170 réponses à ce sujet

[Terror_K]

Jebel Krong wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

What about people who stay constructive but also criticise almost every aspect of the game? I'd personally see myself in that particular category. The amount that's criticised shouldn't determine the validity of the issue(s), the manner in which it's done and the reasoning behind it should.

you don't because you rarely highlight any good points about the sequel - oh yes apart from your review. 

Terror_K wrote...

So, I guess I'll say "sorry" for that which I jumped to conclusions on and was entirely wrong about, and that I'll at least try to not be as judgmental in the first place from now on. But I'll also add this: please don't Mass Effect 3 more of a shooter and less of an RPG even moreso. Please find that balance and listen to the aspects that some fans felt lacking in ME2.

i could criticise both games all day long, but i wouldn't conveniently forget all the good things if i were to do so...

The thing is, I wrote that about a week after the game came out, and since then I've played it through more and at the same time found it grew very old very fast. The more you play, you more you realise how little the "choices and consequences" stuff actually matters and the more you realise how tedious the basic gameplay is, how generic it is and how little there is with regards to builds and how horribly broken the upgrade system is. The game was still fresh when I wrote that, but not so much now, and beyond when new content comes out I find it very hard to play ME2 again. ME1 on the other hand I could still easily play and be very happy with. At the moment I'm playing Fallout: New Vegas, and liking it a lot, and all it's doing is reminding me how good an RPG with shooter-based combat can be without the RPG elements all watered down. Will I feel the same in a few weeks or even a months time? I don't know... but New Vegas definitely has less flaws right from the get-go. They're different styles overall, but New Vegas is a modern styled game that manages to stick to its roots far better than ME2 did.

That's not to say that ME2 doesn't have positive points, but the negative ones just drag them down, and when there's already what I consider an overabundance of praise aimed at the game I feel the voice of every displeased person needs to be heard by BioWare. Praising will only serve to give us more of the same with ME3, and that's not what I want. And quite frankly almost every aspect is flawed in some way that I feel is bad design or bad implementation or simply annoying. ME1 never truly annoyed me with its flaws, but ME2 is just riddled with things I really get irritated by all over the show. For all its mistakes ME1 never suffered from what I'd call "WTF?! Moments" (with the possible exception of unsorted and ungrouped inventory) either, while ME2 has at least half a dozen really bad ones that just make me go "Why would you even consider this good, let alone actually put this in the game?!! This is so ****ing stupid it boggles the mind!"

It's hard to praise a game when almost every time it does do something well there's some kind of "but..." attached to the end of it. Beyond interrupts, voice-acting quality and graphical improvements I can't really think of anything that's just wholy good without some bad aspect attached to it. Even the graphical improvements have a tag of "but they've cost us large, epic areas in the process that --when combined with other elements-- make the universe feel small"

Also, keep in mind I generally thought the game was going to be a lot worse than it actually turned out to be. I thought it was going to be abysmally bad judging from the previews.

Modifié par Terror_K, 27 octobre 2010 - 02:08 .

[mopotter]

FieryPhoenix7 wrote...

@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.

My thing is I think every game should be a stand alone game with a definite beginning and ending.  But i would like the stories to be connected someway.  I never want to play a game that has a cliffhanger ending that you will have to wait 2 years to finish.   It's bad enough with a movie, but I like to replay games and replaying one with a cliffhanger ending would suck.  

[Jebel Krong]

Terror_K wrote...

Jebel Krong wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

What about people who stay constructive but also criticise almost every aspect of the game? I'd personally see myself in that particular category. The amount that's criticised shouldn't determine the validity of the issue(s), the manner in which it's done and the reasoning behind it should.

you don't because you rarely highlight any good points about the sequel - oh yes apart from your review. 

Terror_K wrote...

So, I guess I'll say "sorry" for that which I jumped to conclusions on and was entirely wrong about, and that I'll at least try to not be as judgmental in the first place from now on. But I'll also add this: please don't Mass Effect 3 more of a shooter and less of an RPG even moreso. Please find that balance and listen to the aspects that some fans felt lacking in ME2.

i could criticise both games all day long, but i wouldn't conveniently forget all the good things if i were to do so...

The thing is, I wrote that about a week after the game came out, and since then I've played it through more and at the same time found it grew very old very fast. The more you play, you more you realise how little the "choices and consequences" stuff actually matters and the more you realise how tedious the basic gameplay is, how generic it is and how little there is with regards to builds and how horribly broken the upgrade system is. The game was still fresh when I wrote that, but not so much now, and beyond when new content comes out I find it very hard to play ME2 again. ME1 on the other hand I could still easily play and be very happy with. At the moment I'm playing Fallout: New Vegas, and liking it a lot, and all it's doing is reminding me how good an RPG with shooter-based combat can be without the RPG elements all watered down. Will I feel the same in a few weeks or even a months time? I don't know... but New Vegas definitely has less flaws right from the get-go. They're different styles overall, but New Vegas is a modern styled game that manages to stick to its roots far better than ME2 did.

