fuck the people who played the previous games.". You know like the did with Dragon Age 2.

Yeah im not buying Mass Effect 3.

I dislike the phrase, yes, but only because it makes people who clearly didn't read the article through gripe about the developers 'making the game easier'. If you take a minute and read the full text, you'll see that this pertains to 'the story thus far' exposition, which Bioware wants to include for new players to catch them up but doesn't want to dump on people who are continuing with a previous save file and know what's going on. I fail to see how that's a bad thing.

If that one line is making you give up on Mass Effect 3, then you clearly weren't that interested in it in the first place.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

boag:

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

George Lucas didn't try to attract new viewers with Return of the Jedi.

This Statement is flawed, Remember that the original Starwars movie, was the 4th chapter, and Return of the Jedi incorporated a lot elements to appeal to more general audiences.

Star Wars wasn't originally released as Episode IV: A New Hope. It was simply released as Star Wars. It was only later on, when Lucas decided he wanted some wiggle room to go back and explore the backstory that he gave the films episode numbers.

And regardless, the fact remains that without having seen the first two films, Return Of The Jedi is not going to make a lick of sense to any viewer. How will they know who Obi-Wan is, or why he's glowing blue? From where would they learn exactly why Han is trapped in carbonite and hung up in a drug den at the film's start? Hell, would they even know why it's such a big deal that Vader is Luke's father, without having seen the prior two films?

Any good story has a beginning, a middle, and an end. Any good trilogy follows this form. Therefore, it should stand to reason that you can't hook new players/viewers at the end, then they've already missed out the beginning and middle that set everything up for the finale in the first place. I personally would much rather Bioware simply spent all their resources making sure that established ME fans get the send off they deserve.

But then, it's not like I'm bitter about how Bioware decided to end the KOTOR storyline or anything...

IM not debating the merits or downsides to introducing people to a late trilogy, Im just stating that your statement, right there, which I quoted is flawed, therefore you should amend it or replace it for another one.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

But then, it's not like I'm bitter about how Bioware decided to end the KOTOR storyline or anything...

I'm not sure how much of that was their decision, but I feel your rage.

This should be hastily scribbled on a scrap of paper and slipped inside every copy of ME3:

Part 1
You are Slickback Shepard, interstellar pimp. You teach aliens to fear the back of your hand, your guns don't run out of ammo, !ever!, you kill sandworms with a pistol, you bang a blue chick so hard Rupert Murdoch feels it, and then you slaughter an impossibly ancient machine squid god who eats species. You are elected Boss of the Galaxy, unanimously.

Part 2
Bioware pulls it pud for a while, some angsty bullshit, then you get bored and abort a baby terminator.

Problem solved. You're welcome Bioware.

boag:
IM not debating the merits or downsides to introducing people to a late trilogy, Im just stating that your statement, right there, which I quoted is flawed, therefore you should amend it or replace it for another one.

What part of it is flawed? As I already mentioned, the Episode titles that hinted at previously unexplored backstory were only added to the original films later on after they were already released. Return Of The Jedi is a perfect example of a trilogy conclusion which requires knowledge of the prior events in order to understand what is going on. Why is that such a contentious issue for you?

On the one hand, it does sound like theyre trying to make good for both new players and existing players.

However: What the hell is with this assumption that every player is going to have their existing saves? Its two years since ME2 was released. I enjoy ME, but I didnt enjoy it enough to keep my save sitting around for two years, across multiple hard drives and reformats. I know the ME story. I dont want the dumbed down experience. But it sounds like Ill be forced to have it if I buy ME3.

While I understand wanting to have new players, I agree with the comments that a story-based trilogy is not the best place to try to go with that strategy. If you want a series that is welcoming to newcomers, you need to either build that into the series from the start, or to build the series on gameplay and themes with independant stories (eg, Zelda) rather than trying to do one big story.

I cant help but feel that Bioware is saying "Whoops... We kinda realised we didnt actually want to make a trilogy after all. We just wanted to make some games."

I honestly don't know about this. I mean, this is a game that's meant to be a CONTINUATION of previous games. In fact, instead of buying JUST this game if you haven't played the first two, it'll be MUCH more beneficial for a new player to play through the first two because the way they play will ultimately alter the story for the second and third games, making their game completely personalized.

Doesn't that sound like something that's much more fun to do?

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

boag:
IM not debating the merits or downsides to introducing people to a late trilogy, Im just stating that your statement, right there, which I quoted is flawed, therefore you should amend it or replace it for another one.

What part of it is flawed? As I already mentioned, the Episode titles that hinted at previously unexplored backstory were only added to the original films later on after they were already released. Return Of The Jedi is a perfect example of a trilogy conclusion which requires knowledge of the prior events in order to understand what is going on. Why is that such a contentious issue for you?

Its flawed because:

on the one hand both reference events the viewer is unfamiliar with, Lukes Father, the Clone Wars and the Rebel Insurgency, the dismantling of the Galactic Senate.

on the other hand, they are both self contained stories, the only thing I could possibly give you a passing grievance over is Han Solos Rescue, otherwise its pretty straight forward and anyone new to the Franchise could sit down and watch Return and not be confused.

That is why your example is flawed.

boag:

Its flawed because:

on the one hand both reference events the viewer is unfamiliar with, Lukes Father, the Clone Wars and the Rebel Insurgency, the dismantling of the Galactic Senate.

on the other hand, they are both self contained stories, the only thing I could possibly give you a passing grievance over is Han Solos Rescue, otherwise its pretty straight forward and anyone new to the Franchise could sit down and watch Return and not be confused.

That is why your example is flawed.

Those are the sort of questions people are going to have if they skip A New Hope/Empire Strikes Back and head straight for ROTJ. It's really not that difficult a point to understand. Yes, the events of ROTJ are separate from the prior films, but they are built on what was laid down previously.

Wow. Apparently most people just up and forgot to read the article they were responding too. Funny that...

OT: Sounds good to me. Seems like their solution is probably the best possible solution to draw in new players without effecting the old ones. Whenever Bioware opens their mouth about the game, they seem to mention nothing but good ideas (well, except for the silly multiplayer thing. But that was a one-time anomaly).

justnotcricket:

D0WNT0WN:
snip

I dislike the phrase, yes, but only because it makes people who clearly didn't read the article through gripe about the developers 'making the game easier'. If you take a minute and read the full text, you'll see that this pertains to 'the story thus far' exposition, which Bioware wants to include for new players to catch them up but doesn't want to dump on people who are continuing with a previous save file and know what's going on. I fail to see how that's a bad thing.

If that one line is making you give up on Mass Effect 3, then you clearly weren't that interested in it in the first place.

Aye, you have me there. After the amazing dissapointment that was Mass Effect 2 and the abortion that was Dragon Age 2 I have little to no interest in Mass Effect 3.

Still my distain for the recent Bioware products doesnt mean I dont have my right to complain and gripe.

What I see is that new players wont start with the last game advertised to be an epic trillogy, it would be like somebody watching Return of the Jedi first and then saying "So why does Luke wear that black glove?". The whole feature is a pointless endeavour for this series. However In some series that span different consoles over the peroid of many years it is necessary (see Yakuza and Metal Gear Solid which did have features similar) but for a series like Mass Effect there isnt a need for a "Previously on Mass Effect option".

It is just a waste of hours and man power that is going to pull away from the main game, that's why it is a bad thing.

Also as for my comment on "More Accessible for New Players" that is just my general opinion on the phrase and ones like it, big red warning lights go on when I hear developers say words like that. I did not articulate my words properly in my first post.

They have to. They are alienating their old players by requiring Origin.

JeanLuc761:
Sorry, but I think Bioware's making a very wrong move here. I can understand wanting to attract new players (this is a business, after all), but using the final act of an epic trilogy is definitely not the time to do it. And what this inevitably ends up doing is screwing over the already existing fans of the game. I -want- my AI squadmates to go "Hey Shepard, remember that time we..." It gives the game personality, and it makes the story feel like it's mine.

Excited as I am for this game, I don't like this at all.

You do make a good point. Honestly, I don't want to risk the relationships being dulled down that I've developed over the past 2 games to be saturated for the new comer. Call it selfish, but the one thing Mass Effect had going for it was the interactive story. Don't fuck us over now.

Seriously, Tali better be all over my shit in this next game.

Also, The first Mass Effect didn't even really do a good job introducing newcomers in. It took me till the second playthrough to realize you could upgrade your guns.

No. Failure. I don't care if you'll tell me about the experiences. I want to live them. Know what would help boost more sales Bioware?

Release Mass Effect 1 for PS3. Pests. I want to play this series, but I have neither a 360 or a PC capable of doing it.

Moosejaw:
But I LIKED it when they walked up to me and went, "Oh, you remember that one time?" and I went, "Yeah, yeah I do."

So, that sucks.

If you actually read the article, it says that the game will KNOW if you played the previous two - so if you did, then characters will say "hey, remember that one time?". However, if you've never played the game before, then they won't, because that one time never occured for that player.

I don't get why people are upset over this. If you played the previous games, then nothing changes for you at all. Only newbies get an altered game. That's a win/win.

JeanLuc761:
Sorry, but I think Bioware's making a very wrong move here. I can understand wanting to attract new players (this is a business, after all), but using the final act of an epic trilogy is definitely not the time to do it. And what this inevitably ends up doing is screwing over the already existing fans of the game. I -want- my AI squadmates to go "Hey Shepard, remember that time we..." It gives the game personality, and it makes the story feel like it's mine.

Excited as I am for this game, I don't like this at all.

Did you miss the point of that article? If you played the previous games, WHICH YOU DID, then your party members WILL say "hey Shep, remember that time we..."

Only people who didn't play the previous game will get those lines cut.

Please actually read the article before you start complaining. Please? It makes this so much easier.

Daystar Clarion:
Trying to make the third game in a story heavy trilogy more accessible for new players.

You're doing it wrong.

Remember that time when someone complained that The Return of the King was too confusing because it wasn't accessible to new viewers of The Lord of the Rings?

No, me neither.

Yuuup. Don't design a story heavy trilogy where you carry over saves from each game to the next and then also design it to be easily played without the prior games. You just fuck over everyone and make a mediocre game.

Jodah:
They have to. They are alienating their old players by requiring Origin.

I thought the same thing as I was reading this!

I don't see reason for all the complaining. If anyone read through properly, they will know that we who have played all of the games won't get exposition every 5 minutes and therefore won't be affected. We shouldn't care. Granted, I question the thought process of anyone who wants to jump into an epic during the third chapter, but it's their decision.

I'm surprised though. With this, it means Bioware has more lines for write for a lot of scenarios. They're nothing if not dedicated.

Caffiene:
On the one hand, it does sound like theyre trying to make good for both new players and existing players.

However: What the hell is with this assumption that every player is going to have their existing saves? Its two years since ME2 was released. I enjoy ME, but I didnt enjoy it enough to keep my save sitting around for two years, across multiple hard drives and reformats. I know the ME story. I dont want the dumbed down experience. But it sounds like Ill be forced to have it if I buy ME3.

While I understand wanting to have new players, I agree with the comments that a story-based trilogy is not the best place to try to go with that strategy. If you want a series that is welcoming to newcomers, you need to either build that into the series from the start, or to build the series on gameplay and themes with independant stories (eg, Zelda) rather than trying to do one big story.

I cant help but feel that Bioware is saying "Whoops... We kinda realised we didnt actually want to make a trilogy after all. We just wanted to make some games."

I really don't understand your reasoning. Bioware clearly told us both times to keep our saves to import into the sequels. It's not their fault if you chose not to keep yours or lost yours. That is a matter beyond their control. They made their trilogy and they're choosing to make the third point a simple place to jump in for people who choose not to play the first two. By all means, the ones who have been here the whole time and wanted to continue have had ample warning and they can't cater to every little request just because someone didn't feel like holding onto his/her save.

I love how people are whining the house down without actually reading the article text.

Stay classy folks.

D0WNT0WN:

It is just a waste of hours and man power that is going to pull away from the main game, that's why it is a bad thing.

Not really... From my understanding of how it works, this would be simple as pie to code. It would take one or two guys like no time at all to code this thing. Just make a simple Boolean when the player starts up a game saying whether or not they imported, then make certain dialog options or parts not appear if that boolean is false. Boom, done. It should take about as much coding, manpower, and testing as having the option to turn off "Auto-Aim" in the options menu (or similar). You could still consider it a waste, but it would a waste of what, a day or three? Not much of a difference in the long run...

Y'know, I thought this was one of the selling points of ME3 in the first place. They created an entire character just so they could have someone to exposit to for God's sake.

Also, I'm entirely indifferent to this if it does what it says it does(I.E: only show up when a non-carried over file is played).

NO. This is the kind of shit that spoiled Saints Row the Third for me, making as little references and continuations as possible just to avoid "alienating new players." You know what? this is the third god damned entry for this not-so-obscure game, and they can't be arsed to pick up the other two? NO! That's a no-no, and something that ruins good sequels.

Daystar Clarion:

Remember that time when someone complained that The Return of the King was too confusing because it wasn't accessible to new viewers of The Lord of the Rings?

Gaming is a very different medium to cinema though. And while ME is certainly one of the more cinematic and story based games out there, many gamers in this generation don't see numbers on a sequel as a barrier to jumping into a story - whether this is a good or bad thing, who can say.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

boag:

Its flawed because:

on the one hand both reference events the viewer is unfamiliar with, Lukes Father, the Clone Wars and the Rebel Insurgency, the dismantling of the Galactic Senate.

on the other hand, they are both self contained stories, the only thing I could possibly give you a passing grievance over is Han Solos Rescue, otherwise its pretty straight forward and anyone new to the Franchise could sit down and watch Return and not be confused.

That is why your example is flawed.

Those are the sort of questions people are going to have if they skip A New Hope/Empire Strikes Back and head straight for ROTJ. It's really not that difficult a point to understand. Yes, the events of ROTJ are separate from the prior films, but they are built on what was laid down previously.

ugh, you know what, I dont care enough about the SW continue a meaningless discussion about it, the fact of the matter remains, you can jump into a new hope and have self contained story just as you can on Return.

And from the looks of it will be the same deal for ME3, if you have trust issues then just wait and see how it gets review or just skip it altogether.

If they did it right, I think this would actually be really cool because if what they're saying is true, I won't have to listen to a lot of crap I've already heard before. I'm SO amped for this game. I really miss playing with my Shepard and I want to know what happens to Thane! But March is coming! Got to get back to playing ME1 and ME2 so I can perfect my game for ME3!

OutcastBOS:
NO. This is the kind of shit that spoiled Saints Row the Third for me, making as little references and continuations as possible just to avoid "alienating new players." You know what? this is the third god damned entry for this not-so-obscure game, and they can't be arsed to pick up the other two? NO! That's a no-no, and something that ruins good sequels.

Another person not getting that this is exactly what Bioware is avoiding? I understand people get angry about their beloved franchises being made "accessible," but does the very sight of the word itself make them skip straight to the comment section to rant in their rage?

Zhukov:
I love how people are whining the house down without actually reading the article text.

Stay classy folks.

Ain't the first time. Certainly won't be the last, unfortunately...

Also, it makes me lol when I see stuff like this, then see people post about how mature, reasonable, and smart we are. XD

kingpocky:

OutcastBOS:
NO. This is the kind of shit that spoiled Saints Row the Third for me, making as little references and continuations as possible just to avoid "alienating new players." You know what? this is the third god damned entry for this not-so-obscure game, and they can't be arsed to pick up the other two? NO! That's a no-no, and something that ruins good sequels.

Another person not getting that this is exactly what Bioware is avoiding? I understand people get angry about their beloved franchises being made "accessible," but does the very sight of the word itself make them skip straight to the comment section to rant in their rage?

To be honest, yes. Mainly when it has to do with things that are sequels to already established franchises. Being more "accessible" is ruining a lot of good games. Fable, Saints Row, ect. I know that they're trying to make it easier to get into, but still, there are two earlier games that can do just that.

Mike Kayatta:

"If I'm a new player and some guy walks up to me and is like 'Ohhhh, Shepard! Remember that one time?' I would be like 'No. I don't remember that one time,'" Clifford said. "So we wanted to make sure that there aren't those moments that the player is like, 'Who is this? What's going on? What are they talking about?'"

^^ This is what I was talking about earlier. Maybe they'd remember that one time, or not go "who is this" if they actually played the first damn games.

BehattedWanderer:
No. Failure. I don't care if you'll tell me about the experiences. I want to live them. Know what would help boost more sales Bioware?

Release Mass Effect 1 for PS3. Pests. I want to play this series, but I have neither a 360 or a PC capable of doing it.

The first Mass Effect is owned by Microsoft, Bioware has no say in it

MiracleOfSound:

Daystar Clarion:

Remember that time when someone complained that The Return of the King was too confusing because it wasn't accessible to new viewers of The Lord of the Rings?

Gaming is a very different medium to cinema though. And while ME is certainly one of the more cinematic and story based games out there, many gamers in this generation don't see numbers on a sequel as a barrier to jumping into a story - whether this is a good or bad thing, who can say.

On certain games, like the yearlies (COD, sports titles, ect) it's alright, because they're stand alone thing. Others where I find it alright are sequels with little relation to past ones, like the Elder Scrolls.

But on stuff like this, where the story is strongly connected, I find it bad.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here