Mass Effect 3 - 13: Bet you could really go for a bottle of cool, refreshing Tupari!

[Beowulf DW]

And I'm already worried.

I'm already cheering.

[Zevox]

You're being too negative. In both their attempts they had good points too. Neither the Mako nor the Hammerhead were 100% bad or even 50% bad. If they can just distill the good parts from both experiences they would have something truly beneficial.

The Mako was definitely at least 50% bad - I truly can't think of anything to praise about it, other than that it wasn't made of tissue paper like the Hammerhead, which isn't something I'd normally call "praise." And while the Hammerhead fixed the Mako's handling problems, it was a failure everywhere else, from its durability to the portions you used it for simply being any fun or having any real point to them.

So yes, I'm being negative here, but only because that's the kind of track record Bioware has on this matter.

[Xondoure]

Agreed with Zevox. While I enjoyed the hammerhead bits, the Mako bits were terrible; even on the actual levels they were long drecks with boring combat segments. And the hammerhead bits were fun only because they were relatively short and at least it handled well. Lair's little car chase was a neat idea thematically, but it isn't what people point to when they talk about Lair. Remove it, and the experience is virtually unchanged (and I personally found it the most bothersome part of the level gameplay wise.) I'm not against vehicles in games. But they are not something that has truly improved the Mass Effect playing experience once.

It also increases the chances this game will be a bunch of open world segments strung together ala SW:TOR. There are games I want to see with that set up (future borderlands titles being the big one.) However, space for the sake of space is not good world building and merely leaves me attaching a rubber band to my controller and grabbing a snack while my car drives in a single direction to the distant quest marker.

[Nerd-o-rama]

Yeah, DA2 was my exact thought when I heard that bit, so I'm hoping that's what they go with. The only potential issue with this approach is that it pretty much prevents them from doing any significant timeskip (i.e. more than a few years.)

I can think of five ways to get an arbitrarily long time-skip out of a sci fi universe with established cryogenic freezing, relativity-breaking phlebotinum, and technological resurrection after death just off the top of my head. Not saying it'll happen, mind, but it's absolutely feasible.

Also TOR isn't open-world or exploration-based. It's an extremely linear game with too much Random Encounter space, like WoW but usually less visually interesting. I can see that as an argument for Bioware not knowing what those things mean, but hopefully they learned there lesson from no TOR player doing anything but complaining. (The lesson is don't make an MMO.)

[Psyren]

The Mako was definitely at least 50% bad - I truly can't think of anything to praise about it, other than that it wasn't made of tissue paper like the Hammerhead, which isn't something I'd normally call "praise." And while the Hammerhead fixed the Mako's handling problems, it was a failure everywhere else, from its durability to the portions you used it for simply being any fun or having any real point to them.

It didn't just handle better, it was frenetic and fast-paced. I couldn't imagine trying to do a mission like Geth Incursion, or escaping an active volcano, or even Prometheus Station exterior in the Mako.

So yes, I'm being negative here, but only because that's the kind of track record Bioware has on this matter.

"Track record" is not really an accurate (or at least meaningful) term when it comes to one person's preferences.

I can think of five ways to get an arbitrarily long time-skip out of a sci fi universe with established cryogenic freezing, relativity-breaking phlebotinum, and technological resurrection after death just off the top of my head. Not saying it'll happen, mind, but it's absolutely feasible.

Point, but that would just raise the question of why they'd start it during Shepard's life at all if they were going to do a long-scale skip.

Agreed with Zevox. While I enjoyed the hammerhead bits, the Mako bits were terrible; even on the actual levels they were long drecks with boring combat segments. And the hammerhead bits were fun only because they were relatively short and at least it handled well. Lair's little car chase was a neat idea thematically, but it isn't what people point to when they talk about Lair. Remove it, and the experience is virtually unchanged (and I personally found it the most bothersome part of the level gameplay wise.) I'm not against vehicles in games. But they are not something that has truly improved the Mass Effect playing experience once.

I recall a dev quote where they said they like throwing experimental mechanics into the DLC to see which ones resonate with people. The car chase in Lair was one such experiment, and banter aside it was mostly a miss.

One I think people received positively was the pseudo-adventure-game investigation mechanic from Leviathan. Another was Omega's class-based interrupt.

[Avilan the Grey]

"Track record" is not really an accurate (or at least meaningful) term when it comes to one person's preferences

It's only a "one person's preferences" if you disregard the rest of us.

[Psyren]

It's only a "one person's preferences" if you disregard the rest of us.

