Aller au contenu

Photo

I hope bioware gives a big middle finger to the fans in ME3


  • Ce sujet est fermé Ce sujet est fermé
164 réponses à ce sujet

#101
InvaderErl

InvaderErl
  • Members
  • 3 884 messages

kraidy1117 wrote...

So what I am getting at is that Bioware should have not improved the gameplay and just had the same? 


DON'T YOU GET IT! THEY CANNOT PANDER TO THE FANS!

The only way to keep the series from becoming stale is not to listen to anyone and keep everything exactly the way it is!

IoCaster wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

So
what I am getting at is that Bioware should have not improved the
gameplay and just had the same? ME2 should not have sold as well as it
did then.


I'm curious to know how well it did sell. Do
you have some numbers for us or at least a source with some numbers?


It sold over 2 million its first week:

http://www.1up.com/d...ory?cId=3177757

Modifié par InvaderErl, 02 avril 2010 - 08:35 .


#102
Xaijin

Xaijin
  • Members
  • 5 348 messages

Ray Joel Oh wrote...

And that is your opinion. Now do you hope Bioware pays attention to it, or not? Conundrum.


I"LL GET YOU NEXT TIME, GADGET *MEOW*

Modifié par Xaijin, 02 avril 2010 - 08:34 .


#103
Schroing

Schroing
  • Members
  • 650 messages

IoCaster wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

So what I am getting at is that Bioware should have not improved the gameplay and just had the same? ME2 should not have sold as well as it did then.


I'm curious to know how well it did sell. Do you have some numbers for us or at least a source with some numbers?


It got about 2 mil in its first week. I have no idea how well it's done since then. Wikipedia says 6.6 million or something like that, but it's unsourced.

2,000,000 is a lot, by the way.

Modifié par Schroing, 02 avril 2010 - 08:37 .


#104
IoCaster

IoCaster
  • Members
  • 577 messages

InvaderErl wrote...





It sold over 2 million its first week:

http://www.1up.com/d...ory?cId=3177757




Yeah I seem to remember that was a press release or something that stated that 2 million copies were shipped to retailers world wide. I'm pretty confident that the initial shipment should be sold through to consumers by now. The only hard data that I've seen are the US Xbox 360 NPD numbers for Jan (572,100) & Feb (246,500) which total ~820,000 sold. That's only for the US. I haven't been able to find EU or PC numbers yet.

If Wikipedia is to be believed it's 6.6 million as of March 2010. That's got to be based on either a substantial number of PC sales or somehow a significantly higher number of EU gamers bought the Xbox 360 version than US buyers. I'm a bit skeptical about the EU thing, but it's certainly possible that it sold more on PC than Xbox 360, although that would be an extremely rare occurrence especially by that kind of margin. I think that at this point the 6.6 million Wikipedia number is definitely suspect since it's not been sourced yet. Those are Halo and CoD caliber sales numbers and EA/BioWare wouldn't be shy about letting the world know via press release if it were true.

Anyway, I hope it did sell a gazillion copies because it's a great standalone game. I just wish that it was a better fit as a true sequel to Mass Effect.

#105
Ecael

Ecael
  • Members
  • 5 634 messages

InvaderErl wrote...

It sold over 2 million its first week:

http://www.1up.com/d...ory?cId=3177757

I don't mean to interfere, InvaderErl, but the article stated:

"The publisher announced that Commander Shepard's spacefaring sequel has moved over 2 million copies this week."

That means they shipped 2 million copies that week, but they do not know if it sold.

On the other hand, a lot of sales were made through digital distributors like Steam and Direct2Drive; they certainly don't make a habit of releasing sales reports. The XBox 360 alone sold around 1 million its first week, so it's not far-fetched to believe that it sold that amount (around 2 million).

Modifié par Ecael, 02 avril 2010 - 10:20 .


#106
Karstedt

Karstedt
  • Members
  • 1 536 messages

kelmar6821 wrote...

You missed the entire point of the OP

It just seemed like fan opinion period played to big a role in ME2, and it lacked for it.


I don't think fan opinion was at fault. I think, "somebody", took fan opinion and blew it way the hell out of proportion. Instead of correcting things, they removed them. And some things that were replaced, were done so with fundmentally inferior concepts.

When I complain about my car being dirty, I don't want someone to scrub it down with a wire brush.

