Mass Effect 3

[HappyTree]

I was going to post this in the Upcoming Games thread as it is a bit too early for a ME3 dedicated thread, but for some reason I get no REPLY option in that thread.

So, here is a gallery of images from ME3 to whet your appetites:

http://imageshack.us/g/687/screenshot20110608at216.jpg/

Especially interesting are the power-up and weapons upgrade screens. Looks "awesome".

[HappyTree]

Trailer videos!

http://masseffect.bioware.com/

[Ignatius_S]

Yup, new upgrade system and Shepherd skills are meant to be more customisable. Hands-on previews sound pretty spiffy, although some are saying it's primarily a fast shooter... but early days!

From what I've read, it sounds like combat has improved - for me, that's something that needed working. I found the ME2 combat pretty repetitive and one tactic was pretty much all that was needed, regardless of who you were up against or what type of character you were playing. Most of this, I found to be because of the map design – an aspect that I did not find conducive to a stealthy approach to combat. Because of this, I was very pleased to read one opinion that the map design in ME3 (or at least, the bit played) does a better job in supporting all classes.

Although there were some elements that I thought improved in ME2, one of the most problematical things for me, was that I felt less engaged by the storyline and the interaction with my party members – the latter felt quite often felt like a chore that I was only doing to get their side missions. The finale was a bit of a damp squib, whereas it felt like a climatic slice of epic awesomeness in the first game.

[MojoJojo]

Yeah,  from what I've heard the Dragon Age sequel suffers from a similar problem. Bioware seem to have taken the approach of splitting everything up into separate episodes as a way of reducing costs. The recruiting characters thing from ME2 was pretty rubbish from a story viewpoint.

The "anyone can die" thing from ME2 probably means we're going to get a whole new roster of allies this time round as well. Hopefully we'll get to see the Krogan brothers all interacting together.

[HappyTree]

I'm not a big fan of shooters and don't mind the repetition. I mean, what else are you supposed to do besides crouch behind a barrier and fire off biotic powers or ammo when a guy pops up? I find close combat extremely confusing and poorly implemented. When an enemy gets near me I can't get my character to react quickly enough, it feels sluggish. Running away is like being in a bad dream, Shepard can't even run properly. So if ME3 is going to be more shooter-heavy they need to completely revamp the combat system and make it like Halo where you can actually move with quick reactions.

I can't see them giving ME3 an entirely new combat movement system, so I doubt it could be so reliant on combat. If they try it will bomb, it's simply not a good enough action game to be an action game. Where ME has excelled is the amazing integration of adventure, story and RPG elements to create a very compelling experience. But a shooter is it not. I hope they don't try to make it into one.

[Big Jack McBastard]

Every environment in the previous games where a fight occurs has obvious barriers/places to duck behind, it's often just a matter of finding which one(s) work depending on the difficulty you've set.

I also cannot see them massively overhauling the interface or doing anything spectacular with character movement, not being able to jump for example is something I imagine will carry over, it'd be a whole other galaxy if they put that in, it'd have to be justified somehow, which would mean some on the fly changes in topography in the maps which they don't seem to be keen on.

I would like more casual interaction with the environment, some semblance of an economy which you can effect (which seems highly unlikely), some well hidden secrets (for once) which only come to light through your actions or decisions. A bit of customisation of ancillary characters wouldn't hurt (which seems to be lacking in the latest Bioware releases) and a solid series of callbacks to the decisions made in ME1 and 2.

The last one is the most important and points to the ambitions this franchise seems to be going for, imported saves with decisions from 2 previous games come into play, which is something I've never seen before. All of the permutations of those decisions when combined makes for a shit-load of alternatives in the story when you add them up and really think about them. Ignoring or marginalizing those decisions (killing/saving the last of the Rachni in ME 1, Promoting/calming the war between the Quarians and Geth in ME 2 and so on and so on) would be massively disappointing.

I tried to work out the number of different ways things could be done based on what appear to be significant plot divergences in the first two games and quickly[nb]I'm sure there are many more[/nb] came out with a spider diagram of 32+ splits (plus another 10 or so depending on who lives) which should/need to be addressed by the third game (though some were partially accounted for or carried on in ME2).

