145 réponses à ce sujet

[ebola9717]

Mikko Kinnunen wrote...

Typically once a dev team gets into the third installment of any franchise, you must assume they've gotten at least a little better at making the said type of game

Exactly. And I think maybe your memory is a little fuzzy, because every series you mentioned (except Killzone) has only had two years in between each game. This is nothing out of the ordinary.

[Arandomindividual]

underhill1990 wrote...

EA wants more money money money

In the context of Mass Effect, players want more ME ME ME these days, so it works out fine.

[Gatt9]

Moondoggie wrote...

Johnsen1972 wrote...

moneycashgeorge wrote...

 ME3, Resistance 3, Killzone 3, Uncharted 3. All of these games are coming out really fast after their predecessor. I mean ME2 came out THIS YEAR and its sequel is already being announced. What does this mean for ME3, and what does is mean for the game industry?

Are publishers shortening development cycles? Are they copying the CoD model of repetitive 2 year development?
Does this mean that we're going to see less changes in new franchise installments? Is ME2 going to be gameplay identical to ME3?

It's true, the publishers wants to make money as much and as fast as possible. In this case it's EA who pressures their studios to shorten the development cycles. They want money.
When EA bought the company that owned Bioware a few years ago, I was really worried that Bioware would be closed after a few years like many other studios EA bought and closed.
But in case of Bioware, so right now Im not worried anymore. Biowares bosses have a good stand against EA, because Bioware produces successful quality games. I dont think EA can force Bioware to bring out a game thats not "ready".

And for ME3. You can basically redo all the good things they already developed, and fix a few things people didnt like. All they have to do is to write an awesome story and hire lots of good actors
The graphics will be the same, basically an improved  unreal 3 engine. The gameplay will be basically the same too.

So producing ME3 in about 2 years is realistic.

Have trust in Bioware, everything will go well.

You have zero proof for that. Why is it EA's fault if there is anything wrong with the game but if the game is great people will praise Bioware? I know full well when the early release glitches show up people will slam EA "it was release too early they forced Bioware to release it too quick!"  Why you felt Bioware would be shut down i do not know. Do you assume EA shuts down it's profitable developers?

I guess it's the "cool" thing for gamers to hate on EA and blame them for everything but i'd rarther EA have the reigns than the previous people who were publishing for Bioware. EA has the financial clout and ability to back Bioware that is needed for a game that has grown as fast as Mass Effect and a company developing as quick as Bioware has. The bigger they get the more demands that are made for their games. And the cosumer demand needs to be met by financial support.

Profit has meant that EA has needed to support Bioware more in terms of what kind of budget they need to develop a game. I'm sure Mass Effect 3 will be even bigger than Mass Effect 2 because of this. It has to be because we demand it and EA knows to satisfy customer demand they need to put thier money where their mouth is.

Actually there's plenty of proof.  Decades of it.  EA's consistently shutdown studios after running them into the ground,  Bullfrog,  Westwood,  demanding specific types of games be made.  They even shut down ridiculously profitable studios like Origins (Ultima, Wing Commander) because they decided that all games from that point onwards should be MMO's.  TBH,  EA wouldn't even be around today if they hadn't obtained sole rights to the NFL series.

It's no coincidence that EA aquires Bioware and suddenly Mass Effect goes from being an RPG to a really bad shooter,  and then Dragon Ages gets the same treatment.

EA's goal isn't to support what Bioware thinks makes a great game,  Bioware didn't suddenly shift from being an RPG studio to a crappy-shooter studio because they wanted to.  EA takes over,  suddenly Bioware's turning out half-baked ripoff's.  EA's goal is to make money,  they do it buy running their subsidiaries into the ground.  Bullfrog,  Orgiins,  Westwood,  Maxis,  and soon Bioware,  it's a decades long trend.

Modifié par Gatt9, 13 décembre 2010 - 06:40 .

[Terror_K]

Bennyjammin79 wrote...

Gatt9 wrote...
It's no coincidence that EA aquires Bioware and suddenly Mass Effect goes from being an RPG to a really bad shooter,  and then Dragon Ages gets the same treatment.

Actually millions of people like the game and the sh!tload of awards it's won say it's not a crappy shooter. So in the immortal words of Shaft: Up yours, baby.

That just proves that it appeals to the masses more than anything. You just gave another example of we who are dissatisfied saying "ME2 was dumbed down to appeal to the mainstream masses!" and you defending it ironically by saying "No it wasn't! ME2 was massively popular!"

Also, since when have "crappy shooters" never won awards? I'm pretty sure the Halo series and Modern Warfare 2 have had a few.

[NvVanity]

Terror_K wrote...

Bennyjammin79 wrote...

Gatt9 wrote...
It's no coincidence that EA aquires Bioware and suddenly Mass Effect goes from being an RPG to a really bad shooter,  and then Dragon Ages gets the same treatment.

Actually millions of people like the game and the sh!tload of awards it's won say it's not a crappy shooter. So in the immortal words of Shaft: Up yours, baby.

That just proves that it appeals to the masses more than anything. You just gave another example of we who are dissatisfied saying "ME2 was dumbed down to appeal to the mainstream masses!" and you defending it ironically by saying "No it wasn't! ME2 was massively popular!"

Also, since when have "crappy shooters" never won awards? I'm pretty sure the Halo series and Modern Warfare 2 have had a few.

Don't be silly. If the game industry had high standards for ratings then the majority of games out there would have low scores.

Personal Opinion: Nothing wrong with making an RPG more streamlined to appeal to a wider audience, just don't streamline it too much.

[Gleym]

In a word: Money. Money always takes prevalence over taking the time and effort to produce a good, long, quality game.

[Zurcior]

Terror_K wrote...

Bennyjammin79 wrote...

Gatt9 wrote...
It's no coincidence that EA aquires Bioware and suddenly Mass Effect goes from being an RPG to a really bad shooter,  and then Dragon Ages gets the same treatment.

Actually millions of people like the game and the sh!tload of awards it's won say it's not a crappy shooter. So in the immortal words of Shaft: Up yours, baby.

That just proves that it appeals to the masses more than anything. You just gave another example of we who are dissatisfied saying "ME2 was dumbed down to appeal to the mainstream masses!" and you defending it ironically by saying "No it wasn't! ME2 was massively popular!"

Also, since when have "crappy shooters" never won awards? I'm pretty sure the Halo series and Modern Warfare 2 have had a few.

 "appeals to the masses"

 Since when is something being liked by a lot of people a bad thing?

[Terror_K]

Zurcior wrote...

 "appeals to the masses"

Since when is something being liked by a lot of people a bad thing?

Since when most of those people want simple, action-oriented titles completely lacking in complexity or depth because such things confuse and bore them. Since gaming became less focussed on the AD&D audience and more focussed on the ADD one. Since it's so radically shifted the direction the gaming industry has taken to the point where everybody is producing the same brown hybrid mush as everybody else in an attempt to merely find that perfect balance in order to make profit rather than to actually make good, well-defined games because they can see the way the wind is blowing and they've got the scent of money wafting towards Bungie, Epic and Activision carried by Halo, Gears of War and CoD.

Since then.

[X-JIDE]

It’s quite understandable that this time around they’ve gotten used to the unreal engine all from ME1 to ME2.
Also they now have more staff members from the PS3 team port side so I guess the workload has been eased a bit, for all the Bioware staff. Plus the research from ME2 players helped them get a clear view on what to focus on the next sequel.

If they feel like they can make next year’s deadline without any hitches then good for them.

[Zurcior]

Terror_K wrote...

Zurcior wrote...

 "appeals to the masses"

Since when is something being liked by a lot of people a bad thing?

Since when most of those people want simple, action-oriented titles completely lacking in complexity or depth because such things confuse and bore them. Since gaming became less focussed on the AD&D audience and more focussed on the ADD one. Since it's so radically shifted the direction the gaming industry has taken to the point where everybody is producing the same brown hybrid mush as everybody else in an attempt to merely find that perfect balance in order to make profit rather than to actually make good, well-defined games because they can see the way the wind is blowing and they've got the scent of money wafting towards Bungie, Epic and Activision carried by Halo, Gears of War and CoD.

Since then.

 
 All I have to say to that tired old arguement is this:

[Doodly_Coopens]

Its coming out holiday 2011. So about 2 years. Thats not that fast if you ask me.

[Marsbergen]

2 years isn't that fast anymore, but 2 years was pretty fast 15 years ago. Games back then weren't guaranteed sequels, and if they did manage to sell well enough to warrant a true sequel, 3 years minimum.

Unless nowadays, developers just choose to announce their games later in development.

