450 réponses à ce sujet

[lazuli]

Dinkamus_Littlelog wrote...

Listen, I know ME2 is a weak game, but there is no need to fabricate such nonsense that anyone who recognises what a dumbed down, shooter pandering bore ME2 was automatically wants to go back to the flaws of ME1.

I want improvement. Not shooter pandering.

Have your cover based whack-a-mole-gameplay borrowed straight from Gears of War by all means! I just dont expect to be forced into playing it, or have it ruin the main story or gameworld the main story takes place, as it did in ME2.

If you want a constant barrage of waist high walls dotting a main story that is simply traversing from one shooting gallery to the next, there is always Gears of War.

I'd love to discuss how you think ME can be completely divorced from shooters and yet still retain a combat system, but we're getting off topic.

[Fingolfin09]

this must be stopped!

[Dinkamus_Littlelog]

Chaos-fusion wrote...

Personally, I'll be waiting to see if this is for ME3 or another game entirely before I make my mind up, but I'm wavering on buying it or not anyway because, as has been said afew times here already, I don't care much for the direction BW are going with their games.

If its for a spin off Mass Effect game, fine, crisis averted. I dont mind Bioware doing these things out in the open. There is a reason Im not buying TOR, and its because Im not an MMO fan. With ME1 however, I started out on this "trilogy" because I wanted a space-faring RPG experience. I knew the shooter was an element of the game, it couldnt be missed. ME2 shunted that up from just being an element to being the focus of the game. As I said, if I wanted that, Id go play Gears of War.

Same goes for multiplayer too.

[Quintega]

Not all MP is like what you guys are describing I've played some RPG's were it had severe restrictions and wasn't necessary such as tales of symphonia. If it was like that game I don't see the problem. Plus it would be hard to make this mmo or quad screen with out it being heavily restricted do to fighting over who plays shepard

[bjdbwea]

Dinkamus_Littlelog wrote...

Potentially having a large chunk of the game being committed to multiplayer in ME3 tells me Bioware arent "listening to the fans", they are instead "watching the sales" and right now perhaps in their eyes ME2 didnt reel in enough shooter fans as they wanted, as right now the sales sit nowhere near those of the likes of Gears of War.

This is what I fear too. If those sales numbers that were floating around are correct, ME 2 certainly didn't sell spectacularly well. If we consider that a big number of buyers had to be ME 1 and RPG fans, the idea of dumbing down the game to appeal to a broader audience (namely shooter fans and casual gamers), doesn't seem to have turned out as successful as they might have hoped. There are two possible reactions to that: Go into the other direction again with ME 3, to at least keep the current base happy. Or try again and dumb down / shooterize it even more, so that maybe next time the new target audience responds. The introduction of a multiplayer mode would certainly be a sign of the latter, unfortunately.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 29 mai 2010 - 03:59 .

[full_metal_zombie]

hex23 wrote...

cyberwaste13 wrote...

Excuse me? I don't take offense, but I do wonder what you're talking about. All 3 are shooters, one a third person, the other 2 first person. I was talking about fans of a genre, and listed 3 examples of that genre. I fail to see the problem.

"Half Life" is nothing like "Gears of War" or "Halo". For you to casually lump all three of them in together, as if the only difference is "3rd person or 1st person shooter"....again, you obviously have no idea what you're talking about. 12+ years ago the "Half Life" series pioneered a lot of story telling elements we take for granted nowadays, and easily has just as much atmosphere and emphasis on characters and plot as anything Bioware has done. Hell, Bioware would probably tell you this themselves if you asked.

The other two, "Halo" and "Gears Of War"....not so much. Lumping "Half Life" in with them is like saying Michael Mann's "Heat" is the same as Joe Carnahan's "Smokin Aces" because both movies have automatic weapons.

Ecael wrote...

cyberwaste13 wrote...

So you're saying fans of Gears of War, Halo or Half-life don't care about story, or lack the attention span to sit through anything not related to shooting or blowing something up for more than 30 seconds? Two of my multiplayer buddies who never touched RPGs play Mass Effect 2 and it made them not only ME2 fans, but Bioware fans. I think more often than not it's more that some FPS gamers just haven't been introduced to quality RPGs. Brah.

You're comparing Half-Life 1/2 to Gears of War and Halo?



If Mass Effect 3's multiplayer can imitate the success of Half-Life 2's, then it'll be amazing. If it tries to imitate anything else (Gears of War, Call of Duty, Halo) - it's going to fail.