If the series is to resonate those early decisions they should stick with your bod one way or another and make a significant impact on the story or what needs to be done to get a reasonable outcome.

There was a lot of talk about making ME2 accessible for new players while placating the fanboys of the first game who had savegames burning a hole in their memory and granted, they covered a bit of the material but left huge holes for ME3 to fill. If the third is more focused on existing players[nb]gives more satisfying results to[/nb] rather than those jumping on the bandwagon I'd be happy enough.

[HappyTree]

Well I just encountered a bit of a mistake in the carrying over from ME1. The character I imported was my full Paragon one who saved everyone and went around being an angel. Then when I encountered the snivelling fanboy Conrad Verner in the Illium bar he claimed I punched him in the face. No way!

But I don't mind these continuity errors that much. As you said, there are so many story branches over 3 games that it is probably impossible to cater for them all.

One character did come up and thank me for saving the Rachni queen but it's been so long since I played ME1 I had to go to the Mass Effect Wiki to find out what Rachni are!

[Big Jack McBastard]

It's one of the few games I've played where I've not ran into any glitches myself (yet) so that's^ surprised me.

When all of the potential decisions/stories from ME1 and 2 come into play it breaks my brain a bit. I tried to knock up a flow diagram for them but just kept thinking of more splits that might effect the story, anything from gender to a maintained attitude plays a role it's not tripped me up yet.

I'm semi glad it's fouled up for other people though, proves the programmers aren't as smart as they think they are.

[HappyTree]

I dl'd Shadow Broker and spoke to Liana about it. She left her desk and suddenly the hacking data terminal mission was completed, yet I hadn't done it. So I went back a save and avoided the subject. Lucky I did cos not only was that mission very interesting, I found from the Wiki that a bug could have stopped me being able to recruit the Justicar completely! Seems that the Shadow Broker DLC had some trouble integrating into the rest of the story if you do it too early.

Must be a nightmare trying to manage all these different things in the game flow. Anyway this topic is turning into an ME2 discussion!! Well, that'll be my fault :-*

ME3: please don't be a shooter! I was just being pelted by a gunship earlier on and trying to run for cover was very hard. I do wonder why the character movement is so incredibly sluggish. It works well normally, giving a nice kind of smoothness to exploration, but in a tight corner you're buggered if you have to move quickly.

[MojoJojo]

After ME2 I'm sure there were some comments that they thought they had gone a bit too simplistic.

The combat in ME2 is pretty gash really - it only works because it's never too challenging, so it just works to break up the flow a bit. If you turn the difficulty all the way up it just becomes a real chore.

[Ignatius_S]

Have to say, all this discussion has made me think that I'm going to have to go back and replay both games! It's also really been nice to hear what people have to say.

Yeah,  from what I've heard the Dragon Age sequel suffers from a similar problem. Bioware seem to have taken the approach of splitting everything up into separate episodes as a way of reducing costs. The recruiting characters thing from ME2 was pretty rubbish from a story viewpoint.
 
The "anyone can die" thing from ME2 probably means we're going to get a whole new roster of allies this time round as well. Hopefully we'll get to see the Krogan brothers all interacting together.

Speaking of Dragon Age 2, did you see the very recent public comment from EA admitting that they lost some of the fans because of the changes? Apparently, according to a story I saw today, there's DLC coming to address some of the concerns - http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-06-17-dragon-age-2-dlc-to-address-fan-feedback
 
With the companions in ME2, I thought there were some interesting aspects in the stories being told in the sidequests – Jacob's, in particular, sticks in my mind. However, I thought more could be done with the outcome of what happened (dialogue outcomes, the way characters act etc.) – the main significance, as it stood, was to do with the suicide mission.
 
As for the characters you'll be able to play, some of the following is already known, some pretty obvious, some just opinion and some being mentioned in previews, I'll spoiler it to be on the safe side.
 

The main set of squad companions seem to be basically the surviving characters from the ME1 (except for Wrex, booo!) and a new character. Depending on who sacrificed themselves in the first one, Liara and Ashley/Kaidan can't die in the second. The developers said ages ago that if you were romantically involved with someone in the first, but get it on with a new character in the second game, there'll be consequences as the former paramour isn't overly impressed.
 
