-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
[X360] 14 Mass Effect screens in 720p
- Thread starter snoopers
- Start date
Magicpaint
Member
DO WANT DO WANT DO WANT
AHHHHHHH
AHHHHHHH
Why do you think it didn't work with BG1->BG2->ToB? I thought it was well done.VonGak! said:
I hope it will be just like with Baldur's Gate games... They made Tales of the Sword Coast addition for the first one, yet they developed huge and massive Baldur's Gate 2 in basically no time (only 1,5 years). I hope we won't have to wait long for Mass Effect 2 now that they have engine and universe created.
Scottlarock
Banned
why are we talking about mass effect/uncharted wrinkles, and which has better wrinkles? and Sorry Sony why are you in this thread?
Merovingian
Banned
Hey, Yenos, check this, it's an E3 video of mass effect : http://download.gametrailers.com/gt_vault/t_masseffect_walkthrough_1_e36_h264.wmv
I promise there's wrinkles.
I promise there's wrinkles.
Tieno
Member
They've already have (worked on) content for the sequal. The upstart for such a massive project is huge and long work, but once you're done with that you can focus on just content creation and the artistic side and finetuning the engine here and there.szaromir said:
Dennis Dyack mentioned similar things with Too Human.
It'd be cool to see this Lord of the Rings-model work in games.
Merovingian
Banned
VonGak! said:
Yup, the fact that it's Bioware and MS, makes me believe it will really happen.
Tieno said:
It'd be cool to see some non-MMO or RTS Lord of the Rings, too. I get the feeling that EA RPG hiatus / disguised cancellation is going to drag and drag. I don't know, though, whether AAA trilogy-planning is something to approach with lust or doubt. I guess we'll know in the next few years.
Metalmurphy
Member
HOLYSHIT @ the first two pics OO
The others... not so much
The others... not so much
Ynos Yrros
Banned
Merovingian said:
It's not the same thing
I know, I'm stupid. Sorry guys for trashing this topic with worthless opinion.
Just want you to know that I'm as excited as most of you about this game, I shouldn't try to downplay any of it's aspects in the first place, and after watching X06 and E3 videos again, I got some clarity on how ridiculous my complaints are.
Again, sorry.
Tieno
Member
Tell me about it. I'm a huge Tolkien fan and never once bought a LOTR game and then the one LOTR RPG game that gets good press is an MMO. Such a big universe to explore in The Silmarillion too.Salazar said:
Seeing what Bioware did with the Star Wars license and KOTOR...a Silmarillion or LOTR based RPG by Bioware would be one of my dream projects. But an original IP has advantages too, especially when the execution seems to be as top notch as with Mass Effect.
No, in fact they didn't bring their past. But I think bringing your customized character to the sequel is more cool than a simple gimmick - at least I was attached to my character.VonGak! said:
They're still worth a play, because they are somewhat in between Fallout and Icewind Dale. Almost everyone loves them.
I prefer original IPs. Developers are not constrained and can push their imagination to limits.Tieno said:
proposition
Banned
Oh man, I can't wait.
I only rented Battle For Middle-Earth, and couldn't get past my indifference to the genre. I did buy Return of the King for mac, and it rocks (with some reservations - repetitious boss fights and cheap time/swarm challenges).
What you say about original IP is true - which is in part why I hold something back when someone announces before the first instalment is out that there's going to be a trilogy. The rewards are going to be so immense if Mass Effect or Too Human make it stick, but part of me sees (that is, wants to see) the development time and money going into different IP. The chat about 'epic' and 'saga' before we even have a release date for the first of the three is a bit of a joke - although Denis, bless him, can't really help it.
What you say about original IP is true - which is in part why I hold something back when someone announces before the first instalment is out that there's going to be a trilogy. The rewards are going to be so immense if Mass Effect or Too Human make it stick, but part of me sees (that is, wants to see) the development time and money going into different IP. The chat about 'epic' and 'saga' before we even have a release date for the first of the three is a bit of a joke - although Denis, bless him, can't really help it.
BigGreenMat
Member
Is there any word on this coming out for the PC?
Fragamemnon
Member
BigGreenMat said:
Maybe in a few years, if at all. Microsoft doesn't give a shit about PC gaming, else there would be a port (Vista-only would be fine!) by 2Q2008 at the very latest.
Merovingian
Banned
BigGreenMat said:
Jade Empire was ported. So probably in 1,5 years or so it will.