I wasn't trying to start a debate between the superiority of one game over the other. I was simply listing games from a genre. Yes, as much as you don't want to admit it, Half-LIfe IS a first person shooter, as much as Halo is, and as much as Gears of War is a third person shooter. ALL THREE ARE SHOOTERS. As a base line comparison for the purpose of my post, it was valid. Sorry if I put your fanboy panties in a twist. For the record, I do find Half-Life vastly superior to Halo or Gears of War. Anything source engine will always win over others, and thats just gameplay. Storywise there is no comparison.

But I wasn't talking about story, nor gameplay. I was talking about genre. Get over yourselves. End of discussion.

[Jackal904]

LAME! Mass Effect is a single player experience, and it needs to stay that way. Any multiplayer will take away from the experience significantly. Co-op would detract attention away from the awesome story and deep character connections. I sure as hell hope they don't have any kind of multiplayer in ME3 or I will be super ****ing pissed. I remember a dev made a post in these forums a long time ago saying Mass Effect is a single player game only and it will stay that way. Hopefully he's correct.

Dinkamus_Littlelog wrote...

lazuli wrote...

I will be disappointed if they take the step backwards that you seem to be clamoring for.  Although they might cater to a stereotypically less... thoughtful crowd, shooters are an enjoyable type of video game too.  And not all of their fans are slackjawed chawbacons.  ME's combat system owes a lot to shooters and tactical RPG's.  ME2 streamlined the clunky ME1.  Sure, you lost your item customization.  Sure, companions don't talk or interact as much as they should.  But do you really want to go back to endlessly repeated interiors, unbalanced combat, and a counter intuitive inventory system?  If you do, you still have ME1.

Listen, I know ME2 is a weak game, but there is no need to fabricate such nonsense that anyone who recognises what a dumbed down, shooter pandering bore ME2 was automatically wants to go back to the flaws of ME1. I want improvement. Not shooter pandering.

Have your cover based whack-a-mole-gameplay borrowed straight from Gears of War by all means! I just dont expect to be forcedinto playing it, or have it ruin the main story or gameworld the main story takes place, as it did in ME2.

If you want a constant barrage of waist high walls dotting a main story that is simply traversing from one shooting gallery to the next, there is always Gears of War.

Oh stfu. People like you are whiny little ****es who complain about the entire game even though you're only butthurt over the fact that the game is more streamlined and consists of less menu manuevering.

Modifié par Jackal904, 29 mai 2010 - 06:13 .

[Dinkamus_Littlelog]

Jackal904 wrote...

Oh stfu. People like you are whiny little ****es who complain about the entire game even though you're only butthurt over the fact that the game is more streamlined and consists of less menu manuevering.

Clearly youre the target audience. Youre certainly dumb enough to appreciate how dumbed down this game has been made for your benefit.

In short, if youre butthurt over ME2 criticism, then you should... hmm, shut up and take it?

Or is it like Im insulting your mother for calling out areas I think ME2 sucked?

[SpiderFan1217]

Thanks for the info OP. I'm excited now.

Modifié par SpiderFan1217, 29 mai 2010 - 09:08 .

[Jackal904]

Dinkamus_Littlelog wrote...

Jackal904 wrote...

Oh stfu. People like you are whiny little ****es who complain about the entire game even though you're only butthurt over the fact that the game is more streamlined and consists of less menu manuevering.

Clearly youre the target audience. Youre certainly dumb enough to appreciate how dumbed down this game has been made for your benefit.

In short, if youre butthurt over ME2 criticism, then you should... hmm, shut up and take it?

Or is it like Im insulting your mother for calling out areas I think ME2 sucked?

Intelligence has nothing to do with appreciating smoother and more streamlined gameplay. I have a degree in engineering science. I've done types of math that you don't even know exists.

But I fail to see how the game has been dumbed down. Instead of pausing the game and selecting an ability to use, you just use a hotkey instead. The loot in ME1 was just the same **** over and over again with slightly better stats. There's actual variation in weaponry in ME2. The skills in ME1 were extremely similar to eachother and weren't remotely as deep as you try to make them out to be. In ME1 all you would get is a small boost in damage or duration for each skill point. In ME2 each additional skill level significantly boosts the ability, and at level 4 you can choose one of two very different variations of the ability, which makes ME2's skill system far deeper than ME1's.

More menues does not equal deeper gameplay.

[Kalfear]

I got to say, going co op/multiplayer would be the final nail in the cofin of what could have been a all time great sci fi RPG franchise.

This will probably mean I dont buy that gamne as im already on the fence because of how dumbed down part 2 of game was for RPG players. Going co op rather then spending EVERY RESOURCE AVAILABLE on the missing RPG aspects of game just tells me they dont really care anymore, they want a Halo type title at any and all costs and are more then willing to sacrafice Mass Effect potential to attain this title.