Whatever number of you want the Mako and all other vehicles chucked from the franchise, I'm pretty sure you're a minority. (Not that it would matter even if you weren't, of course, since this is evidently a thing they're doing.)

[Anteros]

Whatever number of you want the Mako and all other vehicles chucked from the franchise, I'm pretty sure you're a minority. (Not that it would matter even if you weren't, of course, since this is evidently a thing they're doing.)

I really don't think it was a minority that hated the mako. Those parts are the entire reason I can't force myself to replay Mass Effect 1. It seems to be almost universally despised.

It has more to do with being required to do dozens of boring fetch quests over almost impassible terrain than the mako itself though.

[Zevox]

It didn't just handle better, it was frenetic and fast-paced. I couldn't imagine trying to do a mission like Geth Incursion, or escaping an active volcano, or even Prometheus Station exterior in the Mako.

I don't see what importance that has to anything I said.

Whatever number of you want the Mako and all other vehicles chucked from the franchise, I'm pretty sure you're a minority. (Not that it would matter even if you weren't, of course, since this is evidently a thing they're doing.)

I would be surprised if that were true. I've always been under the impression that those who liked the vehicles were the minority of Mass Effect fans. Hence for instance why the Mako was ditched after the first game, the Hammerhead was minor free DLC for the second rather than a part of the core game, and they didn't even try to include one in the third.

[Beowulf DW]

I really don't think it was a minority that hated the mako. Those parts are the entire reason I can't force myself to replay Mass Effect 1. It seems to be almost universally despised.

It has more to do with being required to do dozens of boring fetch quests over almost impassible terrain than the mako itself though.

I loved the Mako! All the different things I could do with the thrusters were awesome. And car fu was a legitimate tactic!

[Anteros]

Like I said, the problem isn't the Mako itself, or even the Hammerhead. It's the the fact that the gameplay designed around them is bad.

[Jayngfet]

Personally I'm not going to trust the Mako until I see it in action. Mainly because the trailers for ME1 only showed the Mako in flat terrain and only doing controlled jumps from a standing position. These trailers show it trying to work with low hills with no jets, which was never the issue since ME terrain was always full of mountains and drop offs and steep climbs, especially since we see no actual boosts or jumps being performed. They can talk it up all they want, but until I put the vehicle through it's paces myself, or watch someone do it in a lets play, I won't be convinced.

Though there were some legitimately decent Mako sidemissions, once you figured out how to basically turn it from a tank into a guided brick you throw at the enemy. There's nothing quite like flying down a mountainside, raining hellfire and smashing into a snipers nest headfirst with the A-Team theme running in the background. Provided I get to do that more regularly I'll probably be happy.

What's got me more worried is the idea of having to play another N7. N7's are cool when used sparingly, but I'm not going to pay sixty bucks to just be an off brand Commander Shepard, because I already got the full Shepard Experience once. If I need to be another Human again, at least make me a C-Sec cop or something.

Though what's more worrying is that if you need to be not-Shepard, then that male Turian design from way back when was probably a squadmate. Which makes me even more worried that this is just a remake of ME1 in spirit, if not straight plot. Especially if the rumblings about the whole ancient-race being relevant again is actually true.

[Leon]

The trouble with the Mako i found was not so much it its self but the terrain it was most often forced to drive on, someone at Bioware has a thing for knife edged ridges and a incredible elevations in ME1 an a habit of putting interesting thins in the middle of them.

What ME4 needs is more Elcor!

[Anteros]

Personally I'm not going to trust the Mako until I see it in action. Mainly because the trailers for ME1 only showed the Mako in flat terrain and only doing controlled jumps from a standing position. These trailers show it trying to work with low hills with no jets, which was never the issue since ME terrain was always full of mountains and drop offs and steep climbs, especially since we see no actual boosts or jumps being performed. They can talk it up all they want, but until I put the vehicle through it's paces myself, or watch someone do it in a lets play, I won't be convinced.

Though there were some legitimately decent Mako sidemissions, once you figured out how to basically turn it from a tank into a guided brick you throw at the enemy. There's nothing quite like flying down a mountainside, raining hellfire and smashing into a snipers nest headfirst with the A-Team theme running in the background. Provided I get to do that more regularly I'll probably be happy.

What's got me more worried is the idea of having to play another N7. N7's are cool when used sparingly, but I'm not going to pay sixty bucks to just be an off brand Commander Shepard, because I already got the full Shepard Experience once. If I need to be another Human again, at least make me a C-Sec cop or something.

