By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony - BioWare's Ceo hints at PS3 Mass Effect 2, ME2 DLC - English and Polish.

demonfox13 on 16 December 2009

What I don't understand is how everyone makes it seem like Bioware is some sort of pioneer of having your saved data from ME1 carry on to 2 and so on. For those that don't know, Suikoden 1,2 and 3 say hello :p. I couldn't care less about ME series coming to PS3 but it would be a nice addition for those people that would be interested in another shooter with rpg elements (I prefer Crimson Sea2 *snickers). Besides it would be a slap in the face to 360 as it was for PS3 with the whole FFXIII thing I think lol.



Make games, not war (that goes for ridiculous fanboys)

I may be the next Maelstorm or not, you be the judge http://videogamesgrow.blogspot.com/  hopefully I can be more of an asset than a fanboy to VGC hehe.

Around the Network
letsdance on 16 December 2009
TRios_Zen said:
letsdance said:
TRios_Zen said:
Procrastinato said:
It doesn't make sense that there isn't a PS3 version of ME2.... unless its somehow unusual/different from the X360 version, or MS paid for a timed exclusive deal.

Either MS paid for timed exclusivity, or the PS3 version includes ME1 on the BD disc, or something. I think the ME1 theory is a good one, since that would be a big value draw to PS3 consumers who are interested in the series, and the conversion probably isn't that hard, since they've obviously gotten their engine working well on the PS3 with Dragon Age.

So you are suggesting that PS3 owners basically get ME1 for free; thereby ensuring that 360 owners not only lose an exclusive (probably not a big deal outside the vocal minority on boards) but ALSO get screwed over on price, by paying twice the amount PS3 owners pay for the same content?

I'm not sure what incentive EA would have to pander to the PS3 audience, while alienating their 360 one.


Sony makes devs doing late ports add extras. Id think a full game would constitute as an extra. It wouldnt be that expensive to make a 2 year port. Thats their incentive. Alienating? how so? they are getting both games. and early. You want to talk about alienating go talk to Namco and SE

I paid 60 for ME, I'll pay 60 for ME2, PS3 owners pay 60 and get both, and both you and Procrastinato want to argue that I wasn't screwed?

In order for this to work they would have to advertise the difference, so 360 advertised as just the game, PS3 advertised as two...for the same price...

I'll agree to disagree, but we DO disagree here.

Please note, I'm NOT disagreeing that EA could port the game, so don't misunderstand my argument here, I could care less about that.


I guess you must feel screwed no matter what considering people are buyin ME for 20 dollars



TRios_Zen on 16 December 2009
letsdance said:
TRios_Zen said:

I paid 60 for ME, I'll pay 60 for ME2, PS3 owners pay 60 and get both, and both you and Procrastinato want to argue that I wasn't screwed?

In order for this to work they would have to advertise the difference, so 360 advertised as just the game, PS3 advertised as two...for the same price...

I'll agree to disagree, but we DO disagree here.

Please note, I'm NOT disagreeing that EA could port the game, so don't misunderstand my argument here, I could care less about that.


I guess you must feel screwed no matter what considering people are buyin ME for 20 dollars

Yep, you caught me.  Cause someone paying for something is totally the same as getting it free.

IF you just want to disagree, that's fine with me, but let's use a little logic, cool?



Dno on 16 December 2009
TRios_Zen said:
letsdance said:
TRios_Zen said:
Procrastinato said:
It doesn't make sense that there isn't a PS3 version of ME2.... unless its somehow unusual/different from the X360 version, or MS paid for a timed exclusive deal.

Either MS paid for timed exclusivity, or the PS3 version includes ME1 on the BD disc, or something. I think the ME1 theory is a good one, since that would be a big value draw to PS3 consumers who are interested in the series, and the conversion probably isn't that hard, since they've obviously gotten their engine working well on the PS3 with Dragon Age.

So you are suggesting that PS3 owners basically get ME1 for free; thereby ensuring that 360 owners not only lose an exclusive (probably not a big deal outside the vocal minority on boards) but ALSO get screwed over on price, by paying twice the amount PS3 owners pay for the same content?

I'm not sure what incentive EA would have to pander to the PS3 audience, while alienating their 360 one.