Fragamemnon
Member
I really hope that if they do port it over that they use the same team that did the JE port. That was very well done IMO.
PC owners get love from Bioware in 2008 (Dragon Age) and 2009 (MMO).
PC owners get love from Bioware in 2008 (Dragon Age) and 2009 (MMO).
Merovingian
Banned
Fragamemnon said:
"Bioware doesn't care about the 360, if they did they would port Dragon Age"
Fragamemnon
Member
Merovingian said:"Bioware doesn't care about the 360, if they did they would port Dragon Age"
Disingenuous. Microsoft talks up Vista as a gaming platform and talks about how they want to make PC gaming better. Then they go off and put freaking Ensemble on a console-only game, backbench BHG to board games, and offer a total of two non-expansion SKUs for the PC in 2007-both console ports, one three years old, the other sent to die. Talk about support for Vista for gaming!
Bioware doesn't make these kind of statements, nor do they have any need or interest to do so. So your little quip there is totally disingenuous-cute, but missing my point entirely.
I mean, why is it that virtually every third party ensures that there's a PC port/release of a game when it fits the platform (Ubisoft, EA, Capcom, etc.)-hell, sometimes even when it doesn't-but that the one company (MS) that's spoken the most about making sure that the PC stays relevant and important is doing very little to see that through.
I mean, Gears of War, Forza, Mass Effect, Catan, Viva Pinata (definite appeal as a PC game), Halo 3-all of these games would work well on the PC. Make them Vista only, funk them up with Live for Windows, that's fine. Is it so much to ask that the company that talks up one of their platforms (Vista) the most actually bring desiriable software to that platform?
Yeah, it is asking for too much. MS is far more interested in PC gamers owning 360s than they are about people playing games on their Vista machines.
Sorry, this has been driving me bonkers for a while. The PC press should be shelling MS on this point, but only one or two people on the web sites and in print really seem to get it.
Fragamemnon
Member
Also, I'm not sure Microsoft would even allow a non-gimped version of Dragon Age to exist on consoles, or at least the 360. End user mod and content creation tools are a huge part of that game's feature set, and man oh man if there is anything Microsoft is bat crazy about, it's ensuring that their premium downloadable content racket on Xbox Live is protected against devaluation by "free" content.
For reference, see the whole Epic/Gears of War/MS content fiasco.
For reference, see the whole Epic/Gears of War/MS content fiasco.
turkification
Member
altough the characters looks pretty detailed and good, the environment not so..
Merovingian
Banned
Dragon Age would do just fine on the 360 without MOD creations tools. And about the Pc thing, if i owned a 360 i too would love to see every game on Pc on it, but somethings just don't happen that way. The 360 needs 1st party exclusives, i for one am glad that these games are made with the 360 in mind 1st, if they want to port it to the Pc after the game comes out on the 360, be my guest, don't care-
But the 360 is the Ms gaming machine. Not the PC where Piracy reigns supreme.
But the 360 is the Ms gaming machine. Not the PC where Piracy reigns supreme.
Fragamemnon
Member
Merovingian said:
Outside of being woefully gimped in comparison with the PC one, you're probably right. Who wants a gimped version of a game, though?
Merovingian
Banned
Fragamemnon said:
That's just stupid, since mods are no longer in the hands of the developers. For example, i play Neverwinter Nights, and never played a mod on it even though i knew the mod community was pretty big. Did i care? No i bought the game for the game that the developers made for me.
Dragon Age would be same, i don't look at Dragon Age as a Mod Tool that comes with a game on the side. No, it's a game, that should be awesome, that comes with mod tools on the side.
You say Gimped, i say i don't care if being gimped means not coming with Mod tools.
Hopefully we will see Dragon Age get an announcement for the 360, but since they have an unnannounced project for the 360, odds are that there's not enough man power for a port.
Fragamemnon
Member
Merovingian said:
I'm fine with a port coming, say, six to nine months after a PC-suitable game comes out on the 360. I agree that no first party 360 release should be, in any way, compromised for a future PC port. I don't think those things are or were ever in question. They don't even seem to be willing to do that, other than Shadowrun, which is really just a grand big Live for Windows/crossplatform gaming experiment on the PC.
Microsoft has said that with Vista is the other pillar of their gaming platform and that it and Games for Windows will "revitalize" the PC gaming scene. As for piracy, I think both Shadowrun and Halo 2 Vista both use a product activation scheme to prevent piracy, there's no reason that MS couldn't use that on their other products/releases as well.
Merovingian
Banned
Fragamemnon said:
Hey as i've said, release them a year later on the PC, include the Mod tools that are so popular on the PC, optimize the game for multiple configs, etc.
I'm cool with that. But it's one of those things, i also would like to see some Pc games on my console, but i won't.
Fragamemnon
Member
Merovingian said:You say Gimped, i say i don't care if being gimped means not coming with Mod tools.
Hopefully we will see Dragon Age get an announcement for the 360, but since they have an unnannounced project for the 360, odds are that there's not enough man power for a port.
I think it's terribly gimped in comparison, but I'm fine with a port of Dragon Age. Seeing games go to consoles doesn't bother me, it's the latest round of MS bullshit on the PC with Games for Windows/Vista that bugs the snot out of me.
Anyway, Mass Effect *drool*. I almost think it's fair to call this Game of the Yea on the 360 already-provided it makes it out this year.
Let's assume Mass Effect is GOTY. I wonder if that will have any significance whatsoever on the console war. If ME wins, then two 360 exclusives will win the award back-to-back. It probably is totally irrelevant to the grand scheme of things, but interesting nonetheless.
Fragamemnon
Member
RSTEIN said:
Well, if it does win GOTY, I think it cements the 360 as a kickass piece of alien busting hardware lovin'.
Fragamemnon said:
Well, I think you're blaming them for an issue that is not their responsibility.
It is not MS's responsibility to provide good GAMES for PC, they are pushing gaming on the PC as an OS provider, and bulding features into their Operating System that will make gaming better.
It's still up to the myriad of PC developers to use that OS to create games.
MS's responsibilities to the 360 are wholly different. They are the sole provider for exclusive games, it is their main responsibility to develop and publish these games, which will drive the success of the platform.
If they dilute their 1st party efforts to include PC, then Sony will trounce all over them.
I just see MS having different roles here:
for PC Gaming - Provide a good OS, and standard features, that make gaming on PC easier, and therefore more mainstream.
for X360 - Provide a strong lineup of exclusive titles.
I just don't see it as their responsibility to provide AAA pc titles, there are plenty of PC exclusive developers than can answer that bell.
Yeah, they could at least give us ability to upload XNA games. The potential of XNA is so wasted right now. :|Fragamemnon said:
Nah, this title is already reservedfor certain Bungie game.Anyway, Mass Effect *drool*. I almost think it's fair to call this Game of the Yea on the 360 already-provided it makes it out this year.
BenjaminBirdie
Banned
Blablurn said:
Damn He's a mix of Jack Johnson and Lost's Jack (Mathew Fox).
o_o
No. He really isn't.
It's. Guy. Pearce. You guys really need to stop looking past the hair cut and look at what and who the dude looks frigging IDENTICAL to.
Fragamemnon
Member
I don't see it that way at all. Vista gaming is just like the 360-both are platforms for playing video games. The sale of a Vista license or PC generates revenue for Microsoft, and a Live for Windows subscription generates revenue.
Part of backing your platform is providing exclusive games, or at least supporting your platform at a reasonable level. Three expansion packs and two console ports is a shitty way to support your gaming platform, and that's MS' PC gaming lineup for 2007. What makes it worse is that they aren't even good console ports-a three year old, nonupgraded XBOX port and a middling, quirky shooter. Then they go and take their best PC developers, whose most recent game sold many millions, and put them on the 360.
That's just sad-and for them to go talking about how they want Vista to revitalize gaming, yet don't actually do anything to make it happen by bringing some attractive games to the platform. It's a say-one-thing-do-another approach, especially since Vista and Live for Windows currently offer so very little to actually make PC gaming better.
The only Games for Windows thing that has turned out well is 360 pad support in PC games, which makes console stuff like Lego Star Wars and TR: Anniversary very easy to get into on the PC.
Part of backing your platform is providing exclusive games, or at least supporting your platform at a reasonable level. Three expansion packs and two console ports is a shitty way to support your gaming platform, and that's MS' PC gaming lineup for 2007. What makes it worse is that they aren't even good console ports-a three year old, nonupgraded XBOX port and a middling, quirky shooter. Then they go and take their best PC developers, whose most recent game sold many millions, and put them on the 360.
That's just sad-and for them to go talking about how they want Vista to revitalize gaming, yet don't actually do anything to make it happen by bringing some attractive games to the platform. It's a say-one-thing-do-another approach, especially since Vista and Live for Windows currently offer so very little to actually make PC gaming better.