It's been reported that companions from ME2 will make an appearance and one preview talks about Mordin being in the mission (though he's not one of the squad). I suspect what they'll do, when someone does a new game, there will be a default set of characters who survive. In any case, I think how Wrex's survival/death was handled in the second game will be replicated in the third – if the person survived, it'll be of help in a mission; if they didn't, it'll be slightly harder but the mission/content will still be available.

..I mean, what else are you supposed to do besides crouch behind a barrier and fire off biotic powers or ammo when a guy pops up?..

That's exactly my point – there's nothing else to do, no matter what type of character you're playing. In the first one, I found combat an awful lot more interesting and you could experiment. I can see what they were trying to do in the second one, but if a developer is going to make a follow-up into more of an action-shooter, then they need to make that element satisfactory. I didn't think the Zero Punctuation review was wildly off the mark when it said that most of the game feels like being in a series of shooting galleries before returning your ship.
 

...I can't see them giving ME3 an entirely new combat movement system, so I doubt it could be so reliant on combat. If they try it will bomb, it's simply not a good enough action game to be an action game. Where ME has excelled is the amazing integration of adventure, story and RPG elements to create a very compelling experience. But a shooter is it not. I hope they don't try to make it into one.

According to the hand-on previews, combat looks like has been revamped

Spoiler alert

Grenades back and improved; stealth kills; decent melee.

[close]

. However, as I mentioned in my previous post, the problems I found with the combat was largely due to the map design - the tightly confined environment was incredibly restrictive - and the indications are that this has been fixed.

Every environment in the previous games where a fight occurs has obvious barriers/places to duck behind, it's often just a matter of finding which one(s) work depending on the difficulty you've set....

Although that's true to a degree, I found the first one far more conducive to experimenting and different tactics. In my first complete play-through, I played an Engineer (a character-type that I normally wouldn't play) and I found it very rewarding by the amount of tactics I had to work out. When I then played an Infiltrator, I found I could take a stealthy, lone-wolf approach - I also loved skipping out of the vehicle, perching on a hillside and sniping at a few Geth Colossus as I dodged laser bombardment.

...
I would like more casual interaction with the environment, some semblance of an economy which you can effect (which seems highly unlikely), some well hidden secrets (for once) which only come to light through your actions or decisions. A bit of customisation of ancillary characters wouldn't hurt (which seems to be lacking in the latest Bioware releases) and a solid series of callbacks to the decisions made in ME1 and 2....

Spot on!

....The last one is the most important and points to the ambitions this franchise seems to be going for, imported saves with decisions from 2 previous games come into play, which is something I've never seen before. All of the permutations of those decisions when combined makes for a shit-load of alternatives in the story when you add them up and really think about them. Ignoring or marginalizing those decisions (killing/saving the last of the Rachni in ME 1, Promoting/calming the war between the Quarians and Geth in ME 2 and so on and so on) would be massively disappointing....

There was a lot of talk about making ME2 accessible for new players while placating the fanboys of the first game who had savegames burning a hole in their memory and granted, they covered a bit of the material but left huge holes for ME3 to fill. If the third is more focused on existing players[nb]gives more satisfying results to[/nb] rather than those jumping on the bandwagon I'd be happy enough.

Good points. They had talked up about the impact of decisions in ME1 into the second game and I was a little disappointed by how that panned out. However, from what Bioware has been saying, it sounds like earlier decisions are going to play a significant part... here's hoping!

[Big Jack McBastard]

Speaking of Dragon Age 2, did you see the very recent public comment from EA admitting that they lost some of the fans because of the changes? Apparently, according to a story I saw today, there's DLC coming to address some of the concerns - http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-06-17-dragon-age-2-dlc-to-address-fan-feedback

I've kind of warmed a little to DA2 after playing it through 3 times now, the DLC has helped a bit (though the Black Emporium is just an l33t item dump with a shop thrown in) though they were appallingly lazy with the environments (a ton of repeated dungeons and locations with barriers plonked in/areas made inaccessible, but still using the same minimap so it looks as if the whole area *could* be accessible led to a few 'WTF?' moments) I've pretty much gotten over it, but I can't see DLC fixing those problems unless it's a huge overhaul of existing places and not just some tacked on or even well integrated stuff like the Prince of Starkhaven material.