#107
Karstedt

Karstedt
  • Members
  • 1 536 messages

IoCaster wrote...

If Wikipedia is to be believed it's 6.6 million as of March 2010.


Still nowhere near Tetris. So it must suck :whistle:

#108
Ecael

Ecael
  • Members
  • 5 634 messages

Karstedt wrote...

kelmar6821 wrote...

You missed the entire point of the OP

It just seemed like fan opinion period played to big a role in ME2, and it lacked for it.


I don't think fan opinion was at fault. I think, "somebody", took fan opinion and blew it way the hell out of proportion. Instead of correcting things, they removed them. And some things that were replaced, were done so with fundmentally inferior concepts.

When I complain about my car being dirty, I don't want someone to scrub it down with a wire brush.

It's like I said before, Kar:

Ecael wrote...

I posted this much earlier in the thread, but I'll post it here for convenience:

1. BioWare was originally developing Mass Effect 1 for the PC, and all its gameplay/menu options were tailored for it.
2. Microsoft, their former publisher, paid them to gain exclusivity for the XBox 360 instead of the PC.
3. Mass Effect 1 is released for XBox 360 in 2007 exclusively at first, but plays like a PC RPG game.
4. Electronic Arts buys BioWare in 2008 and has Demiurge Studios develop Mass Effect for the PC (finally).
5. Mass Effect 2 is released for both XBox and PC, but plays like an XBox 360 shooter game.
6. All gaming companies, including EA, now believe in marketing for console games due to the prevalent piracy issues on PC.
7. Therefore, Mass Effect 3 will be focused on catering to the XBox 360.

So Mass Effect 3 will play out like an XBox 360 shooter again, much like Mass Effect 2. However, Christina Norman did reassure everyone that they're coming up with ways to add more RPG elements back in without disrupting the simplified shooter gameplay.

It's the best explanation for why the gameplay changed so drastically.

#109
Karstedt

Karstedt
  • Members
  • 1 536 messages
Yeah, that's a good explanation and I've seen it before. I was just commenting on what the OP said, in that I don't believe listening to the fans was the problem.

#110
Upset Goldfish

Upset Goldfish
  • Members
  • 131 messages

Ecael wrote...

Karstedt wrote...

kelmar6821 wrote...

You missed the entire point of the OP

It just seemed like fan opinion period played to big a role in ME2, and it lacked for it.


I don't think fan opinion was at fault. I think, "somebody", took fan opinion and blew it way the hell out of proportion. Instead of correcting things, they removed them. And some things that were replaced, were done so with fundmentally inferior concepts.

When I complain about my car being dirty, I don't want someone to scrub it down with a wire brush.

It's like I said before, Kar:

Ecael wrote...

I posted this much earlier in the thread, but I'll post it here for convenience:

1. BioWare was originally developing Mass Effect 1 for the PC, and all its gameplay/menu options were tailored for it.
2. Microsoft, their former publisher, paid them to gain exclusivity for the XBox 360 instead of the PC.
3. Mass Effect 1 is released for XBox 360 in 2007 exclusively at first, but plays like a PC RPG game.
4. Electronic Arts buys BioWare in 2008 and has Demiurge Studios develop Mass Effect for the PC (finally).
5. Mass Effect 2 is released for both XBox and PC, but plays like an XBox 360 shooter game.
6. All gaming companies, including EA, now believe in marketing for console games due to the prevalent piracy issues on PC.
7. Therefore, Mass Effect 3 will be focused on catering to the XBox 360.

So Mass Effect 3 will play out like an XBox 360 shooter again, much like Mass Effect 2. However, Christina Norman did reassure everyone that they're coming up with ways to add more RPG elements back in without disrupting the simplified shooter gameplay.

It's the best explanation for why the gameplay changed so drastically.


This.

/thread

#111
Terror_K

Terror_K
  • Members
  • 4 362 messages
It's funny and ironic that the shooter market has become a console thing when it started on the PC and always plays better there.

Throw_this_away wrote...

repetition is gone from the missions/side missions


While repetition is gone, there's a notable lack of sidequests in ME2 with any real depth, and the N7 missions lack the polish and decent well-thought-out integration that the ones in ME1 had, i.e. they're not properly introduced or concluded, have barely any dialogue, don't really feature any interesting NPC's, rarely have any moral choices or input from squaddies, and overall feel slapped together and rushed.