Sony makes devs doing late ports add extras. Id think a full game would constitute as an extra. It wouldnt be that expensive to make a 2 year port. Thats their incentive. Alienating? how so? they are getting both games. and early. You want to talk about alienating go talk to Namco and SE

I paid 60 for ME, I'll pay 60 for ME2, PS3 owners pay 60 and get both, and both you and Procrastinato want to argue that I wasn't screwed?

In order for this to work they would have to advertise the difference, so 360 advertised as just the game, PS3 advertised as two...for the same price...

I'll agree to disagree, but we DO disagree here.

Please note, I'm NOT disagreeing that EA could port the game, so don't misunderstand my argument here, I could care less about that.

and i paid $600 for my ps3 $479
 for my xbox elite and 120 bucks for halo 3...

 

Now i can get TWICE the amount of ps3s for what i paid

i can get 2 and almost a half 360's (arcade) for what i paid

and the halo helmet i can get for 10 bucks...

 

point= things change over years......



TRios_Zen on 16 December 2009
Dno said:

and i paid $600 for my ps3 $479
 for my xbox elite and 120 bucks for halo 3...

 

Now i can get TWICE the amount of ps3s for what i paid

i can get 2 and almost a half 360's (arcade) for what i paid

Nad the halo helmet i can get for 10 bucks...

 

point= things change over years......

So the consensus I'm getting is that, it's totally cool that PS3 owners get something free, just because.  Okay, whatever...like I said, I can agree to disagree, doesn't bother me any.  This is a hypothetical situation after all.



Around the Network
Procrastinato on 16 December 2009
TRios_Zen said:
letsdance said:
TRios_Zen said:
Procrastinato said:
It doesn't make sense that there isn't a PS3 version of ME2.... unless its somehow unusual/different from the X360 version, or MS paid for a timed exclusive deal.

Either MS paid for timed exclusivity, or the PS3 version includes ME1 on the BD disc, or something. I think the ME1 theory is a good one, since that would be a big value draw to PS3 consumers who are interested in the series, and the conversion probably isn't that hard, since they've obviously gotten their engine working well on the PS3 with Dragon Age.

So you are suggesting that PS3 owners basically get ME1 for free; thereby ensuring that 360 owners not only lose an exclusive (probably not a big deal outside the vocal minority on boards) but ALSO get screwed over on price, by paying twice the amount PS3 owners pay for the same content?

I'm not sure what incentive EA would have to pander to the PS3 audience, while alienating their 360 one.


Sony makes devs doing late ports add extras. Id think a full game would constitute as an extra. It wouldnt be that expensive to make a 2 year port. Thats their incentive. Alienating? how so? they are getting both games. and early. You want to talk about alienating go talk to Namco and SE

I paid 60 for ME, I'll pay 60 for ME2, PS3 owners pay 60 and get both, and both you and Procrastinato want to argue that I wasn't screwed?

In order for this to work they would have to advertise the difference, so 360 advertised as just the game, PS3 advertised as two...for the same price...

I'll agree to disagree, but we DO disagree here.

Please note, I'm NOT disagreeing that EA could port the game, so don't misunderstand my argument here, I could care less about that.

 

I hear ya, with the feeling screwed, but I don't think EA is considering your feelings, or the feelings of anyone who has already purchased the game, when re-releasing it, or lowering the price in general.

Think about it.  Say ME2 rocks (I have high confidence it will).  It would be downright stupid of EA to continue the ME franchise as a X360 exclusive for ME3, given the rapidly advancing PS3 userbase.  If they want to alienate near half of the ME3 audience, then they should keep it as an exclusive -- if they want to make it multiplat, and rake in more money, they should bundle ME1 with ME2, and release them together on the PS3 for the 2010 holidays, well after they've raked in the X360 timed exclusive dough.  Cha-ching! ...and they're set for a crossplat release of ME3, which will probably sell a gazillion copies.