I'm also not terribly keen to play it through again anytime soon so whatever they're knocking up will likely end up waiting on my HD until about a week before DA3 comes out.

I found the first one far more conducive to experimenting and different tactics. In my first complete play-through, I played an Engineer (a character-type that I normally wouldn't play) and I found it very rewarding by the amount of tactics I had to work out. When I then played an Infiltrator, I found I could take a stealthy, lone-wolf approach - I also loved skipping out of the vehicle, perching on a hillside and sniping at a few Geth Colossus as I dodged laser bombardment.

True, the first ME had more in the way of open environments which allowed for some alternative tactics, don't think I ever played an Infiltrator, I did Soldier on Hard, Engineer and Adept on Veteran. Going lone wolf never appealed to me as I'd have had my ass handed to me in double quick time. Stealth just doesn't fit my MO in ME it's all: 'Kill, kill, kill, chat, decision, kill, kill, kill.'

[Ignatius_S]

I've kind of warmed a little to DA2 after playing it through 3 times now, the DLC has helped a bit..but I can't see DLC fixing those problems unless it's a huge overhaul of existing places and not just some tacked on or even well integrated stuff like the Prince of Starkhaven material....

I was very interested to read what you said about DA2 in the game's thread – am planning to pick it up (very) cheap sometime. Although I'm obviously not in the best position to comment about what the DLC but from what I had heard and been told about the game, I'm a little dubious about how much they can do to 'address concerns'.

....True, the first ME had more in the way of open environments which allowed for some alternative tactics, don't think I ever played an Infiltrator, I did Soldier on Hard, Engineer and Adept on Veteran. Going lone wolf never appealed to me as I'd have had my ass handed to me in double quick time. Stealth just doesn't fit my MO in ME it's all: 'Kill, kill, kill, chat, decision, kill, kill, kill.'

In very open environments, sniping with the Infiltrator was great (although in more closed ones, I found the sniper rifle a good weapon) – and in vehicle sections, I found it both easier and more fun to jump out and take enemies at long distance, when there was a Geth roadblock. Overall, I found the class to be pretty versatile.

In the second game, Bioware talked up the Infiltrator class massively, in particular about how adaptable it was. Although I think there were a good range of skills, my own take was that these were hampered by the confined level design. Also, the sniper rifle became a lot less effective, which was very disappointing and was a comment gripe.  On the other hand, my impression from reading online comments, was that the Infiltrator wasn't a very popular choice of class in the first game, but was in the second.

[MojoJojo]

Hmmm, well all this talk made me abandon LA Noire and restart Mass Effect. Just completed my first mission, which was the Thorian one.

I mostly don't replay games massively, but I have a slightly odd history with ME. First I played the second one, until about half way through the last mission. Then I bought the first one and played it to until just before the final mission. Then, about a year later I finished ME1 from that point, imported into ME2 and played that through in a few weeks. Got some of the DLC too.
Restarting ME1 has really hammered the point home - ME1 is a lot better than ME2. ME2 couldn't be bothered with bosses, or a half decent plot. Pretty much every recruitment and loyalty mission is interchangeable in ME2. ME1 managed so much more. Even the way the galactic map works in ME1 gives a sense of scale compared to ME2 which ends up feeling like a menu screen.

ME2 isn't awful by any means, but it's also obviously a budget version of ME1. They made an ambitious game that was popular enough to start a franchise, but for the sequel their main goal seemed to be how much money they could save.

Is there anyway that ME2 improves on ME1 - except for removing some feature which just needed a bit more work?