Pandemonic IX wrote...

I think you're all exaggerating the idea that Bioware would ruin their game by only listening their fans.
Just have faith, Bioware knows what they're doing to make ME3 enjoyable for everyone, so stop your whining about how fans makes you all angry because they like to express their opinions of what things should be improved or changed in the sequel.


People said "have faith" and "trust BioWare" and "BioWare knows what to do" etc. when I and others didn't like what they saw was happening to ME2 before it came out... and then we got ME2 and were mostly right about the problems we were worried about. If BioWare is so trustworthy and knows how to make ME3 an enjoyable game for everybody, why'd they screw up so badly with ME2? And since they did, why should I believe that they'll make ME3 any better when they couldn't get the second one right? The recipe for perfection was already there in Mass Effect 1, it just needed the levels of the ingredients altered, not an entirely new recipe that has a few same items here and there.

Modifié par Terror_K, 03 avril 2010 - 05:21 .


#112
GodWood

GodWood
  • Members
  • 7 954 messages

Terror_K wrote...

While repetition is gone, there's a notable lack of sidequests in ME2 with any real depth, and the N7 missions lack the polish and decent well-thought-out integration that the ones in ME1 had, i.e. they're not properly introduced or concluded, have barely any dialogue, don't really feature any interesting NPC's, rarely have any moral choices or input from squaddies, and overall feel slapped together and rushed.

You just described the ME1 sidemissions.
ME2's weren't great but that doesn't mean ME1's were particularly any good either.

#113
jlb524

jlb524
  • Members
  • 19 954 messages
My opinion>>>



ME2 had better combat but worse story than ME1. I think most fan input went into combat which was improved. Now, I will complain about story in hopes of improvement in ME3.

#114
Badpie

Badpie
  • Members
  • 3 344 messages

jlb524 wrote...

My opinion>>>

ME2 had better combat but worse story than ME1. I think most fan input went into combat which was improved. Now, I will complain about story in hopes of improvement in ME3.


+1, J. :)

#115
chool77

chool77
  • Members
  • 3 911 messages
ME2 was a great game...

#116
Tlazolteotl

Tlazolteotl
  • Members
  • 1 824 messages
Hmm .. I think the "side missions with no depth" thing was deliberate, and has to do with ME2's overall design decision.

Main quests lots of xp. Loyalty quests about 3/4 as much. Side quests, not much.

And therefore, their length has to be curtailed accordingly.

Now, if there were more of those side quests in a chain, I'd be able to lump those together as "one" quest ..

#117
Onyx Jaguar

Onyx Jaguar
  • Members
  • 13 003 messages

GodWood wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

While repetition is gone, there's a notable lack of sidequests in ME2 with any real depth, and the N7 missions lack the polish and decent well-thought-out integration that the ones in ME1 had, i.e. they're not properly introduced or concluded, have barely any dialogue, don't really feature any interesting NPC's, rarely have any moral choices or input from squaddies, and overall feel slapped together and rushed.

You just described the ME1 sidemissions.
ME2's weren't great but that doesn't mean ME1's were particularly any good either.


I throw in my hat with this sentiment.  I'm more impressed by variance in gameplay and level design than by unique dialogue, which is the lone advantage the sidequests in ME 1 had.

#118
royceclemens

royceclemens
  • Members
  • 968 messages
Indeed. If you take away the long-ass drive in the Mako over spare terrain to any number of identical space-trailers or identical caves in ME1, you'd have absolutely no idea who you were fighting or why. More than that, the majority of side missions in ME2 would actually be longer without the worthless filler of the Mako trip or running back to Nassana/Helena/Garoth/whoever.



At least with ME2, I could tell the damned things apart.

#119
Terror_K

Terror_K
  • Members
  • 4 362 messages

GodWood wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

While repetition is gone, there's a notable lack of sidequests in ME2 with any real depth, and the N7 missions lack the polish and decent well-thought-out integration that the ones in ME1 had, i.e. they're not properly introduced or concluded, have barely any dialogue, don't really feature any interesting NPC's, rarely have any moral choices or input from squaddies, and overall feel slapped together and rushed.

You just described the ME1 sidemissions.
ME2's weren't great but that doesn't mean ME1's were particularly any good either.