They'd be fools to keep it exclusive to the X360 voluntarily, when they obviously have a working PS3 engine that evolved from the ME1 engine (see: Dragon Age engine references in OP).  The timed exclusivity may very well be due only to the extra time needed to port ME1 to the PS3, and nothing more.  They may not speak about it, not because MS paid them, but because they want multiplat owners to buy the X360 version at full price, and then buy it again in bundle/GotY form on the PS3.  If you're gonna establish a franchise foothold on a platform, what better way to do it, than to release the first two episodes together on the giant storage medium the platform provides, as a bundle with a huge amount of value?

You could write them a nastygram after E3 when they announce it (okay I'm going overboard with my theory here ;), but it won't make them want to lose money, because your feelings are hurt. =)  The more I think about this theory, actually, the more feasible it sounds.

Just remember, come E3 -- I called it first. ;)



 

kitler53 on 16 December 2009
TRios_Zen said:
letsdance said:
TRios_Zen said:
Procrastinato said:
It doesn't make sense that there isn't a PS3 version of ME2.... unless its somehow unusual/different from the X360 version, or MS paid for a timed exclusive deal.

Either MS paid for timed exclusivity, or the PS3 version includes ME1 on the BD disc, or something. I think the ME1 theory is a good one, since that would be a big value draw to PS3 consumers who are interested in the series, and the conversion probably isn't that hard, since they've obviously gotten their engine working well on the PS3 with Dragon Age.

So you are suggesting that PS3 owners basically get ME1 for free; thereby ensuring that 360 owners not only lose an exclusive (probably not a big deal outside the vocal minority on boards) but ALSO get screwed over on price, by paying twice the amount PS3 owners pay for the same content?

I'm not sure what incentive EA would have to pander to the PS3 audience, while alienating their 360 one.


Sony makes devs doing late ports add extras. Id think a full game would constitute as an extra. It wouldnt be that expensive to make a 2 year port. Thats their incentive. Alienating? how so? they are getting both games. and early. You want to talk about alienating go talk to Namco and SE

I paid 60 for ME, I'll pay 60 for ME2, PS3 owners pay 60 and get both, and both you and Procrastinato want to argue that I wasn't screwed?

In order for this to work they would have to advertise the difference, so 360 advertised as just the game, PS3 advertised as two...for the same price...

I'll agree to disagree, but we DO disagree here.

Please note, I'm NOT disagreeing that EA could port the game, so don't misunderstand my argument here, I could care less about that.

and you would get both at release date while ps3 owners would get an old game and just like every game, the price goes down with time.  ME cost $20 right now.  the theoretical ps3 ME2 isn't going to release at the same time as the 360 version.  both game for $60 would be about fair and if you don't agree stop buying any game at release date.  



TRios_Zen on 16 December 2009
Procrastinato said:

I hear ya, with the feeling screwed, but I don't think EA is considering your feelings, or the feelings of anyone who has already purchased the game, when re-releasing it, or lowering the price in general.

Think about it.  Say ME2 rocks (I have high confidence it will).  It would be downright stupid of EA to continue the ME franchise as a X360 exclusive for ME3, given the rapidly advancing PS3 userbase.  If they want to alienate near half of the ME3 audience, then they should keep it as an exclusive -- if they want to make it multiplat, and rake in more money, they should bundle ME1 with ME2, and release them together on the PS3 for the 2010 holidays, well after they've raked in the X360 timed exclusive dough.  Cha-ching! ...and they're set for a crossplat release of ME3, which will probably sell a gazillion copies.

They'd be fools to keep it exclusive to the X360 voluntarily, when they obviously have a working PS3 engine that evolved from the ME1 engine (see: Dragon Age engine references in OP).  The timed exclusivity may very well be due only to the extra time needed to port ME1 to the PS3, and nothing more.  They may not speak about it, not because MS paid them, but because they want multiplat owners to buy the X360 version at full price, and then buy it again in bundle/GotY form on the PS3.  If you're gonna establish a franchise foothold on a platform, what better way to do it, than to release the first two episodes together on the giant storage medium the platform provides, as a bundle with a huge amount of value?

You could write them a nastygram after E3 when they announce it (okay I'm going overboard with my theory here ;), but it won't make them want to lose money, because your feelings are hurt. =)  The more I think about this theory, actually, the more feasible it sounds.