_{for smartarses about to point out the lifts - that is yet another example of them just cutting something. The slow lifts in ME1 were just to hide loading. Since it didn't quite work, ME2 just went back to loading screens}

(oh and The SHadow Broker DLC was the thing which first made realise that ME2 was a bit rubbish - it's up there with an ME1 mission. Has a boss fight and everything_)

[papalaz4444244]

Fuck. haven't finished ME2 yet. Got to a tricky fight that fucked me off and never went back to it :P

[HappyTree]

It's been a while since I played ME1 but I'd broadly agree that is was better. ME2 is great and I'm enjoying finding members of the team and then doing their loyalty missions. But apparently after you've done all that it's almost over, so I'm anticipating feeling let down that I've spent all this time building my stats and team up and then have to do it all again in ME3.

I want to run around reaping the benefits of my über powers a bit more! And I don't have enough powers. I chose to be a Sentinel - tech and biotics - because I thought I'd need high tech skills to open doors and things. Now I'm thinking I'd have preferred to be a full biotic so I can make things float in the air, which is really all I ever want to do in any game or even in my dreams: fly and make things float around.

One thing that is an improvement in ME2 is the inventory system. Well, there is no inventory really. Ok, I take that back. The inventory in ME1 was very annoying in its linearity but at least you could get a bit of brainpower going working out exactly what upgrades to put in which weapons. In ME2 it's very much dumbed down. Plus in ME1 I got very rich selling all the stuff I found in containers but in ME2 I'm reliant on one or two wall safes, some hacked consoles and Cerberus funding.

And both MEs are less involving than KotOR. I loved those little card games and pod racing, arena fighting, etc. Fleshed out the world so much more.

So the question is: is ME3 going to be even more stripped down than ME2? Or the same? Or a return to form? Sadly, economically speaking, I am 100% sure to buy it to complete the saga so that would invite the developers to spend less effort for their captive audience. But the leaked info and pics do make it look like it's just about the same as ME2 with a few things done a bit better.

One big issue is planet exploration. I personally liked the Mako, I thought it was cool navigating in a vehicle that had so much grip and manoeuvreability. But I don't really mind the planet mining in ME2. It's a little tedious - amassing lots of minerals is an exercise in grinding - but then I don't mind grinding in games if that work pays off. And it does in ME2 because I now have so much of these minerals (except for the elusive element zero) I can afford every upgrade I come across. So I get the benefit of my work of several hours' solid mining.

The hovercraft in the Firewalker missions is a good substitute for the Mako. I wonder what the mechanism for finding and digging up upgrades will be in ME3.

[MojoJojo]

One thing that is an improvement in ME2 is the inventory system. Well, there is no inventory really. Ok, I take that back. The inventory in ME1 was very annoying in its linearity but at least you could get a bit of brainpower going working out exactly what upgrades to put in which weapons. In ME2 it's very much dumbed down. Plus in ME1 I got very rich selling all the stuff I found in containers but in ME2 I'm reliant on one or two wall safes, some hacked consoles and Cerberus funding.

Well, that's a very obvious example - ME1's inventory system is a bit broken and a pain. So in ME2 they just got rid of it. It wouldn't have been that hard to fix [nb]probably by choosing to have just upgrades or just weapons, instead of the combos, or just have a linear upgrades path for weapons. And some other stuff too, obv. [/nb], but it was just cheaper to not bother.

Ohh, the decryption/hacking mini-games in ME2 are better I guess.

but if you don't obsess too much about it and just sell off most stuff whenever you can it's not too bad. Actually, on this play through I'm sticking with just Wrex and Tali, so I don't have

[Ignatius_S]

Lead Gameplay Designer for ME3, Christina Norman has gone from the project and Bioware, and been replaced by Preston Watamaniuk, one of the main designers of KOTR – http://gamerant.com/mass-effect-3-lead-gameplay-designer-leaves-bioware-dyce-93478/

Something that the article doesn't mention is that he was the lead designer for ME 1 & 2.

[VegaLA]

ME3 to feature MultiPlayer.

http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/24912/Mass-Effect-3-Multiplayer-Preview-Video/

I know some of you will groan but I love my online team based campaigns!

[HappyTree]

If you're looking for new and exciting ways to play Mass Effect 3...