That's not to say that ME2 doesn't have positive points, but the negative ones just drag them down, and when there's already what I consider an overabundance of praise aimed at the game I feel the voice of every displeased person needs to be heard by BioWare. Praising will only serve to give us more of the same with ME3, and that's not what I want. And quite frankly almost every aspect is flawed in some way that I feel is bad design or bad implementation or simply annoying. ME1 never truly annoyed me with its flaws, but ME2 is just riddled with things I really get irritated by all over the show. For all its mistakes ME1 never suffered from what I'd call "WTF?! Moments" (with the possible exception of unsorted and ungrouped inventory) either, while ME2 has at least half a dozen really bad ones that just make me go "Why would you even consider this good, let alone actually put this in the game?!! This is so ****ing stupid it boggles the mind!"

It's hard to praise a game when almost every time it does do something well there's some kind of "but..." attached to the end of it. Beyond interrupts, voice-acting quality and graphical improvements I can't really think of anything that's just wholy good without some bad aspect attached to it. Even the graphical improvements have a tag of "but they've cost us large, epic areas in the process that --when combined with other elements-- make the universe feel small"

Also, keep in mind I generally thought the game was going to be a lot worse than it actually turned out to be. I thought it was going to be abysmally bad judging from the previews.

i disagree. and so, for a brief time, did you.


btw my friends are playing fallout: NV, and apart from the game-crashing bugs every 5 minutes, they are all complaining that it's far too hard, especially if you go off-the-beaten-track, and mostly just recycled bits from F3 and it's DLC.

Modifié par Jebel Krong, 27 octobre 2010 - 02:11 .

[Nightwriter]

Terror_K wrote...

Also, keep in mind I generally thought the game was going to be a lot worse than it actually turned out to be. I thought it was going to be abysmally bad judging from the previews.

I thought the game was going to be outstanding judging from the previews.

[lazuli]

Nightwriter wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

Also, keep in mind I generally thought the game was going to be a lot worse than it actually turned out to be. I thought it was going to be abysmally bad judging from the previews.

I thought the game was going to be outstanding judging from the previews.

And it was, to the vast majority of players, based off of review scores and my own personal experiences.  If you can't see how ME2 is far and away a completely and utterly better game than ME1, even in terms of plot, then you're probably in the minority.

[Killjoy Cutter]

Nightwriter wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

mopotter wrote...
Me too.  I enjoy playing ME2 it's fun, but I wish they had, somewhere in the game, shown us what this had to do with the reaper invasion.  

This is a comment that comes up on a semi-regular basis, and I don't get it.  I really don't.

The Collectors were a direct agent of the Reapers and under the control of one of them, who went by the name of Harbinger.  What they were doing was obviously part of the Reapers' plans.  I would hope that we'll find out in more detail why they were turning tens of thousands of humans into a larval Reaper when we get ME3, but we have a pretty good idea already.

I'll tell you why we say it.

Because battling the Collectors doesn't make you feel like you're battling the Reapers.

That's not the same thing, though. 

[Habelo]

´But what if i play it, then after i have played it. Realised i didnt like it?



**** THE UNIVERSE FALLS APART LOGICALL FLAW IN OP'S ARGUMENT

SADFJAKSDFsdkfaäödf---asd-d---sadf.a....s....nooo..o

[Killjoy Cutter]

lazuli wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

Also, keep in mind I generally thought the game was going to be a lot worse than it actually turned out to be. I thought it was going to be abysmally bad judging from the previews.

I thought the game was going to be outstanding judging from the previews.

And it was, to the vast majority of players, based off of review scores and my own personal experiences.  If you can't see how ME2 is far and away a completely and utterly better game than ME1, even in terms of plot, then you're probably in the minority.

Which implies that they're right by being more numerous ("If you can't see how...").  Which is just... wrong.  

[Nightwriter]

lazuli wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

Also, keep in mind I generally thought the game was going to be a lot worse than it actually turned out to be. I thought it was going to be abysmally bad judging from the previews.

I thought the game was going to be outstanding judging from the previews.

And it was, to the vast majority of players, based off of review scores and my own personal experiences.  If you can't see how ME2 is far and away a completely and utterly better game than ME1, even in terms of plot, then you're probably in the minority.

Overall? Maybe. On the forums? I think not. And the forums > casual gamers.

"Your disappointment is in the minority" isn't such a sensational statement to make because most gamers don't care, don't put much time and attention into a game, have a passing interest at most and are easily pleased by fireworks and pretty lights.

You can say individual parts of ME2 were outstanding, mos def, but I don't feel you can say it about the whole game, no. Just to be fair, you couldn't really say it about ME1 either.