No, ME1 side-missions were repetitive and samey, which is different from what ME2 side-missions suffered from. ME1 sidequests were better set up, usually with Admiral Hackett or an NPC such as Admiral Kahoku or Nassana Dantius, etc. giving you them through conversations. They were thus better integrated than ME2's "scan until you find something" method. ME1's side-missions were usually admittedly just landing on a planet and killing people in one of three base designs, but there was usually at least some dialogue somewhere and sometimes even a moral choice or input from your squaddies (such as Kaidan commenting on L2 implants with the biotic terrorists for example) and had some interesting NPC's to interact with. They felt samey and cut'n'paste, but at least they were presented in a way that at least tried to give them some depth and integration to make them feel real and hide this as much as they could (it didn't always work, but the attempt was at least made).

ME2's N7 missions were more varied, which was great, but were pretty much never set up at all and only really found by scanning for things. There's barely any dialogue from Shepard, let alone anybody else, and no interesting NPC's at the heart of it to either antagonize you or be saved and thank you or anything else, and with a couple of rare exceptions there were no real moral decisions or any feeling that these would impact ME3 in an import. Squaddies pretty much had nothing to add beyond generic lines of curiosity and vague comments that could suit any situation. The missions themselves were more varied, yes, and the locations better, agreed... but they felt more like thrown in DLC where the devs couldn't afford to have the voice-actors even say anything more than they do something that was part of the original game (the ones where you find a bunch of message-pads outling what you and the enemies are doing is particularly trite and guilty of this). Many were simply linear missions with no variances at all. To sum it up, they weren't presented as well, even though they had more meat on the bones.

Ideally, I think the best solution is a mix of the two: give us ME2's more varied and original locations and missions, but present it and integrate it with the polish the ME1 UNC missions had; give us a proper set up, some dialogue and some choices.

#120
The Spamming Troll part 2

The Spamming Troll part 2
  • Members
  • 99 messages
the main question you have to ask yourself is, do you actually think ME3 is going to be worse then ME1 or ME2? if i didnt love the story in ME1 and love the imersion i felt, it wouldnt be a very good game to me. if i didnt love the combat and mirandas butt ME2 wouldnt be a good game to me.



theres absolutely no way ME3 is going to be a bad game.



you gotta have faith in bioware. you certainly wont be wasting your 60 bucks when ME3 comes out.

#121
Hyper Cutter

Hyper Cutter
  • Members
  • 633 messages

kelmar6821 wrote...

Go back to doing it your way for ME3, Bioware.

That would entail giving the finger to EA, not us...

#122
Pandemonic IX

Pandemonic IX
  • Members
  • 37 messages
Seems like there is just no pleasing certain people...
If some of you are so afraid that ME3 is going to be an epic fail, then stop wasting your time by pondering how Bioware is going to scew up the ME3! that's stupid. Besides, it's too early to even start crying about a game being ruined that is still in development.

Modifié par Pandemonic IX, 03 avril 2010 - 09:30 .


#123
Qwepir

Qwepir
  • Members
  • 352 messages
Combat was clunky at best in ME1, ME2 improved drastically. But the story. Oh dear. It doesn't feel like a Mass Effect game.

#124
marshalleck

marshalleck
  • Members
  • 15 645 messages

you gotta have faith


As much as I like the improvements in ME2, people need to stop saying this. Judge what you see with your own two eyes and what you play, don't just make yourself believe that everything is going to be great. "Have faith" just leads to embittered fanboys-gone-bad (worse than fanboys themselves) who post 20-page diatribes about how their favorite IP is forever ruined.

Modifié par marshalleck, 03 avril 2010 - 09:26 .


#125
Terror_K

Terror_K
  • Members
  • 4 362 messages

Pandemonic IX wrote...

Seems like there is just no pleasing certain people...
If some of you are so afraid that ME3 is going to be an epic fail, then stop wasting your time by pondering how Bioware is going to scew up the ME3! that's stupid. Besides, it's too early to even start crying about a game being ruined that is still in development.


Perhaps not... but things like The Hammerhead don't exactly fill me with confidence when despite complaints about certain aspects of the vanilla game the Hammerhead DLC comes out and continues to just be more of the same problems again and more evidence that many valid points have either been missed or ignored.