[HappyTree]

Mass Effect Goes Multiplayer

"Rest assured, it's nothing of what you've feared." That's what Mass Effect 3 executive producer Casey Hudson said via Facebook when the game's cooperative online multiplayer mode was announced. This brought a sigh of relief to some, while others cringed at seeing "Mass Effect" and "multiplayer" so close together. At the Electronic Arts Vegas Game Show earlier this year, we got to try this mode for ourselves, as well as speak with BioWare general manager Aaryn Flynn about the game in general, which you can see in the video below.

From what we've gathered, the fate of pretty much everything in Mass Effect 3 will rest on the galaxy's readiness level. This is a representation of how well Shepard has prepared the entire galaxy for the coming battle. It can also be influenced in several ways, one of which is the new multiplayer mode. This cooperative, four-player online mode drops players into a horde-mode-style area where they must battle against increasingly difficult waves of enemies.

Your personal commander Shepard won't be available here; he (or she) is much too busy romancing aliens and punching reporters. Instead, a new character must be created from the game's most humanoid races--Asari, Turian, Drell, Krogan, Salarian, and human--and established classes. Your character's abilities are tied to his or her class (there are no racial abilities), and which weapons you bring is up to you. However, your class will determine firearm proficiency.



We were assigned a human infiltrator for our play session, which took place on the industrial-looking slums map. In multiplayer, the map you choose determines the set of enemies you will face. For this map, it was all Cerberus commandos; others may include the insectoid Collectors or a combination of different groups for a greater challenge. Back in the slums, we found that shooting people in multiplayer wasn't different from single-player. Some enemies carried massive shields that required one of our team to act as a distraction while the other sneaked up behind the foe. And when a massive Atlas mech suit landed, it was an all-hands-on-deck moment where we had to quickly bring the brute down.

Special objectives were interspersed throughout the match. During one wave, we had to run across the map and disable four enemy devices. Another required us to group up in an area and defend it while uploading data. Despite our best efforts, our character would get taken out after one-too-many space bullets to the face. When our character went down, we could frantically press a button to postpone death. Of course, this became more difficult, and by the time the second unit arrived, we simply couldn't maintain it any longer. Dying took us out of the current wave and into spectator mode. We could then return at the start of the next wave, assuming our teammates lived that long.

Killing enemies and completing objectives earn your character money and experience. Money is used to purchase and upgrade weapons, while experience increases your character's level. At a certain point in your character's progression, you will have the option to export him or her into your single-player. There, you can use your character as a war asset on the Galaxy at War map. How exactly these characters will function in your campaign remains to be seen.



Despite the fact that this is a cooperative mode, you're not required to have three friends to play. In fact, we could have played with two, one, or even zero teammates if we were so inclined. The game wouldn't have granted us any AI teammates, but it would have adjusted the enemy difficulty accordingly. Or you can just ignore the mode entirely. There will be other ways to raise your galaxy's readiness level, and the optimal ending is available without having to touch multiplayer. Mass Effect 3 will be released on March 6, 2012, on the PC, Xbox 360, and PlayStation 3.

[MojoJojo]

So it's not going to get in the way too much, which is good I suppose. I still feel a big "Why?" though. The second game skinned everything back so far I would have thought they had other things to focus on, and it's hard to see multiplayer pulling in a load of new players into the final installment of the franchise.

After Mass Effect 1, Bioware seem to have decided they don't want a space RPG, and now find the franchise a bit embarrassing. So they're trying to make it into a GoW/every other space marine cover based shooter clone.

[HappyTree]

Yeah, with some spurious alternative multiplayer other way to "raise [the] galaxy's readiness level" and "the optimal ending [being] available without having to touch multiplayer" this does seem to be the very definition of bolted-on useless co-op modes.

The only up side I can see is that in order to offer a serious shooting co-op mode they will have had to improve the shooting mechanics to make them properly FPS-like. The combat in ME1 and 2 is ok but is not exactly up to Halo standards. Your movement is far more restricted for a start.

I never really understood why they had to make Shepard move in such a cumbersome way. Pressing A to go into sprint mode was like wading through treacle and the slightest bump in the terrain dropped you back out of running. That kind of motion wasn't a problem since ME was more about the RPG and story elements but if they've changed it to be more shooty they'll have had to completely revamp the way the character moves.