Just remember, come E3 -- I called it first. ;)

Mass Effect is a great series, but it isn't a Gears of War/Halo type of exclusive, so I have absolutely no problem with them porting the game to the PS3.  If you are a PS3 only owner I hope you have the opportunity to play it, I've played through the first twice and enjoyed it both times.  My argument has never been PS3 owners shouldn't have access to either of these games.

@kitler53, outside of Game of The Year discs (with DLC included) how often are current generation games included completely free?

By your logic, since I'm a new PS3 owner, if I want MGS or Resistance 2, them being old and all, I can just wait for the next game to come and I shoud get both for $60, right?  Come on!  That's silly and you know it.

 



Dno on 16 December 2009
TRios_Zen said:
Procrastinato said:
 

I hear ya, with the feeling screwed, but I don't think EA is considering your feelings, or the feelings of anyone who has already purchased the game, when re-releasing it, or lowering the price in general.

Think about it.  Say ME2 rocks (I have high confidence it will).  It would be downright stupid of EA to continue the ME franchise as a X360 exclusive for ME3, given the rapidly advancing PS3 userbase.  If they want to alienate near half of the ME3 audience, then they should keep it as an exclusive -- if they want to make it multiplat, and rake in more money, they should bundle ME1 with ME2, and release them together on the PS3 for the 2010 holidays, well after they've raked in the X360 timed exclusive dough.  Cha-ching! ...and they're set for a crossplat release of ME3, which will probably sell a gazillion copies.

They'd be fools to keep it exclusive to the X360 voluntarily, when they obviously have a working PS3 engine that evolved from the ME1 engine (see: Dragon Age engine references in OP).  The timed exclusivity may very well be due only to the extra time needed to port ME1 to the PS3, and nothing more.  They may not speak about it, not because MS paid them, but because they want multiplat owners to buy the X360 version at full price, and then buy it again in bundle/GotY form on the PS3.  If you're gonna establish a franchise foothold on a platform, what better way to do it, than to release the first two episodes together on the giant storage medium the platform provides, as a bundle with a huge amount of value?

You could write them a nastygram after E3 when they announce it (okay I'm going overboard with my theory here ;), but it won't make them want to lose money, because your feelings are hurt. =)  The more I think about this theory, actually, the more feasible it sounds.

Just remember, come E3 -- I called it first. ;)

Mass Effect is a great series, but it isn't a Gears of War/Halo type of exclusive, so I have absolutely no problem with them porting the game to the PS3.  If you are a PS3 only owner I hope you have the opportunity to play it, I've played through the first twice and enjoyed it both times.  My argument has never been PS3 owners shouldn't have access to either of these games.

@kitler53, outside of Game of The Year discs (with DLC included) how often are current generation games included completely free?

By your logic, since I'm a new PS3 owner, if I want MGS or Resistance 2, them being old and all, I can just wait for the next game to come and I shoud get both for $60, right?  Come on!  That's silly and you know it.

 


They bundle a lot of games that dropped this gen for free... hell i got lego batman and pure on one disk for free with a xbox bundle. and also

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/93813-Capcom-Bundles-Three-Platinum-Hits-for-360 

thats 3 games that was 60 bucks each for 40 bucks!!!!!

your being silly to think that 2 years after a game has dropped that people will pay full price for it.

its clear that ps3 owners are not getting ME2 on release date ,so then they will release mab a 3 year old game at the time (mass effect) and a one year old game if it comes out in 2011 (which i think it will).

Should retail for no more then 60 bucks (30 for each) .

 



TRios_Zen on 16 December 2009
Dno said:
TRios_Zen said:

Mass Effect is a great series, but it isn't a Gears of War/Halo type of exclusive, so I have absolutely no problem with them porting the game to the PS3.  If you are a PS3 only owner I hope you have the opportunity to play it, I've played through the first twice and enjoyed it both times.  My argument has never been PS3 owners shouldn't have access to either of these games.

@kitler53, outside of Game of The Year discs (with DLC included) how often are current generation games included completely free?

By your logic, since I'm a new PS3 owner, if I want MGS or Resistance 2, them being old and all, I can just wait for the next game to come and I shoud get both for $60, right?  Come on!  That's silly and you know it.

 


your being silly to think that 2 years after a game has dropped that people will pay full price for it

I'm sorry, where did I say they would?