The only Games for Windows thing that has turned out well is 360 pad support in PC games, which makes console stuff like Lego Star Wars and TR: Anniversary very easy to get into on the PC.
Fragamemnon said:
It's an approach where one company has it's hands in two cookie jars, and it has too make decisions about what is best for both of them.
I'm sure MS would like to enjoy some extra sales of their AAA games by porting them to PC right away, but that would negatively affect the success of the X360, so they have to make tough choices.
The bottom line is these games are being developed as first party offerings for their Console, to strengthen their console's lineup. If they make it to PC it's a bonus, but they certainly shouldn't be lambasted for creating console exclsuves, which happens to be a smart strategic decision.
And also, there are a number of 3rd party games MS has signed deals with that are PC and 360 exclsuves, like Alan Wake, or Bioshock, so there is *some* support there. They deserve credit for those signings.
You seem to expect it all, but that's not gonna happen. They *have* to maintain a strong library of 360 exclusive titles, since that truly is 'their' platform.
The PC is not their platform, they simply provide the operating system, they don't 'need' to do anything in this space, so from the POV of a PC gamer, any contributions they do make to PC gaming should be appreciated, they certainly don't need to be doing it.
Fragamemnon
Member
yukoner said:
First, that sort of implies that the whole thing is zero-sum-that resources have to be allocated between the 360 and the PC and that if more resources go to the PC then they don't go to the 360. I don't think that is really the case.
If I'm going to be a second class customer, at least they could be clear about that. Don't trot Robbie Bach on stage and talk about how Vista, Games for Windows, and Live for Windows is going to revitalize PC gaming if you aren't going to do any of the legwork or make the investment to make that happen.
Like I said, I'd be cool with a six month to a year or so wait-it's stuff like three years for a bad port of Halo 2 that are IMO unacceptable. That kind of timeframe is fair and gives the porting team-presumably not the original dev team, who has better things to do anyway, the time to tweak the interface and add in PC features.
It's still a far cry from the support that most of the third parties (EA,Ubisoft,Capcom,etc.) give to Microsoft's own Vista platform, and hence still sad and embarassing, but hey business is business.
If the titles aren't going to sell that's a different thing entirely. They shouldn't publish stuff if they think it's not going to make money over the long run, but in general MS' PC game folk are really good about picking games that turn a profit.
I'm not specifically lambasting them for making console exclusives, though I think that's one of the reasons why their PC lineup is so pathetic. I'm talking about overall support for their own platform, which is by any definition quite anemic.
Seriously, all of the big third parties with any exposure to the PC are doing more for gaming on that platform than Microsoft is, for all of MS' talk there just is no walk and their current game lineup is a total joke. Their PC game group is all cash cow and zero risk, no new titles, nothing. Even the proven, multimillion selling PC teams get put on the 360.
I think Microsoft's lack of support for PC gaming is pretty indefensible, given their comments and statements on where they want gaming on the platform to go (Live for Windows).
Fragamemnon
Member
Vista is their platform, though. It's a platform for, among other things, gaming. I'd agree with your statement if not for the comments that Microsoft is serious for supporting Windows as serious gaming platform.
I think that entails more than just shipping decent dev tools and telling developers to have fun, especially given that they have published PC games to great success for well over a decade. Even during the height of the Xbox's launch they were shipping more stuff than they are now.
Merovingian
Banned
BenjaminBirdie said:No. He really isn't.
It's. Guy. Pearce. You guys really need to stop looking past the hair cut and look at what and who the dude looks frigging IDENTICAL to.
Yeah he looks like Guy pearce alot, but less skninny.
Fragamemnon said:
I do see what you're saying, and I can agree that the are not putting a lot of resources into PC gaming.
At the same time, you aren't giving them any credit at all, and they do in fact deserve some. Statements like "aren't going to do any of the legwork or make the investment to make that happen. " - are just untrue.
What is Bioshock? Alan Wake? Lost Planet? Shadowrun? Is that not some legwork?
I don't think it's quite as terrible as you make it out to be.
And they are in fact, doing much more than that, bringing numerous games to the platform. Maybe not as much as you'd like, but in the end, there are still plenty of major publishers who can pick up the slack, their job is to attract those publishers as much as it is to create games.
Anyways- we better move on before we drag this thread too far off base.
But really Mass Effects rocks, what else is there to say really?