It is odd. Release a space RPG that is massively successful and then change what made it different. Do they really think all the Battlefield and Halo fanboys are going to get on board?

[Ignatius_S]

You'll need an EA online pass to do the multiplayer elements, which you get free with a new copy of the game or have to buy if you got a second-hand game, so arguably this might provide an incentive for some not to go with the new copy.

I wonder if multiplayer DLC might be released?

So it's not going to get in the way too much, which is good I suppose. I still feel a big "Why?" though...

It seems such an accepted standard these days, so I think that's a major reason.

However, I would also say it's because EA/Bioware are looking further than just Mass Effect 3. There have been hints that a ME MMORPG is in the works, so this might be a 'taster'. Prior to any official suggestion, there have been quite a few punters/bloggers that wrote about wanting an ME game and one reason is that a significant amount of people really like the ME universe.

One thing that struck me about reading that you don't need to do any of the multiplayer malarkey in ME3, is how similar it is to what Bioware has said about the Star Wars: The Old Republic. With the latter, Bioware has said it wants to attract players just interested in the solo-player element but hope that some will 'dip their toes' into the multiplayer element – it sounds the same here. You don't *have* play the multiplayer elements in ME3 to get the best ending, but it'll be fun and although you're not losing out on the single-player experience, you're still losing out on something. For my money, I'm sure EA/Bioware hope that this kind of approach will exploit a currently untapped market.

In terms of ME3, there was this snippet from a C&VG article, which I found interesting:

But the 'Galaxy at War' mechanic doesn't just take place in the single-player. Instead, it appears to play out like one gigantic, universe-wide game of Risk - in essence 'framing' the solo adventure. The shots we were shown (but, sadly, weren't allowed to leave with) did bring to mind the classic board game, with green territories repre-senting captured assets, amber colours representing those hanging in the balance - and red pointing out Reaper/Cerberus-controlled zones.

"This is a concept that has never been done before in games, ever," reckons Hudson. "Not simply a story device, it's fundamental to the game. For the first time, wherever you go - online, mobile, on social networks - you'll be able to follow your progress. You'll never have to leave the Mass Effect experience."

How this exactly works remains to be seen, but I think the never having"to leave the Mass Effect experience" remark is a significant one – the ME is a significant franchise and they'll be looking to exploit as much as they can.

...After Mass Effect 1, Bioware seem to have decided they don't want a space RPG, and now find the franchise a bit embarrassing. So they're trying to make it into a GoW/every other space marine cover based shooter clone.

I'm sitting on the fence on that one. Not a terribly long time after ME2, there was a Bioware presentation about the next game – can't find the link to hand, but there was a photo of the presenter and a image that she was referring to. This image had two large circles (it might have been a Venn diagram) and one contained user feedback about what was lacking in the second game – and the reduced RPG element was there. The Bioware bod (I can't remember the name but IIRC was pretty high up) discussed some and I'm pretty sure she did about that one – upshot was that they were listening and people should expect to see this reflected.

At the moment, all the hands-on previews appear to be focussed on the action end of thing, so I think it's too early to say what the game's going to be like.

....The only up side I can see is that in order to offer a serious shooting co-op mode they will have had to improve the shooting mechanics to make them properly FPS-like..

From previous, and fairly recent, hands-on previews, it's been suggested that combat has been improved but the system hasn't undergone an overhaul, more of a tinkering.

...It is odd. Release a space RPG that is massively successful and then change what made it different. Do they really think all the Battlefield and Halo fanboys are going to get on board?

Personally, I would say it was lessening the RPG. They do look at feedback (e.g. dropping the Mako) – not saying that they go about this the right way, but that would serve as an impetus. 

[MojoJojo]

I was being a bit overly harsh - I have heard some of the stuff they are adding in ME3, and it does sound like they might have found the balance between ME1/2 a bit better.
There is something about ME2 that is very disappointing though. As a sequel, they didn't try to build on ME1, they just cut stuff from it.
Mako a bit annoying[nb]And I'd contend it was mostly the stupid landscapes that forced you to try and climb 80 degree slopes that were the main problem. Although the shield system was a bit rubbish too[/nb] - cut it!
Inventory system too complex - cut it!

