170 réponses à ce sujet

[SimonTheFrog]

Terror_K, you sure its her? I would have thought the general direction is more of a team-effort. Well, of course it was on her table too, but i'd be careful to pinpoint one person... unless you know more than what has been said in interviews.

[Terror_K]

Pocketgb wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...
And I want to know: how seriously does BioWare and the Mass Effect community take those people who were really disappointed with ME2?

You probably could've said the same thing to those disappointed with ME1.

And in this case, if I had to make a guess, I'd say it's "serious".

Much of what they've done for ME2 - for better or worse - has been in response to many fan criticisms raised in response to ME1. I'd expect no different a treatment for ME3.

Except the difference is that BioWare admitted the faults of ME1 after the game and interacted with the fanbase on the boards. Post-ME2's release they're barely here at all beyond announcements, warnings and locking-down topics, and on top of that they seem to be in this world of fantasy where they believe ME2 was perfect and a better game in every respect, no matter what gets said about it.

It's not like they're doing it to 'make deh monies', either. Two things clash against this: 1. They'd do a better job of that if they cut 90% of the dialog and 2. Dragon Age was an awesome success.

1) No, they're trying to have their cake and eat it too. They don't want to completely alienate the existing fanbase while bringing in new ones too by mainstreaming it up. Seems somewhere they forgot that many of the old fans liked ME1 because it's not the generic mainstream stuff that many other games are, and making it more like them is just going to put them off, especially when you not only gear the gameplay more to that style but present it that way as well. As I've said before, ME1 seemed aimed primarily at intelligent 25+ sci-fi fans while ME2 seemed more aimed at the average action-loving teenager.

2) Yes. Yes it was. And yet the sequel is becoming a generic brown hack'n'slash affair with far less customisation that's about a third of the length. So despite Dragon Age being supposedly the more popular game, BioWare have decided it to drag it into the muck of mainstream gaming now too. DAO may have been accused of being a generic fantasy RPG, but it's sequel is becoming an even more generic modern action game.

At this stage, BioWare is vastly running out of respect from be and only seem to be confirming suspicions I've had since before even DAO started its horrible advertising, Dan Tudge left the team and ME2 started being marketed constantly for its combat.

SimonTheFrog wrote...

Terror_K, you sure its her? I would
have thought the general direction is more of a team-effort. Well, of
course it was on her table too, but i'd be careful to pinpoint one
person... unless you know more than what has been said in interviews.

It is admittedly a little speculation, but I base it on the fact she's the lead gameplay designer and thus is in charge of the overall gameplay design, which I thought was bad. On top of this I generally don't like her attitude and way of thinking given many of her comments and her infamous GDC presentation. Out of all the devs she seems to be the one most outspoken and supportive of the whole "simpler is better" approach.

Modifié par Terror_K, 27 octobre 2010 - 02:55 .

[mopotter]

Nightwriter wrote...

Clunky? What was clunky about it?

mopotter, I don't really think you're in the minority about the end choices of DA:O.

 

  It's not not being alone.  

[MassEffect762]

I don't play ME2.

Bioware can listen to the critics(aka fans) and re-evaluate where they disappointed those fans(myself included) or they can do whatever works best for them.

Modifié par MassEffect762, 27 octobre 2010 - 03:14 .

[ScooterPie88]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

I hate ME2, and I'm proud of it.

I love how people who "hate" a game continue to frequent and troll its forums.  If you enjoyed it great keep posting; if you didn't STFU and GTFO and let those of us who did enjoy it continue to do so outside the game.

Also I love everyone knows what Bioware is all about and their motivations and plans and who the audience they're trying to target is.  Since I know no one here (except moderators) work at Bioware I find it amazing how people know this stuff.

Then there are the elitists who say that ME1 was for smart people and ME2 is for stupid teenagers.  The genophage issue in ME2 comes to mind; a morally ambiguous dilemma that makes one think.  That certainly doesn't need to be brought up if as some critics have said, "ME2 just caters to the immature, action loving audience."  I've had ME1 and ME2 from the day they released.  I read all the novels.  I own the Collector's Edition of ME2.  I love the story and universe.  I only completed ME1 twice because it took what seemed like forever to complete all the sidequests and was generally more of a chore to do so.  I have completed ME2 four times and find it much more pleasurable to fully complete.  Let's be honest ME1's story is superb, not necessarily better than ME2 at least IMO, but still good in its own right.  Its mechanics while on par for the day are outdated by today's standards.  For example no location specific damage.  The ability to have unlimited ammo (which I know is part of the lore).  Cookie cutter environments; I mean how many times can you go into the same merc base and kill everything in it.  ME1 was great still is great but let's not pretend it was perfect.  The same goes for ME2 it has bugs to be sure.  But I refuse to agree that ME2 had a weak plot or that it was directed toward the "younger" people.  DId it have certain inconsistences, certainly, but every universe as vast as Mass Effect does.  Star Wars, Star Trek all of 'em.  I have read plenty of Star Wars novels that contradict each other.  Same goes for watching Star Trek.  Hell I played WoW for years and it has TONS of inconsistencies.  Same with the Halo universe.  Unless the entire series is written by a single person every fictional universe has inconsistences and even if it is written by a single person that individual may make mistakes.

/end rant   

Modifié par ScooterPie88, 27 octobre 2010 - 04:35 .

[Pocketgb]

Terror_K wrote...
Except the difference is that BioWare admitted the faults of ME1 after the game and interacted with the fanbase on the boards.

And there isn't a single post in response to a concern? Not a single one? Nothing that the devs have provided to the community to explain their actions?

As unlikely as that is, I don't think they can be blamed. The more popular Bioware becomes, the more rabid the forum turns - hence why the forums become less and less approachable.

Terror_K wrote...
1) *text*

Can't comment on any of that since I'm someone who felt that ME1 was a mainstream cash-out.

That's being too harsh. Yes, I felt that ME1 was more attuned for the 'mainstream', but done good!

Terror_K wrote...
2) Yes. Yes it was.

So you can see where the 'money' is? Because it's definitely not with Mass Effect.

The point is what it highlights, it's that Bioware *doesn't* have to cater to the common-demoninator to be successful. That leads to my belief that Bioware's decisions with ME2 are by choice of design, not guided by bucks.

ScooterPie88 wrote...
I love how people who "hate" a game continue to frequent and troll its forums.  If you enjoyed it great keep posting; if you didn't STFU and GTFO and let those of us who did enjoy it continue to do so outside the game.

I don't think that's what we're trying to promote here, since lack of criticism leads to a blind creation process.

Modifié par Pocketgb, 27 octobre 2010 - 03:49 .

[Pacifien]

Terror_K wrote...
Except the difference is that BioWare admitted the faults of ME1 after the game and interacted with the fanbase on the boards. Post-ME2's release they're barely here at all beyond announcements, warnings and locking-down topics, and on top of that they seem to be in this world of fantasy where they believe ME2 was perfect and a better game in every respect, no matter what gets said about it.

BioWare admitted faults of ME1, interacted with the fanbase on the old boards, and the result was ME2.

Well, obviously, that wasn't their best idea.

[Terror_K]

Pocketgb wrote...

Terror_K wrote...
2) Yes. Yes it was.

So you can see where the 'money' is? Because it's definitely not with Mass Effect.

The
point is what it highlights, it's that Bioware *doesn't* have to cater
to the common-demoninator to be successful. That leads to my belief that
Bioware's decisions with ME2 are by choice of design, not guided by
bucks.

They don't have to cater to them, but they've decided to. ME2 is a clear sign of that, and what's happening with DA2 seems like an even clearer sign of that. I used to admire BioWare because they avoided the same pitfalls many others had fallen into. Now over the past couple of years it seems they've decided to not only stop avoiding them, but to leap headfirst into these pits. They no longer seem like the once-great RPG developer they once were to me. Instead of appealing to the cult gamer, they've got for the every-gamer like everybody else and their games are becoming more and more generic and simple for it. I'm considering cancelling my DA2 pre-order now, I really am. I probably would if I didn't work in a games store and thus returning it isn't as much of an issue if it sucks.

Pacifien wrote...

BioWare admitted faults of ME1, interacted with the fanbase on the old boards, and the result was ME2.

Well, obviously, that wasn't their best idea.

It would have been if they'd actually listened and paid attention rather than just scrapping everything that was criticised and replacing it with the simplest solution possible. Things like the N7 missions, The Hammerhead and loading screens just tell me they entirely missed the point when it came to several main criticisms. It's like they looked at what was criticised but completely avoided the reasons why it was, then came up with the laziest and simplest "solutions" possible in response, which ended up taking away much of what was good with the original elements along with what was bad.

Modifié par Terror_K, 27 octobre 2010 - 03:59 .

[ScooterPie88]

Read my first post 4 before this; it addresses exactly what Terror is talking about.

[Pocketgb]

Pacifien wrote...
BioWare admitted faults of ME1, interacted with the fanbase on the old boards, and the result was ME2.

Well, obviously, that wasn't their best idea.

It's like the Zelda fans: "Windwaker's too cartoony!" "Twilight Princess is too realistic!" The new one is attempting to create a middle ground, except now half the people from each 'crowd' are upset 

Terror_K wrote...
They don't have to cater to them, but they've decided to. ME2 is a clear sign of that, and what's happening with DA2 seems like an even clearer sign of that. I used to admire BioWare because they avoided the same pitfalls many others had fallen into. Now over the past couple of years it seems they've decided to not only stop avoiding them, but to leap headfirst into these pits. They no longer seem like the once-great RPG developer they once were to me. Instead of appealing to the cult gamer, they've got for the every-gamer like everybody else and their games are becoming more and more generic and simple for it. I'm considering cancelling my DA2 pre-order now, I really am. I probably would if I didn't work in a games store and thus returning it isn't as much of an issue if it sucks.

Sadly, still can't comment due to aforementioned views.

Modifié par Pocketgb, 27 octobre 2010 - 04:12 .

[adam_grif]

"If you don't like it don't play it" is a useless non-argument. People criticize the game not because they hate it but because they see it as having failed to live up to its potential. Identifying problems with a work is central to being able to improve upon it. Saying that everything is fine and oppressing all dissenting opinions is counterproductive and breeds stagnation.



Regardless of whether or not you think that Bioware should listen to these people's opinions, they should not be shouted down like they so often are, because they're just opinions and you should learn to deal with it. Hey, if you don't like their posts, don't read them!





Now onto a higher level discussion. The ME series is wedged between two kinds of fans, ones that love hardcore RPGs and the ones that love the heavy shooter focus. This is a difference in opinion on how the game should be, and no amount of discussion with resolve the competing demands of both groups because they come from different places and like different things. Bioware sided with the shooter/casual side of things because it appeals to a wider base of people.



That said, there are many issues people have that are NOT related to this core divide, and Bioware absolutely should listen to them. Most notably, CHARACTERS WEARING ARMOR IN BATTLE PLEASE.

[MrFob]

AntiChri5 wrote...

There are some people who never ever ever say anythin positive at all, and those i have dismissed as haters.
I generally stop listening to anyone who has only good or bad to say about either ME 1 or 2. They both have their strengths, and they both have their flaws.

This pretty much boils it down. I like the "open discussion" thread because in there most people are reasonable. I hope BW is aware of the criticism and takes it into account when making ME3 (so far, judging from DLCs, they do).
I think everyone who is on these forums regularly at least likes the games (why else would you spend your time contemplating the matter). SO yeah, by all means, the discussions are useful and should be continued. But better to keep them in one place, so to keep everyone up to date on the newest arguments and not to bother those who are not interested in the criticism.

[Iakus]

Pocketgb wrote...

Terror_K wrote...
Except the difference is that BioWare admitted the faults of ME1 after the game and interacted with the fanbase on the boards.

And there isn't a single post in response to a concern? Not a single one? Nothing that the devs have provided to the community to explain their actions?

I admit I may be wrong on this, as the boards are a pretty big place.  But no.  I do not recall a single post (not since I've been here anyway) explaining the logic behind, well, anything in ME 2.  Not a single "Things have been happening  behind the scenes that Shepard doesn't know about"  Not one "We have an answer for this, all will be made clear in ME 3"  No "We wanted to try something different here, what did you guys think of that?"  or "We couldn't do as much of this as we'd like due to technical limitations" Not even a "Tell us why you didn't you like ::insert complaint here::" 

Of course, the Disappointment thread goes into great detail on the last part. 

To any Bioware employee assigned to read that and take notes on that thread: : you have my sympathies as well as my (sorta) apology for my part in it 

Now it's entirely their perogative to respond to posts or not.  I personally don't blame them for steering clear of some of the threads, like the disappointment one  (though I think a throwdown between someone like Smudboy and one of the writers would be truly epic)  At the same time silence is, well, silence.  Stuff gets read into it.  Or its lack.

I sometimes think that part of the reason we "haters" are so tenacious is because we can't be 100% certain we're being heard.  So we keep it up to up the odds.

[Pacifien]

adam_grif wrote...
Now onto a higher level discussion. The ME series is wedged between two kinds of fans, ones that love hardcore RPGs and the ones that love the heavy shooter focus. This is a difference in opinion on how the game should be, and no amount of discussion with resolve the competing demands of both groups because they come from different places and like different things. Bioware sided with the shooter/casual side of things because it appeals to a wider base of people.

I actually think that's an oversimplification of the issue. Mass Effect 1 never had the elements of a hardcore RPG. There is so very little lost of its already weak RPG roots in the transition to Mass Effect 2 that it confounds me as to what it's missing that irks people so. Mass Effect 2, on the flip side, is hardly a heavy shooter game. No really, is anyone who played Halo Reach putting Mass Effect 2 in the same league?

I don't play shooters and I don't play Mass Effect casually. And I'm probably deemed by those reading this thread as being on the side of a Mass Effect 2 apologist. But there was much that needed improving in Mass Effect 1 and, while I don't feel that Mass Effect 2 necessarily achieved what I wanted in that regard, I find there was much in the design of Mass Effect 2 that is done well. I enjoyed the game. I play Mass Effect 2 in a manner that I never played Mass Effect 1. And I still play and enjoy Mass Effect 1. There are elements from both games that I feel are necessary for an improved third game.

So what fan am I? Am I drinking the kool-aid or misanthropic doomsayer? I'd like to think I'm neither. I'd like to think that I have sufficiently thought out elements of the two games that get a free pass into Mass Effect 3 and those that the developers should definitely take a closer look at. Or, at least, when I do critique the game, I like to think I've done that.

It's the people who I feel don't do that where it's so very tempting to get dismissive towards them. Then I start wondering is the person trying to be constructive here or do they just like to see their words on the screen.

[Terror_K]

Yeah. The closest thing I got to an actual discussion about ME2's faults with a dev actually happened in the Dragon Age 2 forums... not here. BioWare used to be known for their community interaction, but right now the Mass Effect side of things is next to dead, and has been since ME2's release. It's like they're afraid of coming here or something.

[Fiery Phoenix]

I just wanted to voice my worries as well. When I visit the Dragon Age (1, 2) section, I am outstruck by the amount of developer commentary they get there. And when I return to the Mass Effect section, all I see is a bunch of fans who appear to be chasing a mirage.



That being said, I like to believe they're reading everything and are actively taking notes, but simply don't post and interact -- but we don't know. In any case, I have high hopes that this will change once the ME3 promotion campaign starts sometime next year.

[MajFauxPas]

"If you didn't like it, play it on Hardcore." - Liara

[Iakus]

Pacifien wrote...

I actually think that's an oversimplification of the issue. Mass Effect 1 never had the elements of a hardcore RPG. There is so very little lost of its already weak RPG roots in the transition to Mass Effect 2 that it confounds me as to what it's missing that irks people so. Mass Effect 2, on the flip side, is hardly a heavy shooter game. No really, is anyone who played Halo Reach putting Mass Effect 2 in the same league?

I am of the belief that it is possible to have a game that blends shooter and rpg gameplay effectively.  Some of the discussions here have shaken that belief.  but it remains.  Granted I'm not a shooter player.  Unless my playing Fallout: New Vegas counts for something?

I'm not sure if what I'm missing from ME 2 counts as something a "hardcore rpg player" would want.  But what I missed was a middle third of a trilogy.  Rather than continue the story started in ME 1, ME 2 shoots off in a dozen different directions.  Like an rpg group that decides to put its main campaign on hold while they run through some modules instead.  Granted some of these stories were pretty good, and may impact the Mass Effect universe later, but I failed to see the point of them when the whole story was supposed to be "build a team and get them ready" I won't go any further here since that's more of a "disappointment" thread topic.

 As far as shooter mechanics and gameplay go.  I figure as long as it's consistent, I'll be content.  I don't play Bioware games for combat.  I play them for stories and characters.  Inventory.  No inventory.  Ammo, no ammo.  Mods, in whatever form.  Just pick one and run with it.  I'll figure the rest out.  I have my own preferences, but that's just it:  preferences.  Not game breakers.

[lazuli]

Just because we post on the forums doesn't mean we have a right to shape the game. Some critics really need a slice of humble pie.



I encourage sharing opinions and debating the various aspects of the game. I don't encourage false senses of entitlement.

[Fiery Phoenix]

@Iakus: ME2 basically felt like a giant reboot if you think about it. They quite literally meant it when they said it would be a stand-alone title. You might as well take ME1 and deal with it as a historical event that happened centuries ago, rather than a mere two years ago.

[Pocketgb]

iakus wrote...
I admit I may be wrong on this, as the boards are a pretty big place.  But no.  I do not recall a single post (not since I've been here anyway) explaining the logic behind, well, anything in ME 2.  Not a single "Things have been happening  behind the scenes that Shepard doesn't know about"  Not one "We have an answer for this, all will be made clear in ME 3"  No "We wanted to try something different here, what did you guys think of that?"  or "We couldn't do as much of this as we'd like due to technical limitations" Not even a "Tell us why you didn't you like ::insert complaint here::"

That's why Christina did this.

[Iakus]

Pocketgb wrote...

iakus wrote...
I admit I may be wrong on this, as the boards are a pretty big place.  But no.  I do not recall a single post (not since I've been here anyway) explaining the logic behind, well, anything in ME 2.  Not a single "Things have been happening  behind the scenes that Shepard doesn't know about"  Not one "We have an answer for this, all will be made clear in ME 3"  No "We wanted to try something different here, what did you guys think of that?"  or "We couldn't do as much of this as we'd like due to technical limitations" Not even a "Tell us why you didn't you like ::insert complaint here::"

That's why Christina did this.

A PowerPoint presentation?  Nice, I guess.  But doesn't really answer my own questions.

Modifié par iakus, 27 octobre 2010 - 05:55 .

[wulf3n]

Pocketgb wrote...
That's why Christina did this.

That makes me worried about ME3 now.

All this talk about making it more and more a third person shooter!
It's like they don't even know what made ME1 such a great game, and are turning it into nothing but fan service.

Pacifien wrote...
 Mass Effect 1 never had the elements of a hardcore RPG. There is so very little lost of its already weak RPG roots in the transition to Mass Effect 2 that it confounds me as to what it's missing that irks people so. 

I guess that depends on what your definition of an RPG is. If your a stat junkie, then there probably isn't much difference between ME1 and ME2. but to me its more than that, its about the world your in, can you actually "Role Play" in the game sure ME2 lets you choose dialogue, make decisions, but ME1 was more than that,.
You weren't shuttled to every "combat" location, combat could happen anywhere(immersion). You weren't just clicking spots on a planet when it made a noise, you actually wen't down to the planet, drove around, ran into pirate gangs(immersion). etc.
In shooters, the story drags you from point a to point b, you're really just along for the ride. In ME1 it felt like i was pushing the story, that these events were happening because of what i was doing. ME2 sits somewhere in between, sure i have a bit of freedom, in what order i do things, make some discoveries, but ulitmately im being dragged from combat location, to combat location.

Modifié par wulf3n, 27 octobre 2010 - 06:18 .

[GodWood]

Collider wrote...
I feel like the squad mates (or more generally, the characters) are the story and without them the game/plot would be kind of stupid

I really hate the whole "ME2's characters are the story" thing simply because the characters aren't that particularly fleshed out compared to say one of Bioware's other ecent releases DA:O.
Sure I liked most of them its just they only had about 4 conversations with you and virtually never interacted with one another.

Modifié par GodWood, 27 octobre 2010 - 06:35 .

[Pocketgb]

iakus wrote...
A PowerPoint presentation?  Nice, I guess.  But doesn't really answer my own questions.

Well tough stuff! You aren't a unique little snowflake! Tons of people have tons of questions about thousands of concerns, and very very few get those concerns addressed. The presentation was, as I asked, a response to quite a few commonly expressed issues.

In regards to actual forum responses? While it's largely true - I've seen a few responses in the strategy sections - my own original question asked if there was any response at all to the community, which was what the presentation was.

wulf3n wrote...
All this talk about making it more and more a third person shooter!
It's like they don't even know what made ME1 such a great game, and are turning it into nothing but fan service.

I don't think everyone's going to agree on what made ME1 great

Modifié par Pocketgb, 27 octobre 2010 - 06:45 .