185 réponses à ce sujet

[Gibb_Garrus]

MrnDvlDg161 wrote...

First of all --- I want to say I am in no means picking on you at all --- its just an example: 

"loved ME2. I never want to have to fiddle with an inventory again. Just
give me a couple more power options on each squadmate and let me adjust
their stats/appearances and I'm good.



I am fine with the
migration towards Gears of War. It's a damn good game. GoW was very
light on story, and what Bioware did - ME story + GoW gameplay - was
like combining peanut butter and chocolate for me. In other words, a
no-brainer."


Of which I stated a good post or two back in a different thread....  the shooters won this round in ME2 and there is no doubt about it from one end of the spectrum to the other.  The cut corners.  The condensed atmospheres. What was taken out versus what was applied. If one wanted Gears of War --- they should go find Gears of War or wait for  3-4-and-5 to come out. Halo is another. 

My point is, its eventually becomming  more  Resistance Fall of Man than  Mass Effect.  The gutting of No.1 as a trade off to the ME2 on another console unfortunately gives it more merit.  ME2 is  ME1  re-done just for that purpose.  Having played ME2 for a 4th round, this time very slowly,  I've since paid attention a little more to how badly the transition was enacted and....

Well who cares what the RPG fans want at this point, it has been mangled, brutalized, and modified like a Protheon slave.  So its really over in that respect.  Congradulations in the end --- someone had to complete the process.

So your saying, now that mass effect has a good combat system its shooterized and mangled? You would have rathered the appauling combat system from me 1?

Don't get me wrong, i prefer me 1 to me 2, but only because of the story, atmosphere and music. Everything else was better x10 in me 2.

[ArchDemonXIII]

PHub88 wrote...

Lets see...I dont hate shooters..

I hate the idiotic fans these days seeming to think that if its not %100 based on the shooting aspect....then it needs to be changed ASAP and immediately made into a game where shooting shooting and shooting are the only focus it has....

 Yea. That's why there was no dialogue wheel in ME2. Good thing that got rid of those pesky experience points too. And why all the reviews talk about how great the game is for not having those.<_<

I enjoy playing through a story....and back in the day I would of never dreamed multiplayer would ultimately screw the story aspect of games so hard to the point where you actually have fans WANTING NO STORY whether they are even aware of it or not....The average shooter these days is 10-15 hours of play time...2-4 days and the campaign, my favorite part...is done...just...like that....and the rest of the focus is durrrrrr yo bro da rpgh daaa turret dadddd spawwnn durrr me shoot u dead spawn shoot me dead durrr 5 minutes repeat....Its extremely maddening to see games becomming short and shorter for the sake of them all becoming more alike...and more focused on boring multiplayer

 

That's why games with intelligent storylines like Half-life series and FEAR are universally reviled. Oh, wait.....  Also, there's always the option of going back and playing again on harder difficulty. Playing an FPS usually stimulates the release of adrenaline, so therefore playing for long periods can be physically exhausting. While a game that can be beat in 10-12 hours is pretty short by RPG standards, if it's good enough, you might put plenty of time into it on replay alone. I bet I put more hours into FEAR than some of the people here put into any RPG.

 Also, if you think that's how all multiplayer is, you are guilty of what RPG players say makes people not like RPG's... an unwilingness to learn how the game is played. Also,  that mindset is more prevalent on public servers. you can usually find more intelligent play on passworded servers but seeing as how attitude plays a big part in determining who gets invited to them, i can see why you probably haven't experienced that yet.

and to think Mass Effect...a game I loved more than any other game I have played in my life...is also going to fall victim? Well why dont I just quit gaming all together...the masses of FOOLS seem to all want every video game to be the exact same thing as eachother

 Might be a good idea. then you can take the money you save and spend it on therapy. Better yet, channel your flair for melodrama into the arts and take up theater lessons.

The one thing I never can understand is why ME1 and ME2 get so many complaints about combat and shooterism...how many freaking shooters is there....go play those!!!!...leave my game alone for christ sakes...Its like these idiots seee a game with guns and automatically asssume....DUURRRRRRR SPACE COD DURRRRRRR...Im so sick and tired of this AWFUL generation of gamers being hellbent on ruining anything original...and demanding easier games to make...shorter games...and the prices keep going up because its easier to milk multiplayer based stuff

 You mean like taking a fresh idea like a cinematic TPS/RPG hybrid and making it a standard RPG?

[MrnDvlDg161]

Gibb_Garrus wrote...

MrnDvlDg161 wrote...

First of all --- I want to say I am in no means picking on you at all --- its just an example: 

"loved ME2. I never want to have to fiddle with an inventory again. Just
give me a couple more power options on each squadmate and let me adjust
their stats/appearances and I'm good.



I am fine with the
migration towards Gears of War. It's a damn good game. GoW was very
light on story, and what Bioware did - ME story + GoW gameplay - was
like combining peanut butter and chocolate for me. In other words, a
no-brainer."


Of which I stated a good post or two back in a different thread....  the shooters won this round in ME2 and there is no doubt about it from one end of the spectrum to the other.  The cut corners.  The condensed atmospheres. What was taken out versus what was applied. If one wanted Gears of War --- they should go find Gears of War or wait for  3-4-and-5 to come out. Halo is another. 

My point is, its eventually becomming  more  Resistance Fall of Man than  Mass Effect.  The gutting of No.1 as a trade off to the ME2 on another console unfortunately gives it more merit.  ME2 is  ME1  re-done just for that purpose.  Having played ME2 for a 4th round, this time very slowly,  I've since paid attention a little more to how badly the transition was enacted and....

Well who cares what the RPG fans want at this point, it has been mangled, brutalized, and modified like a Protheon slave.  So its really over in that respect.  Congradulations in the end --- someone had to complete the process.

So your saying, now that mass effect has a good combat system its shooterized and mangled? You would have rathered the appauling combat system from me 1?

Don't get me wrong, i prefer me 1 to me 2, but only because of the story, atmosphere and music. Everything else was better x10 in me 2.

No Sir.  I have no problem with a better combat system because you need to insure that the shooter portion is upheld by the promice of an  RPG/Shooter.  Thats not my issue and I would agree that the mechanic was tweaked --- my problem is, the different gaming style of a FPS trumped the RPG portion too much.

Story cohesion, level desighn, and mechanics.

Hey... I love FPS's too. I got them all. Play them too.  I play them because I have a certain expectation that they are geared as being FPS.

I play RPG's becuase my expectation is that they play, look, and feel like an RPG. 

But if you sacrafice things for what ever reason you can come up with...wether be supposed buisness practices, sales, whats popular or mainstream... well then your just providing gimmicks to hide obvious changes and that final production suffers.

[ArchDemonXIII]

MrnDvlDg161 wrote...

But if you sacrafice things for what ever reason you can come up with...wether be supposed buisness practices, sales, whats popular or mainstream... well then your just providing gimmicks to hide obvious changes and that final production suffers.

 This isn't  only directed at you, but why do people flatly reject the possibility that BW may have just wanted to try something different?

 They made shattered steel and MDK2.... even JE had action elements to it.  I think people are entirely too quick to pull the sell-out card.

[MrnDvlDg161]

ArchDemonXIII wrote...

MrnDvlDg161 wrote...

But if you sacrafice things for what ever reason you can come up with...wether be supposed buisness practices, sales, whats popular or mainstream... well then your just providing gimmicks to hide obvious changes and that final production suffers.

 This isn't  only directed at you, but why do people flatly reject the possibility that BW may have just wanted to try something different?

 They made shattered steel and MDK2.... even JE had action elements to it.  I think people are entirely too quick to pull the sell-out card.

Well...  here is the soul problem.

A  multi-part game thats supposed to hinge on what you did in the first one....the problem is... the first one happened to be an exclusive game where as the 2nd one transitions to a mutl-plat with an unfortunate stipulation that the 1st episode isn't for " sale"  so to speak.

Dragon Age will not suffer what Mass Effect will suffer because you can play  No.1 in its entirety on mutli-platforms. ME... you cannot. So what happened?

Well you can obviously see what happened and to compensate for that, you dwelled more on the shooter aspects.

That is the problem.  Its not so much of some strange  " Shooter take-over"  no.. its the means and reasons as to why you had to slant to one extreeme while letting the other taper away.

So either these issues get fixed with some mighty good DLC's to plug up the holes or you simply re-make the entire show into something totally different. 

In this case, how ME2 ends is a semi-fix because you pretty much started over with new characters and subplots while the 1st can be imagined away as its influnce has all but vaporized.  Therefore --- ME2 is ME1 and the orginal ME1 turns into some  " Once upon a time..."   G.O.A.T  test  (  Fall Out 3 reference),  making the presidence of lazy skips and gimmicks  with a lot less inventory and a little more Fenix running around and making things explode.

Modifié par MrnDvlDg161, 23 août 2010 - 06:48 .

[PHub88]

ArchDemonXIII wrote...

PHub88 wrote...

Lets see...I dont hate shooters..

I hate the idiotic fans these days seeming to think that if its not %100 based on the shooting aspect....then it needs to be changed ASAP and immediately made into a game where shooting shooting and shooting are the only focus it has....

 Yea. That's why there was no dialogue wheel in ME2. Good thing that got rid of those pesky experience points too. And why all the reviews talk about how great the game is for not having those.<_<

I enjoy playing through a story....and back in the day I would of never dreamed multiplayer would ultimately screw the story aspect of games so hard to the point where you actually have fans WANTING NO STORY whether they are even aware of it or not....The average shooter these days is 10-15 hours of play time...2-4 days and the campaign, my favorite part...is done...just...like that....and the rest of the focus is durrrrrr yo bro da rpgh daaa turret dadddd spawwnn durrr me shoot u dead spawn shoot me dead durrr 5 minutes repeat....Its extremely maddening to see games becomming short and shorter for the sake of them all becoming more alike...and more focused on boring multiplayer

 

That's why games with intelligent storylines like Half-life series and FEAR are universally reviled. Oh, wait.....  Also, there's always the option of going back and playing again on harder difficulty. Playing an FPS usually stimulates the release of adrenaline, so therefore playing for long periods can be physically exhausting. While a game that can be beat in 10-12 hours is pretty short by RPG standards, if it's good enough, you might put plenty of time into it on replay alone. I bet I put more hours into FEAR than some of the people here put into any RPG.

 Also, if you think that's how all multiplayer is, you are guilty of what RPG players say makes people not like RPG's... an unwilingness to learn how the game is played. Also,  that mindset is more prevalent on public servers. you can usually find more intelligent play on passworded servers but seeing as how attitude plays a big part in determining who gets invited to them, i can see why you probably haven't experienced that yet.

and to think Mass Effect...a game I loved more than any other game I have played in my life...is also going to fall victim? Well why dont I just quit gaming all together...the masses of FOOLS seem to all want every video game to be the exact same thing as eachother

 Might be a good idea. then you can take the money you save and spend it on therapy. Better yet, channel your flair for melodrama into the arts and take up theater lessons.

The one thing I never can understand is why ME1 and ME2 get so many complaints about combat and shooterism...how many freaking shooters is there....go play those!!!!...leave my game alone for christ sakes...Its like these idiots seee a game with guns and automatically asssume....DUURRRRRRR SPACE COD DURRRRRRR...Im so sick and tired of this AWFUL generation of gamers being hellbent on ruining anything original...and demanding easier games to make...shorter games...and the prices keep going up because its easier to milk multiplayer based stuff

 You mean like taking a fresh idea like a cinematic TPS/RPG hybrid and making it a standard RPG?

I dont know why I am even going to honor your post with a reply seeing as how your clearly a FPS fanboy, as well as a person who absolutely loves to take things out of context...and bring up things that are completely irrelevant.

How exactly does me being able to recognize that FPS multiplayer games are simply focused on people playing the exact same scenario out over and over... Then over x1000 for 5 minutes and then restarting and doing it again place me in the same category as the FPS fanboys who dont like RPGs because it takes some times to actually get used to things? Uhm, I recognize the fact it would take some time to be "good" at a FPS multiplayer.....but you see...doing the same crap over and over 10000 times in a single hour is not fun to me...so i uhm..kinda wouldnt WANT to get good at it...unlike the fanboys are so used to "show em how to throw a grenade!!!!" "so em how to shoot that target!!!"...that they dont even KNOW what they are missing when it comes to a good action RPG like ME1 was...and ME2 still is for the "most part"

First of, Half-Life is a great game...now tell me how many games are out there that are like half life?...meaning FPS with story and length that equal to it? Thats right....well about...zero...On Xbox360? about zero....You ignored the very first thing I said...I dont hate FPS...but how many exist in modern days that even have a good story and good length? lmao even Half Life is a thing of the past now...oh yeah but who would want to play half life when you could just shoot zombies over and over :innocent:

Adrenaline? Seriously? I have beat Fear 1 two times, Fear Files two times, and Fear 2 three times...and all this having to be over the course of almost two years seeing as how I can barely play the game after beating it right away...Haha, you make it sound like beating a short game and replaying it on a harder difficulty is the greatest thing in the world...Where you locked up for a large sum of your life or something? I dont know what type of gamer you are...But I tend to take the first play on normal..once the games over the absolute last thing I want to do is play it again right away...Its not fun for me to start up something again I had only started up for the first time two days ago...and it certainly doesnt make it anymore fun to play it harder and it absolutely doesnt take me longer..which I only do once it has been MONTHS and the story isnt %100 fresh in my head anymore...I cant think of a more boring thing to do that immediatly start up a 10 hour campaign I just beat.

I love how the uber interneter which you clearly "think you are" with your "being invited to servers" attitude, these days love to jump on someone when they say the word "original" as if because theres ONE or TWO other games out there that resemble one...well let me ask you how many games are there right now that are out for the Xbox360 that are like Mass Effect or even resemble it? thats right...NOT ONE...not a single one....Besides, its not very difficult to deserve the title original these days in a gaming era where virtually every single game involving firearms is a clone of the other games involving firearms....Mass Effect manages to have guns and not be exactly the same as all the other games!

[ArchDemonXIII]

MrnDvlDg161 wrote...

Well...  here is the soul problem.

A  multi-part game thats supposed to hinge on what you did in the first one....the problem is... the first one happened to be an exclusive game where as the 2nd one transitions to a mutl-plat with an unfortunate stipulation that the 1st episode isn't for " sale"  so to speak.

Dragon Age will not suffer what Mass Effect will suffer because you can play  No.1 in its entirety on mutli-platforms. ME... you cannot. So what happened?

Well you can obviously see what happened and to compensate for that, you dwelled more on the shooter aspects.

That is the problem.  Its not so much of some strange  " Shooter take-over"  no.. its the means and reasons as to why you had to slant to one extreeme while letting the other taper away.

So either these issues get fixed with some mighty good DLC's to plug up the holes or you simply re-make the entire show into something totally different. 

In this case, how ME2 ends is a semi-fix because you pretty much started over with new characters and subplots while the 1st can be imagined away as its influnce has all but vaporized.  Therefore --- ME2 is ME1 and the orginal ME1 turns into some  " Once upon a time..."   G.O.A.T  test  (  Fall Out 3 reference),  making the presidence of lazy skips and gimmicks  with a lot less inventory and a little more Fenix running around and making things explode.

One flaw in that.... the PS3 version just got announced.... how exactly did they add more shooter elements to cater to a platform it wasn't coming out on originally? And the thing is while everyone seems to have their knickers in a twist about PS3 making ME1 choices mean less are likely being doom prophets for no good reason. That's why they're getting DLC. 

ps3 gamer: HEY! I don't get to lay ME1 and can't make all the decisions that can affect the end of the game on the other platforms!

BW: Look! guns to play with...

ps3 gamer: OOOO Shiny!

Plus the majority of gamers will buy their game, play it, and never even know stuff was missing.

[PsyrenY]

MrnDvlDg161 wrote...

If one wanted Gears of War --- they should go find Gears of War or wait for  3-4-and-5 to come out. Halo is another.

That's a bit narrow-minded. I love GoW's combat - but ME destroys it in every other single-player aspect - story, characters, setting, atmosphere, replayability etc. So while I could find a great shooter experience playing something else, sorry, but that's not what I'm looking for. I want to play ME without frustrating and iffy combat, and ME2 delivered.

And they use the same engine, so ME taking a leaf from GoW's playbook is only natural.

MrnDvlDg161 wrote...My point is, its eventually becomming  more  Resistance Fall of Man than  Mass Effect.  The gutting of No.1 as a trade off to the ME2 on another console unfortunately gives it more merit.  ME2 is  ME1  re-done just for that purpose.  Having played ME2 for a 4th round, this time very slowly,  I've since paid attention a little more to how badly the transition was enacted and....

So... you're so disillusioned with what the game has become that you played it through 4 times? Are you just complaining for complaining's sake?

[MotoSkunkX]

Not so much hate per say, as people thought the shooter element of Mass Effect 2 took away from the story and were po'd about it.(it didn't, and those people are dumb)

[Bismar09]

MrnDvlDg161 wrote...

I don't agree with you that Fall Out 3 is a shooter, its a misconception. Fall Out 3 is an RPG without the pause for turned based moves. What threw many regular shooters off was they thought that it was one... when really it leaned more towards an RPG type atmosphere.

Fall Out 3 had its own flaws, particularly in the story department --- what saved its ass was the Broken Steel DLC, if that wasn't added on, it would have been a different result all together.

Fallout 3, not Fall Out 3.  Sorry, couldn't help myself :innocent:

[MCPOWill]

 Well I hate to break it to the shooter haters out there but ME2 was designed in mind as a 3rd person shooter with RPG elements whereas ME1 was an RPG with shooter elements, just saying. 

[ArchDemonXIII]

PHub88 wrote...

I dont know why I am even going to honor your post with a reply seeing as how your clearly a FPS fanboy, as well as a person who absolutely loves to take things out of context...and bring up things that are completely irrelevant.

Actually if I'm a fanboy of anything, it's fighting games.

How exactly does me being able to recognize that FPS multiplayer games are simply focused on people playing the exact same scenario out over and over... Then over x1000 for 5 minutes and then restarting and doing it again place me in the same category as the FPS fanboys who dont like RPGs because it takes some times to actually get used to things? Uhm, I recognize the fact it would take some time to be "good" at a FPS multiplayer.....but you see...doing the same crap over and over 10000 times in a single hour is not fun to me...so i uhm..kinda wouldnt WANT to get good at it...unlike the fanboys are so used to "show em how to throw a grenade!!!!" "so em how to shoot that target!!!"...that they dont even KNOW what they are missing when it comes to a good action RPG like ME1 was...and ME2 still is for the "most part"

 While the scenario remains the same, the dynamic nature of what's going on means that the same match can vary wildly between rounds. That's like saying once baseball team A has beat baseball team B, there's no reason to ever play them again that season because the result is a foregone conclusion. Like a sport, the only way to get good at it is practice, a little bit of practice, and more practice. the thing with RPG's is that since it's all numbers based, once you figure out what works on what, it will always work. If i pop around a corner and see an opponent, what happens will play out very differently based on whether the person on the other end of that connection is a newbie or a pro. If you don't like competitive gaming, that's fine, but don't imply that depth is missing just because you don't see it.

First of, Half-Life is a great game...now tell me how many games are out there that are like half life?...meaning FPS with story and length that equal to it? Thats right....well about...zero...On Xbox360? about zero....You ignored the very first thing I said...I dont hate FPS...but how many exist in modern days that even have a good story and good length? lmao even Half Life is a thing of the past now...oh yeah but who would want to play half life when you could just shoot zombies over and over :innocent:

 Well, you got me there. Not being a FPS fanboy, I haven't played them all. i will admit, I do like a good story which shooters tend to be lacking in. but that's why I like ME2. Best of both worlds.

 Some people only like MP games. I'm not one of them. I prefer a good SP experience. That being said, sometimes I can forgive a bad story if the combat is rich enough. that doesn't mean I don't appreciate a game that does have a good story.

Adrenaline? Seriously? I have beat Fear 1 two times, Fear Files two times, and Fear 2 three times...and all this having to be over the course of almost two years seeing as how I can barely play the game after beating it right away...Haha, you make it sound like beating a short game and replaying it on a harder difficulty is the greatest thing in the world...Where you locked up for a large sum of your life or something? I dont know what type of gamer you are...But I tend to take the first play on normal..once the games over the absolute last thing I want to do is play it again right away...Its not fun for me to start up something again I had only started up for the first time two days ago...and it certainly doesnt make it anymore fun to play it harder and it absolutely doesnt take me longer..which I only do once it has been MONTHS and the story isnt %100 fresh in my head anymore...I cant think of a more boring thing to do that immediatly start up a 10 hour campaign I just beat.

 FEAR had incredible AI that was very reactive to player actions.  You could change up the way battles played out just by approaching them differently. the problem is, lots of people that played it would approach each section the same way each time they played it. The payoff was when you pulled off something cool, like running across a conference table in slow-mo with akimbo pistols blasting people on either side before slide kicking the guy at the end of it. Point being, a little creativity on the part of the player can enrich the experience. I played FEAR 3 times back to back and enjoyed it each time. FEAR files wasn't even made by the same developer and was a travesty that proves that even a good shooter can be "dumbed down".  FEAR 2 suffered from consolitis but was still fun. I play it more now than the original only because of the level select.

I love how the uber interneter which you clearly "think you are" with your "being invited to servers" attitude, these days love to jump on someone when they say the word "original" as if because theres ONE or TWO other games out there that resemble one...well let me ask you how many games are there right now that are out for the Xbox360 that are like Mass Effect or even resemble it? thats right...NOT ONE...not a single one....Besides, its not very difficult to deserve the title original these days in a gaming era where virtually every single game involving firearms is a clone of the other games involving firearms....Mass Effect manages to have guns and not be exactly the same as all the other games!

 I never claimed to be an "uber internetter" just pointing out that invite servers tend to have a different atmosphere and that with the attitude you project, if it carried over to online, is unlikely to get you invited to one.

 I can't really speak for the 360, I play on PC.

[Kriztaen]

I think one of the reasons CoD MW2 gets so much hate for "stupid people" is not the actual game itself. It is the feeling one gets when on XBL listening to rude/loud/high pitched/whiny/yelping kids.



The "first impression" of the community is in large part responsible for what gives the genre a bad name. And since CoD is currently the "face" of FPS games for the moment that ideal gets strereotyped into the overall idea of a shooter fan or shooter game.

[shootist70]

I love cross-genre - taking the best of two genres and producing an offspring that has the best of both. Action-packed shooters with deeper characterisation, item implementation and exploration? Why, that sounds like a hell of a lot of fun to me, and that's pretty much what drew me to the Mass Effect games in the first place.



Let's see a hell of a lot more of it, and let's not keep pigeonholing genres and constantly expecting products to conform to arbitrary definitions. You do know that most artists and creators detest it when people do that?

[ArchDemonXIII]

Kriztaen wrote...

I think one of the reasons CoD MW2 gets so much hate for "stupid people" is not the actual game itself. It is the feeling one gets when on XBL listening to rude/loud/high pitched/whiny/yelping kids.

The "first impression" of the community is in large part responsible for what gives the genre a bad name. And since CoD is currently the "face" of FPS games for the moment that ideal gets strereotyped into the overall idea of a shooter fan or shooter game.

I was thinking about that. I think a lot of the bad press shooter fans  get are really symptoms of internet anonymity. It's said that a person's true colors are shown when the have the ability to act without retribution. Try going on a board where there is lax/no moderation and you'll see what I mean. Take 4chan for instance. There's a stellar example of humanity at it's puppies-n-sunshine finest.

[Tazzmission]

MTN Dew Fanatic wrote...

JaegerBane wrote...

To be honest, I'm sick of hearing shooters being stereotyped as 'mindless games for retards, unlike us superior RPG gamers with all of our stats' crap. It's snobbery, pure and simple.

The only games like that I can think of are CoD 4 and CoD Modern Warfare 2 and that's because the people that always play are them are all like,"I r 1337z, look at me wit ma stopin powerz!". Call of Duty ruined everything.

dont forget gears of war on that list.... look i dont care about shooters but the shooter fans are the most annoying bunch seeing as they demand that shooter elements go into a franchise that dosent need it. i mean theres a thread that says me needs to be a fps wich imo will ruin the franchise

[Kriztaen]

Tazzmission wrote...

dont forget gears of war on that list.... look i dont care about shooters but the shooter fans are the most annoying bunch seeing as they demand that shooter elements go into a franchise that dosent need it. i mean theres a thread that says me needs to be a fps wich imo will ruin the franchise

Well to be more precise that topic's creator was saying that the next game after this series (so the next game after ME3) should be an FPS with online.....Yeah, I wanted to strangle him too.

There are some good FPS games like I said in a previous post. But a universe like Mass Effect...that would be difficult to really place in most other game genres. Even if they made it as fun as CoR:EfBB or HL2 it would likely still not be something I (or most hardcore ME fans, especially those that loved 1 over 2) would buy.

Maybe an RTS (but everyone would complain it is a Starcraft clone) or an MMO (which is pretty much impossible given the source material and the fact that BW is doing ToR, please people stop freaking saying ME-MMO pl0x, ist not happening for a while if ever)

[Tazzmission]

Kriztaen wrote...

Tazzmission wrote...

dont forget gears of war on that list.... look i dont care about shooters but the shooter fans are the most annoying bunch seeing as they demand that shooter elements go into a franchise that dosent need it. i mean theres a thread that says me needs to be a fps wich imo will ruin the franchise

Well to be more precise that topic's creator was saying that the next game after this series (so the next game after ME3) should be an FPS with online.....Yeah, I wanted to strangle him too.

There are some good FPS games like I said in a previous post. But a universe like Mass Effect...that would be difficult to really place in most other game genres. Even if they made it as fun as CoR:EfBB or HL2 it would likely still not be something I (or most hardcore ME fans, especially those that loved 1 over 2) would buy.

Maybe an RTS (but everyone would complain it is a Starcraft clone) or an MMO (which is pretty much impossible given the source material and the fact that BW is doing ToR, please people stop freaking saying ME-MMO pl0x, ist not happening for a while if ever)

im saying even spinoffs to me dont need the fps element. the game is about teamwork and if you idiotic shooter fans took the time to explore you would know this.

Modifié par Tazzmission, 23 août 2010 - 06:40 .

[Tazzmission]

i have a thought if shooter fans wanna make mass effect a first person shooter or non stop shooteresq than i say gears of war should become a full on rpg instead of a ****ty shooter

[ArchDemonXIII]

Tazzmission wrote...

Kriztaen wrote...

Tazzmission wrote...

dont forget gears of war on that list.... look i dont care about shooters but the shooter fans are the most annoying bunch seeing as they demand that shooter elements go into a franchise that dosent need it. i mean theres a thread that says me needs to be a fps wich imo will ruin the franchise

Well to be more precise that topic's creator was saying that the next game after this series (so the next game after ME3) should be an FPS with online.....Yeah, I wanted to strangle him too.

There are some good FPS games like I said in a previous post. But a universe like Mass Effect...that would be difficult to really place in most other game genres. Even if they made it as fun as CoR:EfBB or HL2 it would likely still not be something I (or most hardcore ME fans, especially those that loved 1 over 2) would buy.

Maybe an RTS (but everyone would complain it is a Starcraft clone) or an MMO (which is pretty much impossible given the source material and the fact that BW is doing ToR, please people stop freaking saying ME-MMO pl0x, ist not happening for a while if ever)

im saying even spinoffs to me dont need the fps element. the game is about teamwork and if you idiotic shooter fans took the time to explore you would know this.

Yea, because stereotyping and direct abuse has a stunning track record of provoking stimulating debate.

[Tazzmission]

ArchDemonXIII wrote...

Tazzmission wrote...

Kriztaen wrote...

Tazzmission wrote...

dont forget gears of war on that list.... look i dont care about shooters but the shooter fans are the most annoying bunch seeing as they demand that shooter elements go into a franchise that dosent need it. i mean theres a thread that says me needs to be a fps wich imo will ruin the franchise

Well to be more precise that topic's creator was saying that the next game after this series (so the next game after ME3) should be an FPS with online.....Yeah, I wanted to strangle him too.

There are some good FPS games like I said in a previous post. But a universe like Mass Effect...that would be difficult to really place in most other game genres. Even if they made it as fun as CoR:EfBB or HL2 it would likely still not be something I (or most hardcore ME fans, especially those that loved 1 over 2) would buy.

Maybe an RTS (but everyone would complain it is a Starcraft clone) or an MMO (which is pretty much impossible given the source material and the fact that BW is doing ToR, please people stop freaking saying ME-MMO pl0x, ist not happening for a while if ever)

im saying even spinoffs to me dont need the fps element. the game is about teamwork and if you idiotic shooter fans took the time to explore you would know this.

Yea, because stereotyping and direct abuse has a stunning track record of provoking stimulating debate.

for real though arch shooter fans ( the die hard ones) are the most demanding whiney people i ever came across . how often do you see rpg gamers go and say hey lets demand demand demand that cod or gow goes full on rpg? or how often do you hear fighter gamers ( like myself) demand demand demand that god of war should just drop its adventure theme and go full on fighter? if you can sit there and say shooter fans are not trying to run the game buisness then serisously with all do respect you must not be paying attention

[Kriztaen]

This is all I think when someone mentions GoW. Yeah.... www.youtube.com/watch

What has been seen can not be unseen.

Also, I do in fact agree with Tazz on the fact that shooter fans tend to be much more outspoken in what they want, RPG fans tend to complain just as much...just not quite so loudly, vehemently or aggressively. Actually maybe if some of us RPG guys had been a little more aggressive in our own demands some of the dumbing down from ME2 could have been avoided. I love ME2 for making things feel tighter and more fluid. But I do dislike the fact that the "trimming" was beyond overdone.

[sevach]

Well, shooters are often mindless, mindless in the sense that you don't have to think too much and you're mostly relying on your instincts and reflexes (Of course this is a gross generalization, i played very complex shooters that put you into very tough situations that demand a lot of patience and thinking things through). That doesn't mean someone who likes shooters is a dumb idiot, personally, i like beat em ups, and sports games, and you can hardly find something more mindless than a beat em up (perhaps the Transformers movies lol).

There's nothing wrong with a little mindless fun.



I do have a problem with ME2, of course it isn't the fact that they improved the shooter aspect, that is a totally welcome change. My problem is with uninteresting, very disconnected story and the small linear level design (level design that is very shooter like and less RPG)

[ArchDemonXIII]

Tazzmission wrote...

for real though arch shooter fans ( the die hard ones) are the most demanding whiney people i ever came across . how often do you see rpg gamers go and say hey lets demand demand demand that cod or gow goes full on rpg? or how often do you hear fighter gamers ( like myself) demand demand demand that god of war should just drop its adventure theme and go full on fighter? if you can sit there and say shooter fans are not trying to run the game buisness then serisously with all do respect you must not be paying attention

 The problem is that people, in general, are idiots. Shooters are very popular, so therefore it has a proportionately larger number of idiots. If RPGs were larger in popularity, I have no doubt that the RPG crowd would seem just as idiotic.

 It's not as if RPG fans aren't demanding. Look at this thread for example. It's mostly the same 5 or so people demanding that ME be more pure RPG because BW has made good RPGs and therefore, should only make RPGs.

 The ME franchise has been stated by BW to be as much shooter as it is RPG. Therefore people wanting shooter aspect refinements are just as valid as people wanting RPG aspect refinements. I can think of RPG stuff that would work well in ME games, but I also can think of shooter elements that would work well. The sum total is unlike anything else on the market, and for that I applaud BW.

and for the record, if God of War had more focused n the beat 'em up aspect, It would have been compelling enough for me to actually finish.:happy: That's OK though, if I want to more combat I can always play more KoF or GGXX

 

[TheKillerAngel]

Well, shooters are often mindless, mindless in the sense that you don't have to think too much and you're mostly relying on your instincts and reflexes

I don't like the CoD series or Halo (mostly because I have issues with Activi$ion and Micro$oft and other things), but I don't think that's a bad thing. The purpose of games is to entertain, and different games provide fun in different ways. You acknowledge this but having fast reflexes is a unique skill in itself, and I don't think it's fair to disparage it as being totally mindless. I have played people who participate in professional shooter leagues and they are far, far better than people on pub servers. It takes an incredible amount of skill to reach a point where you can headshot an enemy that is moving across the screen and has only appeared a half second ago.

(Some) shooters and fighting games emphasize reflexes and speed more so than other games, but reflexes and speed are a core part of high-level play in many genres. Reflex also integrate themselves with other skills, such as making fast tactical decisions. If you watch professional tournaments for fighting and RTS games, the best players combine reflexes their with creativity.

If you wanted to play a really intelligent and strategic game, I thought of a super realistic RTS. Instead of controlling individual units, you command divisions, regiments, or battalions that appear as rectangles with a symbol and flag on a map. You'd also have to manage things like logistics (supplies for your troops) and constant scouting and reconnaissance would be essential. It would be real time, but combat would depend much more on things like position, terrain, and military tactics as opposed to micromanagement. There would be no "economy" in the traditional sense - you can only use the units you start with, though you may occasionally receive reinforcements. There is no "mining" or "production" of units.

I would probably enjoy a game like that, but a ton of people would find it super boring.

Modifié par TheKillerAngel, 23 août 2010 - 08:32 .