[Killjoy Cutter]

wulf3n wrote...

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.

That's not far from the difference I felt between the two games. 

[Nightwriter]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

mopotter wrote...
Me too.  I enjoy playing ME2 it's fun, but I wish they had, somewhere in the game, shown us what this had to do with the reaper invasion.  

This is a comment that comes up on a semi-regular basis, and I don't get it.  I really don't.

The Collectors were a direct agent of the Reapers and under the control of one of them, who went by the name of Harbinger.  What they were doing was obviously part of the Reapers' plans.  I would hope that we'll find out in more detail why they were turning tens of thousands of humans into a larval Reaper when we get ME3, but we have a pretty good idea already.

I'll tell you why we say it.

Because battling the Collectors doesn't make you feel like you're battling the Reapers.

That's not the same thing, though. 

To some extent I think it does, though I generally agree with you.

We don't really understand the Reaper/Collector connection until we see the giant human Reaper, and when we see the giant human Reaper we don't know what it's for, so we feel like we don't know what it has to do with the Reaper invasion.

[Jebel Krong]

Nightwriter wrote...

Overall? Maybe. On the forums? I think not. And the forums > casual gamers.

"Your disappointment is in the minority" isn't such a sensational statement to make because most gamers don't care, don't put much time and attention into a game, have a passing interest at most and are easily pleased by fireworks and pretty lights.

You can say individual parts of ME2 were outstanding, mos def, but I don't feel you can say it about the whole game, no. Just to be fair, you couldn't really say it about ME1 either.

woah woah hold on there. firstly: on the forums? - you're still the minority  - as usual these days a vocal and persistent one, but still that.

secondly: no-one's opinion is better than anyone else's: "casual" or not. they could be joe bloggs who just played his first computer game ever and his opinion would be as justified and valid as yours. in fact harcore fans as a minority can be detrimental in as much as they do bias developers who are swayed by them: gears of war 2 multiplayer being a complete mess being a prime example.

[lazuli]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...
Which implies that they're right by being more numerous ("If you can't see how...").  Which is just... wrong.  

Being right by being more numerous is not "just... wrong" when you consider that Bioware has to make a profit.  To address one of the questions in the original post, I sincerely hope they don't listen to the forums when things like these come up:

• Bring back the inventory!
• Bring back the MAKO and world exploration!
• Bring back the seamless world!
• Bring back villains we can't understand!
• Bring back superpowered Biotics!
• Get rid of defenses!
• Bring back unlimited ammo!

ME2 is not perfect, but it's a hell of a lot closer to perfection than ME1 ever was.  ME2 is a masterpiece of gameplay and it does something new with its plot and pacing.  I hope ME3 improves further on this, rather than regressing to ME1.  I'm paraphrasing, but I believe a developer said that they weren't going to reinvent the wheel for ME3.  Take that for what you will.

[Nightwriter]

The forums are where BioWare goes to get feedback. So yes, they're a bit important.

I know you like to say we're in the minority, but I think the truth is that ME2's story is one of BioWare's weakest (which is still not that bad considering their record) and even if 100 billion people said otherwise I don't think it would make them right.

What ISN'T true is that ME2 is condemned or totally ruined because of the weak story. It was still a good game with fantastic experiences, and I think ME2 supporters defend the game more for that reason than for some love of the story. Most people I talk to - even ardent ME2 supporters - will admit the story itself was lacking.

[cachx]

Nightwriter wrote...
My problem is not that none of them have children abducted by the
Collectors or something, it's that each character is thrown at you so
quickly and given so little attention it makes them not feel like people.
People
have motivations, they have lives, they have opinions, they don't just
say, "Oh, suicide mission? Kay let me get my things."

This could merit its own thread, maybe... I don't have time to make a full list. Most make sense, a couple do not. I can question Tali and Wrex motives for joining you in ME1 as well.

but I definitely got the impression ME2 was more mindless.

I don't really believe that more intense = mindless. The same way I don't believe that streamlining = dumbed down.

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

Has a aspiring game programmer/ designer I really loved this presentation, specially the "no sacred cows"  and "forget labels" approach, I happen to think that the now decade-old RPG conventions needed a good shake and a slap or two. People also get really hung-up on trying to label a game as one thing or the other and quickly dispense judgement according to it.

Whether you think is was deep or not... The guys on the gameplay forums can explain it much better than I can.

The fact that I can effectively play ME2 without pausing if I wanted to was a huge step forward, on the other hand I kinda miss stats but is not a game breaker thing, just a preference.

[lazuli]

Nightwriter wrote...
Overall? Maybe. On the forums? I think not. And the forums > casual gamers.

"Your disappointment is in the minority" isn't such a sensational statement to make because most gamers don't care, don't put much time and attention into a game, have a passing interest at most and are easily pleased by fireworks and pretty lights.