I'm struggling to think of anything in ME2 that is done better than ME1. The lifts/loading screens?
They scaled back their ambition.

That and the story is pretty weak in ME2, with most of it's game time being in separate little pockets completely separate from everything else. And it looks like ME3 might be taking the same approach there, except you'll be recruiting races/factions, instead of individuals.

Good point about the MMO potential. Hopefully with the more complex leveling and some weapon upgrade ability, ME3 won't feel quite as flimsy as ME2 does. Hopefully they'll work on improving the sense of scale too.

[HappyTree]

The Mako was cool for heading to missions and finding remains of things but it was a bit annoying to have to slog through some Geth turrets to pick up minerals. The mining was an improvement. It wasn't massively exciting but it was very immersive in that using a computer to scan and mine planets for upgrade material is exactly the kind of sub-task people on the ship would have to do for real. I didn't mind it. And they brought the Mako back, kind of, with the hovercraft that was fun to pilot.

I can't complain about the story either in ME2 because it was actually very interesting to recruit all the characters and then do their loyalty missions. Given how long the game lasted overall I don't feel the main story needed to be any longer. It was always a middle chapter. I mean, they really managed to mix up tasks so it wasn't just a repetitive dungeon quest in space. The Thane and Samara loyalty missions were really very different, for example. I hope they keep this kind of inventive variety going in ME3.

[bitesize]

i'm finding it really hard to muster up any enthusiasm for ME3. i found the last one a bit of a slog, and agree totally that they just cut bits out that didn't work too well rather than fixing them, that seemed really shoddy. also definitely agree that the story of ME2 being completely weak - there wasn't really any plot apart from recruiting people one at a time, then the terrible final battle. bleh.

the whole tacked-on multiplayer angle is making me have second thoughts about ME3 too, i know they've been very vocal about saying you won't miss anything if you don't play any of it, but it still bugs me that there's a whole game mode there that i'm not gonna play. just seems like a complete waste of development time + resources to shoehorn something like this into the 3rd part of a trilogy, like anyone's gonna be jumping on at this point. just complete the story as best you can, then start doing new stuff with the franchise after the main trilogy has finished.

[MojoJojo]

The Mako was cool for heading to missions and finding remains of things but it was a bit annoying to have to slog through some Geth turrets to pick up minerals. The mining was an improvement. It wasn't massively exciting but it was very immersive in that using a computer to scan and mine planets for upgrade material is exactly the kind of sub-task people on the ship would have to do for real. I didn't mind it.

It's tedious. I don't want to spend my time doing something tedious, whether it's something someone would do on the ship or not.

I can't complain about the story either in ME2 because it was actually very interesting to recruit all the characters and then do their loyalty missions. Given how long the game lasted overall I don't feel the main story needed to be any longer. It was always a middle chapter. I mean, they really managed to mix up tasks so it wasn't just a repetitive dungeon quest in space. The Thane and Samara loyalty missions were really very different, for example. I hope they keep this kind of inventive variety going in ME3.

There's some truth in that, I suppose. I guess it's a question of scale again - ME2 is like a collection of sci-fi short stories, while ME1 is your classic doorstop space-opera. In book form, sci-fi works really well in short story form, as it's just the right length to explore one simple idea in detail, without getting bogged down in detail. But in ME2 none of the recruitment/loyalty quests have any ideas interesting enough to make up for the reduction in scale. It's really not helped by the fact you fight almost identical enemies in every single one, and they feel very samey in gameplay, even if the stories are different.

I've just played Shadow Broker again, and I can't help wondering why the archaeologist expert on prothean culture has become some sort of intelligence agent.  It's like Indianna Jones turning up as M in James Bond film.

[HappyTree]

http://kotaku.com/5856648/mass-effect-3-beta-leaks-on-xbox-live/gallery/3

[mikeyg27]

I completed ME1 yesterday, and I think the highest compliment I can pay the game is that I'm about to order ME2 straight away. Fucking loved it, despite its flaws (I think the VideoGaiden review did a good job of analysing the pros and cons.

Anyway, I was wandering through Soho today and I walked past a guy wearing one of these. I know it's a bit sad, but me want very much: