Mass Effect 3

[kitten]

ASSUMING DIRECT CONTROL

THIS HURTS YOU

[TheGunheart]

Eh, replace Uncharted 3 with Little Big Planet 2, Deus Ex: Human Revolution and The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim for me.

Something tells me that Project Dark won't be out next year, though.

[Feynman]

Even if The Elder Scrolls V is twice as good as Oblivion, it will still be total garbage, so I'm not getting my hopes up. Mass Effect 3, like 2, will likely be quite good, but it's not really my kind of RPG.

I have my hopes pinned on The Witcher 2. The first game is the best RPG I've played since Planescape: Torment.

[TheGunheart]

The Witcher gets the prize for being one of the only WRPGs I've played where some effort went into the battle system. I loved how the Inverse Ninja Law was actually hard coded into the gameplay with an entire fighting style devoted to becoming the human blender.

That, and I thought the very idea behind a Witcher was pretty damned cool. Yeah, it came from a book first, but it's rather depressing how with all that magic at their disposal, few fantasy RPGs ever considered the possibility of magical transhumanism.

[Snarboo]

I got the special edition of the Witcher earlier in the year, need to dig that back out at some point. WRPGs sometimes mix with me like oil and water, but I loved the storyline concepts and rhythm based combat system.

[TheGunheart]

I hate to bump such an old topic, but I have to admit...I don't think I'm looking forward to this anymore.

They say combat will be "faster", but given you're still hiding behind waist-high walls, that seems doubtful. Then there's the Omni-Blade, which looked awesome, but I realize it's only going to be used for finishers, seeing how CD Projekt is pretty much the only Western developer that can do melee combat. And of course, the trailer seems to give away how you'll actually kill reapers: by sitting in a gun turret and shooting at them.

[derboo]

Mass Effect isn't the kind of game I'd want to be about melee combat. That said, melee in ME2 was actually pretty powerful considering you were just smash enemies with the butt of your gun.

If the turret kills the reaper, that would be a very lame anti climax. I'm not inclined to believe that that's it, though.

[personman]

I still say its a little early to be placing a verdict. I'm not extremely enthused about melee but still.

I know where are all upset with the state of the industry now but, lets simmer down.

[Deleted]

The gameplay changes between ME1 and ME2 were jarring, but I guess they weren't nearly as insipid as what they did to Dragon Age 2. My only hope is that the characters and plot are still strong. I can muddle through even the most inane gameplay for a good story.

[personman]

I personally found the combat far better since they actually made every class feel unique with their exclusive skills. There was really only like, three or four classes in the original just with slightly different stats.

[Ike]

Jun 29, 2011 17:03:41 GMT -5 @jasonx said:

The gameplay changes between ME1 and ME2 were jarring, but I guess they weren't nearly as insipid as what they did to Dragon Age 2. My only hope is that the characters and plot are still strong. I can muddle through even the most inane gameplay for a good story.

Jarring maybe, but all of them were for the better (in my opinion.) I could use the weapons I liked instead of the ones that were just The Best in ME2, and it lacked all the tedious and stupid upgrades. I just want to shoot shit in my sci fi space opera.

They did fuck up hardcore on the planet scanning however. I would much rather run over space monkeys in my awesome quad on barren, samey planets than do that shit for another minute.

[thethird]

I agree with Ike concerning the differences between the games. I liked all the stuff they did with the combat, but jesus the planet scanning was tedious.

Still, eagerly anticipating. Executing dudes with an Omni-Blade sounds more entertaining than just hitting them with your gun and everything else looks like the Mass Effect stuff (I dig hiding behind cover.) that I like. The idea of a turret killing a Reaper sounds pretty silly considering (MASS EFFECT SPOILERS RAH RAH) it took, like, a thousand ships or some such in the first game just to get one, (/SPOILERS YEAH) but who knows. Maybe it's a turret with Protean technology or some such. S'long as it's fun.

[Deleted]

Jun 29, 2011 19:45:44 GMT -5 thethird said:

Maybe it's a turret with Protean technology or some such. S'long as it's fun.

You do remember what happened to the Protheans, right?

[thethird]

Jun 29, 2011 19:49:10 GMT -5 @jasonx said:

Jun 29, 2011 19:45:44 GMT -5 thethird said:

Maybe it's a turret with Protean technology or some such. S'long as it's fun.

You do remember what happened to the Protheans, right?

I actually completely forgot, haha.

Still, though, the idea kinda stands, since (ME2 SPOILERS RAH RAH)Prothean technology is sorta Reaper technology since they eventually were slaves to them and creating Reapers, so the capacity is still there. Which is why the Illusive Man wanted you to salvage the ship at the end. I think that's it.(/END) Right? Unless there's other crucial plot points I've missed, which is a possibility since my memory of ME's plot is fuzzy. I seem to only really remember the loyalty missions and side quests.

[Deleted]

Well...that's kind of the crux of it. SPOILERSovereign said at the end of ME1 that the Reapers control the paths that all galactic civilzation evolve along, which would probably mean that any technology we could come up with would be vastly inferior to whatever they already have. I think this is proven in the scene you mentioned earlier, too. It took thousands upon thousands of ships working together to kill Sovereign. Get enough fire ants together and they could topple a human being, but they couldn't stop an entire city. So anything that even the Protheans had would be like a baby's toy to the Reapers./END SPOILER