You can say individual parts of ME2 were outstanding, mos def, but I don't feel you can say it about the whole game, no. Just to be fair, you couldn't really say it about ME1 either.

And here's the false sense of entitlement I was talking about when I first popped into this thread.  Anyone with spare time can post on the forums.  That does not give you the right to shape the game.

[Jebel Krong]

lazuli wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...
Which implies that they're right by being more numerous ("If you can't see how...").  Which is just... wrong.  

Being right by being more numerous is not "just... wrong" when you consider that Bioware has to make a profit.  To address one of the questions in the original post, I sincerely hope they don't listen to the forums when things like these come up:

• Bring back the inventory!
• Bring back the MAKO and world exploration!
• Bring back the seamless world!
• Bring back villains we can't understand!
• Bring back superpowered Biotics!
• Get rid of defenses!
• Bring back unlimited ammo!

ME2 is not perfect, but it's a hell of a lot closer to perfection than ME1 ever was.  ME2 is a masterpiece of gameplay and it does something new with its plot and pacing.  I hope ME3 improves further on this, rather than regressing to ME1.  I'm paraphrasing, but I believe a developer said that they weren't going to reinvent the wheel for ME3.  Take that for what you will.

[*]Bring back the inventory! not in me1 format, but most people would like something a little more complex - mods, for example to differentiate their weapons/playstyles.

[*]Bring back the MAKO and world exploration! that was better than planet scanning, they just need to differentiate the worlds and make them as unique as overlord's was.

[*]Bring back the seamless world! if you meant big hubs with awful loading pauses or interminable and unrepresentative elevator rides, then no.

[*]Bring back villains we can't understand! when did this happen?

[*]Bring back superpowered Biotics! this happened only in cut-scenes and was true of both games, gameplay wise they seem fine, though less glitchy in me2.

[*]Get rid of defenses! what?

[*]Bring back unlimited ammo! i really like this aspect of me1, there are many ways to increase difficulty other than by hobbling certain classes arbitrarily and making you run around battlefields collecting "ammo" during firefights - for a start you can have more - and more intelligent - enemies.

Modifié par Jebel Krong, 27 octobre 2010 - 03:09 .

[Killjoy Cutter]

lazuli wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...
Which implies that they're right by being more numerous ("If you can't see how...").  Which is just... wrong.  

Being right by being more numerous is not "just... wrong" when you consider that Bioware has to make a profit.  To address one of the questions in the original post, I sincerely hope they don't listen to the forums when things like these come up:

• Bring back the inventory!
• Bring back the MAKO and world exploration!
  
• Bring back the seamless world!
  
• Bring back villains we can't understand!
  
• Bring back superpowered Biotics!
  
• Get rid of defenses!
  
• Bring back unlimited ammo!

ME2 is not perfect, but it's a hell of a lot closer to perfection than ME1 ever was.  ME2 is a masterpiece of gameplay and it does something new with its plot and pacing.  I hope ME3 improves further on this, rather than regressing to ME1.  I'm paraphrasing, but I believe a developer said that they weren't going to reinvent the wheel for ME3.  Take that for what you will.

Making a profit is something else that doesn't make someone right. 

[mopotter]

Mister Mida wrote...

Well, if people stop criticising, Bioware or other companies think they can shove anything down our throat. So I'll never stop criticising or stop others from doing so.

And being labeled a hater has more to do with the people who put that label on others. For most people, ME2 seems to be the pinnacle of game development and they don't want to hear a sound that is so much different - in fact, the opposite - from theirs. There is nitpicking on both sides, but that's easily recognized.

I also think that the 'ME2 fanboys' use the 'If you didn't like it, don't play it' line just because they can't think of any other way to respond to people's criticisms.

Too true.  I will also point out things, in a loving fashion,  I think they really made (imo) bad decisions on, because I care about the people who are making them and I care about the games they make.  

i've noticed BioWare often has things in their games that people either hate or love with a passion.  usually it's one of the NPC's.  But sometimes it's the story or now, game style/play.

 

[Pacifien]

Re-edit: Oh, nevermind, I'm going with a lock. You many now return to the Disappoinment With Mass Effect 2 thread if you'd like to continue with that specific discussion.

Modifié par Pacifien, 27 octobre 2010 - 03:12 .

[Nightwriter]

lazuli wrote...

And here's the false sense of entitlement I was talking about when I first popped into this thread.  Anyone with spare time can post on the forums.  That does not give you the right to shape the game.

You don't need to go around telling people what they do or do not have the right to do, lazuli, and you shouldn't respond to all critique with hostility. We're all just stating our opinions here, it doesn't have to be as bad as you make out.

But fans do shape BioWare games. I'm sorry, it's fact. I don't shape BioWare games, and you don't shape BioWare games, but fan input does change certain game aspects. I don't pretend I'm entitled to a damn thing but my opinion.