Though what's more worrying is that if you need to be not-Shepard, then that male Turian design from way back when was probably a squadmate. Which makes me even more worried that this is just a remake of ME1 in spirit, if not straight plot. Especially if the rumblings about the whole ancient-race being relevant again is actually true.

Plot Synopsis

It turns out that what Cerberus revived in ME2 was actually a clone of Shepard with all his memories. It's up to you: The Real Commander Shepard™ to save the day from an even more dangerous ancient alien race threatening all life. Leave those weakling Reapers to the clone, you've got real work to do.

[Avilan the Grey]

The Mako was bad, but as other has said the biggest problem was the combination of horrible terrain design and "everybody LOVES fetch quests!".
On the story telling missions it was good. Because the terrain was hand designed and not procedurally generated. So it was mostly flat.

[Rodin]

Plot Synopsis

It turns out that what Cerberus revived in ME2 was actually a clone of Shepard with all his memories. It's up to you: The Real Commander Shepard™ to save the day from an even more dangerous ancient alien race threatening all life. Leave those weakling Reapers to the clone, you've got real work to do.

I'll go one even better.

The Shepard that got revived in ME2 was actually a clone, and that clone was...indoctrinated! Mass Effect 2 and 3 were a dream sequence representing the process of being indoctrinated. The real Shepard was rescued by the Alliance, and is just out of hospital ready to face the Reapers.

New squadmate: Starkid.

[Math_Mage]

For my money, the Mako was boring even when you weren't climbing impassable terrain, because its mobility and range made the enemies pointless. Thresher maws were the only thing that even remotely threatened Shepard in the Mako; for everything else, I just pointed and clicked until the enemies were gone and I could get on with the game. Lame.

[Anteros]

I'll go one even better.

The Shepard that got revived in ME2 was actually a clone, and that clone was...indoctrinated! Mass Effect 2 and 3 were a dream sequence representing the process of being indoctrinated. The real Shepard was rescued by the Alliance, and is just out of hospital ready to face the Reapers.

New squadmate: Starkid.

That's actually very similar to the indoctrination theory that was very popular among fans immediately after ME3 while they tried to rationalize the terrible ending. It's not true according to word of god though.

Also, if Starkid comes back I might break something. I'd be perfectly happy if the new game ret-cons Starkid completely out of existence.

For my money, the Mako was boring even when you weren't climbing impassable terrain, because its mobility and range made the enemies pointless. Thresher maws were the only thing that even remotely threatened Shepard in the Mako; for everything else, I just pointed and clicked until the enemies were gone and I could get on with the game. Lame.

You just described 90% of the fights in Mass Effect 1.

Of course a real man gets out of the Mako and kills everything on foot in order to get more exp. Yes, even thresher maws.

[Psyren]

I don't see what importance that has to anything I said.

To summarize: vehicles give more set-piece opportunities. Escaping an erupting volcano on foot vs. in a high-speed hoverjet is just going to be a fundamentally different experience.

It also gives us a much more fun way to harvest resources than planet scanning, assuming they wise up to that option.

Regardless, I'm not actually trying to convince you of anything. Nor do I have to, since apparently we're getting Mako 2.0 regardless of your or my opinions on the matter.

I would be surprised if that were true. I've always been under the impression that those who liked the vehicles were the minority of Mass Effect fans. Hence for instance why the Mako was ditched after the first game, the Hammerhead was minor free DLC for the second rather than a part of the core game, and they didn't even try to include one in the third.

People hated the implementation of the Mako and Hammherhead, not the concept. As for ditching it in subsequent games, they were focusing on refining the on-foot combat first. Now that they have that more or less down pat, returning to vehicles is a logical and laudable move.

Besides which, they used Cortez to foreshadow the Hammerhead's return. My guess is that the need for Extended Cut shoved that DLC off the schedule entirely.

[Zevox]

To summarize: vehicles give more set-piece opportunities. Escaping an erupting volcano on foot vs. in a high-speed hoverjet is just going to be a fundamentally different experience.

And neither one is an experience I'm interested in having in a game like Mass Effect. ME2 and 3 have already given me pretty much exactly the type of formula I want out of the series, and I don't believe adding vehicle segments to that will ever be an improvement.

It also gives us a much more fun way to harvest resources than planet scanning, assuming they wise up to that option.

Good lord, I hope not. At least planet scanning is simple and doesn't take very long unless you need to amass a ton of them. I do not want to have to trek all across some oversized map in a vehicle to gather resources. That's at least as boring and potentially more time-consuming.