Modifié par Marsbergen, 14 décembre 2010 - 12:31 .

[Philhart]

All sequels are being pushed out early due to world ending events in 2012.

 (FACT) Bioware only planned on making two Mass Effect games. Bioware discovered they were in danger of being a couple million short to finish their spaceship to escape from a doomed Earth due to incorrect calculations, so they decided to pop out a new game insuring funding for their spaceship will be complete.

[Philhart]

Bennyjammin79 wrote...

Terror_K wrote...
[Since when most of those people want simple, action-oriented titles completely lacking in complexity or depth because such things confuse and bore them. Since gaming became less focussed on the AD&D audience and more focussed on the ADD one. Since it's so radically shifted the direction the gaming industry has taken to the point where everybody is producing the same brown hybrid mush as everybody else in an attempt to merely find that perfect balance in order to make profit rather than to actually make good, well-defined games because they can see the way the wind is blowing and they've got the scent of money wafting towards Bungie, Epic and Activision carried by Halo, Gears of War and CoD.

Since then.

I respect your opinion but every now and you need to be reminded to get off your high horse.

First: ME2 is far from "simple". It's just not as complicated as YOU would've liked. Just because people don't want to slog through stats and inventory junk doesn't mean they get bored or confused. You and other RPG elitists who continue to try to come off as more highbrow than other gamers is a very old tune. Seriously, the horse is dead; stop beating it. Times are changing and you can either change with them or be left behind. If you are truly as above the common denominator as you like to portray yourself; please have the dignity to die quietly if you choose the latter.

Second: Bioware is a business. EA is a business. Trying to appease a few diehards as opposed to a wider audience is bad business. Sadly it's because of this ME3 could likely have multiplayer. Do I like it? Hell no. Can I change it? Hell no. For better or worse this just how it is, which leaves us with the option to complain or just move on. Are you going to put your money where your mouth is and act like the classy, more evolved, more intelligent and sophisticated person who you claim to be? Or are you going to b!tch and moan?

Indeed a fact, but not as factual as my fact.

[Chaos Gate]

Bennyjammin79 wrote...

Terror_K wrote...
[Since when most of those people want simple, action-oriented titles completely lacking in complexity or depth because such things confuse and bore them. Since gaming became less focussed on the AD&D audience and more focussed on the ADD one. Since it's so radically shifted the direction the gaming industry has taken to the point where everybody is producing the same brown hybrid mush as everybody else in an attempt to merely find that perfect balance in order to make profit rather than to actually make good, well-defined games because they can see the way the wind is blowing and they've got the scent of money wafting towards Bungie, Epic and Activision carried by Halo, Gears of War and CoD.

Since then.

I respect your opinion but every now and you need to be reminded to get off your high horse.

First: ME2 is far from "simple". It's just not as complicated as YOU would've liked. Just because people don't want to slog through stats and inventory junk doesn't mean they get bored or confused. You and other RPG elitists who continue to try to come off as more highbrow than other gamers is a very old tune. Seriously, the horse is dead; stop beating it. Times are changing and you can either change with them or be left behind. If you are truly as above the common denominator as you like to portray yourself; please have the dignity to die quietly if you choose the latter.

Second: Bioware is a business. EA is a business. Trying to appease a few diehards as opposed to a wider audience is bad business. Sadly it's because of this ME3 could likely have multiplayer. Do I like it? Hell no. Can I change it? Hell no. For better or worse this just how it is, which leaves us with the option to complain or just move on. Are you going to put your money where your mouth is and act like the classy, more evolved, more intelligent and sophisticated person who you claim to be? Or are you going to b!tch and moan?

Your hypocrisy is staggering. To accuse someone of being an elitist one moment, and then to take an authoritarian tone and tell them to "get with the times or be left behind" the very next moment is quite the double standard.

To even suggest that Mass Effect 2 was actually deep, actually anything more then a poor man's Gears Of War clone, is quite laughable. Anyone over the age of 12 can see how shallow the game is. No story whatsoever, barely any linkages from the first game to the second, and almost all RPG elements removed. Instead we get an overly linear experience with uninteresting characters, a universe that feels far less expansive, less options to choose from in regards to how to tackle individual situations, less skills, relationships that felt comical and unrealistic, an extremely limited number of primitive sidequests, and easily the worst, most tedious subgame ever in planet scanning.

The first Mass Effect clearly intended to be an artful RPG/action hybrid, so when the sequel was a heavily disembowelled offering, it was a slap in the face to many die hard fans. A cursory glance across the internet will show you that alot of people were very dissatisfied with ME2, and it's not hard to see why.

[Philhart]

I am not dissatisfied with ME2, does that make me stupid?

Modifié par Philhart, 14 décembre 2010 - 02:17 .

[MJRick]

Chaos Gate wrote...

Bennyjammin79 wrote...

Terror_K wrote...
[Since when most of those people want simple, action-oriented titles completely lacking in complexity or depth because such things confuse and bore them. Since gaming became less focussed on the AD&D audience and more focussed on the ADD one. Since it's so radically shifted the direction the gaming industry has taken to the point where everybody is producing the same brown hybrid mush as everybody else in an attempt to merely find that perfect balance in order to make profit rather than to actually make good, well-defined games because they can see the way the wind is blowing and they've got the scent of money wafting towards Bungie, Epic and Activision carried by Halo, Gears of War and CoD.

Since then.

I respect your opinion but every now and you need to be reminded to get off your high horse.

First: ME2 is far from "simple". It's just not as complicated as YOU would've liked. Just because people don't want to slog through stats and inventory junk doesn't mean they get bored or confused. You and other RPG elitists who continue to try to come off as more highbrow than other gamers is a very old tune. Seriously, the horse is dead; stop beating it. Times are changing and you can either change with them or be left behind. If you are truly as above the common denominator as you like to portray yourself; please have the dignity to die quietly if you choose the latter.

Second: Bioware is a business. EA is a business. Trying to appease a few diehards as opposed to a wider audience is bad business. Sadly it's because of this ME3 could likely have multiplayer. Do I like it? Hell no. Can I change it? Hell no. For better or worse this just how it is, which leaves us with the option to complain or just move on. Are you going to put your money where your mouth is and act like the classy, more evolved, more intelligent and sophisticated person who you claim to be? Or are you going to b!tch and moan?

Your hypocrisy is staggering. To accuse someone of being an elitist one moment, and then to take an authoritarian tone and tell them to "get with the times or be left behind" the very next moment is quite the double standard.

To even suggest that Mass Effect 2 was actually deep, actually anything more then a poor man's Gears Of War clone, is quite laughable. Anyone over the age of 12 can see how shallow the game is. No story whatsoever, barely any linkages from the first game to the second, and almost all RPG elements removed. Instead we get an overly linear experience with uninteresting characters, a universe that feels far less expansive, less options to choose from in regards to how to tackle individual situations, less skills, relationships that felt comical and unrealistic, an extremely limited number of primitive sidequests, and easily the worst, most tedious subgame ever in planet scanning.

The first Mass Effect clearly intended to be an artful RPG/action hybrid, so when the sequel was a heavily disembowelled offering, it was a slap in the face to many die hard fans. A cursory glance across the internet will show you that alot of people were very dissatisfied with ME2, and it's not hard to see why.

Thats just your opinion stop trying to throw it around like it's fact, I like Mass Effect 2 more then the first i like it's story more but thats my opinion.

[M8DMAN]

Games development has evolved over the last 10 years. Now adays a game can be developed in a relatively short amount of time compared to the games of the last Generation.

[Sean]

Mikko Kinnunen wrote...

Typically once a dev team gets into the third installment of any franchise, you must assume they've gotten at least a little better at making the said type of game

There are a lot of games where the sequels are crap compared to the original and also some other games even when the first sequel comes out and is bad then they make another thats even worse

Modifié par RX_Sean_XI, 14 décembre 2010 - 02:50 .

[Terror_K]

I've known for a while now that the term "elitist" is most often thrown around by the hypocritical and ignorant, and that it's just not worth discussing things with these people. Especially when they have things so incredibly wrong in their assumptions and label anybody who complains so inaccurately. If you, Bennyjammin79, really did respect my opinion you'd actually know what it was. You don't, so you can't, and your post clearly shows a far greater degree of arrogance than mine did.

[shinobi602]

RX_Sean_XI wrote...

Mikko Kinnunen wrote...

Typically once a dev team gets into the third installment of any franchise, you must assume they've gotten at least a little better at making the said type of game

There are a lot of games where the sequels are crap compared to the original and also some other games even when the first sequel comes out and is bad then they make another thats even worse

That's why he said typically. If the developer is competent (i.e like Bioware), it won't be crap.