Is a real shame and the death of a franchise.

And then there was 1 (Dragon Age). Barring a massive unexpected move by Bioware/EA. I dont see myself remaining a fan/customer of company/product much longer sadly.

Between the terrible board moderation here and on TOR forums. The lies about product to garner sales. The move to shooter over quality. Just dont see much rerason to remain.

Is a sad sad day!

Jackal904 wrote...


Intelligence has nothing to do with appreciating smoother and more streamlined gameplay. I have a degree in engineering science. I've done types of math that you don't even know exists.

Not to get involved in a make beleive epeen war but reading above statement has only one reply:

I have a degree in engineering science. I've done types of math that you don't even know exists.

Of course you do, and I have walked on the moon and dated a woman. 2 other thing you can come online and lie about in the future.

Sorry to hijack your epeen battle, pls continue!

PPS: ME2 was a dumbed down transparent no brain shooter that didnt hold a candle to the complexe design of the first game!

Modifié par Kalfear, 29 mai 2010 - 07:40 .

[Jaron Oberyn]

Throw_this_away wrote...

I 100% predicted ME3 would go co-op/multiplayer long ago (because that is the new standard, and Bioware needs to bring something new to the table to keep ME3 hot for reviewers, and not just "same old, same old"). It will happen.

End of line.

Based on such a bold statement, I'll take a guess that you work at Bioware?

 -Polite

[WorpeX]

Sounds awesome! I love multiplayer, and while I love RPG aspects too, I believe that they can co-exist without gimping one or the other.

[WorpeX]

Sounds awesome! I love multiplayer, and while I love RPG aspects too, I believe that they can co-exist without gimping one or the other.

[RGFrog]

I think a 4 person (squad based) coop would be a good thing. I wouldn't want it to replace the single player, but franchises like Left4Dead have shown that squad based coop can be extremely fun.



Not too sure if an all out Deathmatch or Teamdeathmatch would be good, but it might. 32 Sheppards/Spectres running around or 16 spectres vs 16 reaper agents... interesting but not really what I'm desiring from this universe.



However, a MMORPG in this universe would probably be a good thing too. Might be worth it if they could keep the graphics on par with the single player.

[LuPoM]

Sounds awful.. I fear that the multiplayer side will hit in some way the single player biggest portion of the game..



I hope they DO NOT bring Multiplayer into ME3, as for a future game, I don't know, we should see, but NOT, NOT AT ALL in ME3, which is the epilogue to our SINGLE PLAYER experience started with Mass Effect 1.

[Atmosfear3]

Theres zero indication that ME3 will have multiplayer.

[Jackal904]

Kalfear wrote...

PPS: ME2 was a dumbed down transparent no brain shooter that didnt hold a candle to the complexe design of the first game!

Please tell me what incredibly complex rpg elements there were in ME1. All I've heard from whiners like you is that, "Zomg ME2 is str33m lin3d!! It's G4Y!" People like you seem to associate menues with rpg elements. And like I said before, more menues does not make a game a better rpg.

Modifié par Jackal904, 29 mai 2010 - 08:54 .

[Apocalypse89]

I'm hoping that it's either for a spinoff, such as that game that's rumored to be coming for early 2011, or some kind of online functionality that doesn't involve combat ie, uploading your Shepard or downloading others'.

[Jackal904]

Apocalypse89 wrote...

I'm hoping that it's either for a spinoff, such as that game that's rumored to be coming for early 2011, or some kind of online functionality that doesn't involve combat ie, uploading your Shepard or downloading others'.

Yeah hopefully it's something completely seperate from ME3.

[NKKKK]

Why not just fire all the VO's and most of the writers, scatter "ammo sinks" around like crazy and put in Master Chief as an armor for Shepard.

[bjdbwea]

Jackal904 wrote...

And like I said before, more menues does not make a game a better rpg.

Neither does more pew-pew.

[Sith_exar_kun]

Khayness wrote...

Oh god, no!

I Can use this.

Modifié par Sith_exar_kun, 29 mai 2010 - 09:00 .

[Epantiras]

I don't like writing walls of text, so I'll be brief:



1. I bought ME1 and ME2 because they're *single player* RPGs.

2. I'm *not* going to buy a Mass Effect MMO.

3. If ME3 will have a single player "campaign" as good as the one of ME1 or ME2, that will be enough for me. Multiplayer or not, I won't care as long as it won't steal resources (=time, money, writing and so on) from the single player part.