[Beowulf DW]

Good lord, I hope not. At least planet scanning is simple and doesn't take very long unless you need to amass a ton of them. I do not want to have to trek all across some oversized map in a vehicle to gather resources. That's at least as boring and potentially more time-consuming.

Resource scanning was the absolute worst part of ME2. I couldn't believe they traded in an awesome tank for boring radar mini-game. At least with the Mako you'd get ambushed occasionally and have to shoot things. It was something I enjoyed, not something I had to force myself to do every time I wanted a better gun.

[Dienekes]

Or you know, just cut out the resource gathering completely. It was never well done, no one liked it, and just adds bloat to the game when the outcomes of what it actually did (increase exp, allow you to buy thing, ect.) had no reason to be separate from the main game anyway.

[Psyren]

*snip*

Very well - all I can say then is "sorry" since it seems that the Mako will be mandatory: "Developer BioWare revealed that the whole game will be focused on the exploration of planets, hence the need for a Mako."



Moving right along - Some other tidbits came out of the panel.

- It's using Frostbite - we already knew that so no need to source it.
- It won't be called ME4 - we knew that too.
- They're using two studios again - Mike Gamble. This will likely tie into the multiplayer.
- They prefer co-op multiplayer to competitive/PvP.
- We'll see "a bit of old with the new." This appears to line up with at least part of the new game being concurrent with Shepard.
- Big crowd of mass effect fans!

And here is the transcript/QA from the panel. Highlights from that:

- The unnamed hero is definitely wearing N7 armor, so make of that what you will - Mike Gamble.
- "Crowd went crazy" at the "Mako is back" announcement. (Heh.)
- The new Mako is faster and more agile. The top cannon has been removed.
- "It’s something you can tear around planets in really quickly and get to where you need to go without a whole lot of fuss."
- There will be new races.
- The new Mako will likely be customizable to some degree because "we're going to spend a lot of time in vehicles." (Note the plural.)

[Squark]

The Mako could be decent given enough thought and testing. Hrmm... ME 3 just needed some fine tuning combat wise, so they do have some open space to work on a redesigned Mako. My main issue is that a tracked vehicle is far from ideal for PC controls. I'd much rather have a redesigned Hammerhead type vehicle.

[Psyren]

Honestly I had far less problems driving the Mako on PC than I did on 360. And even if it was worse I always had the option of plugging in a controller for those segments.

[Math_Mage]

You just described 90% of the fights in Mass Effect 1.

Of course a real man gets out of the Mako and kills everything on foot in order to get more exp. Yes, even thresher maws.

Put it this way--combat on foot was at least more fun and challenge than waiting in the damn elevator.

[Beowulf DW]

Put it this way--combat on foot was at least more fun and challenge than waiting in the damn elevator.

Not as a soldier (my favorite class) it wasn't. I'd get out, activate the "I win" abilities, then fire my death-hose assault rifle until it died. Good times.

Incidentally, if they do bring back multiplayer, they need to give the soldier some teeth. It's one of the most popular classes by far, and it was just about the worst class to bring to a match without just the right kit, build, and weapons. That really needs to change.

[Psyren]

Not as a soldier (my favorite class) it wasn't. I'd get out, activate the "I win" abilities, then fire my death-hose assault rifle until it died. Good times.

Incidentally, if they do bring back multiplayer, they need to give the soldier some teeth. It's one of the most popular classes by far, and it was just about the worst class to bring to a match without just the right kit, build, and weapons. That really needs to change.

Actually, I would argue that being gear-dependent is the whole point of a soldier class, so I'm not sure how you change that exactly (or why.) And they actually were the most popular class (with vanguard a close second and infiltrator in 3rd.)

[Beowulf DW]

Actually, I would argue that being gear-dependent is the whole point of a soldier class, so I'm not sure how you change that exactly (or why.) And they actually were the most popular class (with vanguard a close second and infiltrator in 3rd.)

I don't think that any class should be any more gear dependent than any other. If you want to make Soldiers dependent on gear, fine, just bring back Biotic amps and Omni-tools from the first game to make the other classes gear dependent, too. If not, then see to it soldiers can operate effectively no matter what weapons they choose. The weapons themselves should just be a choice of playstyle, not a determination of whether you can even contribute on higher difficulties.

[Squark]

The issue was the weapon upgrade system. Soldiers are more gear dependent. They're the class that shoots guns the best, which means they need good guns. The problem arises from the randomness of unlocking the higher tier guns.