344 réponses à ce sujet

[Dsurian]

Stanley Woo wrote...

It's always going to be about what's best for the game.

Of course, it does mean that we won't be able to please everyone all the time (where have I heard that said before?), but we'll always try to release a product that we think is fun, exciting, and that we can be proud of... unexpected problems notwithstanding. And maybe, just maybe, millions of gamers out there will agree with us.

I can't help but feel that (particularly since EA became your parent) Bioware is turning into another 'jack of all trades' game company, though.  You can't please everyone, sure, yet you start trying so hard and listening to everyone, and the game itself turns into something mediocre for everyone instead of something spectacular for a smaller group of people. 

Jesse Houston wrote...

...All the while living under the constraint that we must produce something that is a 'BioWare Quality' product.

You mean an "EA 'quality' product", right?  I can imagine what would have happened to Baldurs Gate if EA had any say in it...and it doesn't look good...

Modifié par Dsurian, 16 décembre 2010 - 05:14 .

[Terror_K]

Stanley Woo wrote...

You've apparently forgotten about the part of this whole feedback process where we have to take everyone's suggestions and figure out what is and is not going into a game. because it's not just about you and your opinions about what's good or bad. It's that guy's and that girl's and those people's and ours and my friends' and his families' and your nemesis' and her brother's and that girl's father's and that family's auto mechanic's ideas as well.

Yes, of course the RPG lovers are going to want more RPG in their game and shooter fans would like more shooter in their game. but it's not about who complains the loudest or who has the best suggestion or who is "right," whatever that means when it comes to preference, tolerance, and bias in an entertainment product or narrative. It's always going to be about what's best for the game. in some cases, yes, that will mean putting in something the RPG crowd's going to love. In other cases, it's about making the shooter crowd happy. Heck, sometimes it may even be about pleasing the one guy in Moose Jaw who really liked Gianna Parasini! Regardless of who a particular feature or plot or character is designed to please, we have to, as Jesse said, weave all of this goodness into an awesome game, and I think we're going to do that.

Of course, it does mean that we won't be able to please everyone all the time (where have I heard that said before?), but we'll always try to release a product that we think is fun, exciting, and that we can be proud of... unexpected problems notwithstanding. And maybe, just maybe, millions of gamers out there will agree with us.

But better for what kind of game and better for who?

And it seems like in the process of trying to make Mass Effect 2 an "awesome game" you made it too much of a game, and less of a unique experience like the first one was. ME2 just lost that spark that made it special and just feels like the cold product of trying to make the optimum game for the most amount of people rather than feeling like a work of art crafted by love that's meant to be what it's meant to be, whether that result is super popular overall amongst the masses or not. ME1 felt like it was aimed at a particular audience, while ME2 feels far more generic and mainstream like it's aimed too hard at trying to please as many as possible by being too much of a Jack of All Trades and being a Master of None in the process. ME2 feels methodical and cold because of this, as if it's the result of a bunch of things thrown into a "Make Perfect Game" machine rather than something crafted to be something of quality. It's all style over substance and simplicity over depth.

And I really do fail to see how taking away so much depth and customisation and putting far too much on auto-pilot is better for the game. ME1 had faults, I admit that, but ME2 overcompensated for them and removed far too much. The fact that modding is completely gone --a thing that pretty much was never complained about-- and is replaced by such a linear, unsatisfying, overly automated research/upgrade system with no real trade-offs that allows you to easily God-mod everything without any real true customisation alone is not something I'd consider good for any game, RPG or not. There's such a thing as oversimplicity and overautomation and taking the player out of the game and the game out of the game too much, and I feel ME2 crossed that line on all these counts.

The thing is, what type of game are you trying to make here? You say it's about "what's best for the game" but that can purely depend on what type of game you're trying to make. Are you really making an RPG with TPS combat, a half-and-half RPG/TPS shooter or a TPS that's just story-driven? Whatever it is, it'd be nice if once you started to make something you actually stuck with the plan rather than deciding to change things up halfway through the series just to appeal to a greater audience. Because that's what it seems like ME2 did to me. It's not only evident in the style changes, but the overall presentation and style of the game. It's pretty much screams "retooled for our new, younger target demographic."

The reason I loved and admired you guys so much in the past was because you didn't seem to care about all this "popularity and profit over quality" crap. BioWare was the company that always just seemed to be "we make our games the way we want, and we don't care if they're not popular with the mainstream masses." It was a case of you guys basically saying "games made for nerds, by nerds." And now it just seems that lately it's just all about being popular and going for the big audiences and to hell with making electronic works of art if making cold, generic moneymakers is more profitable.

Modifié par Terror_K, 16 décembre 2010 - 08:47 .

[CARL_DF90]

Jesse Houston wrote...

I can tell you with absolute certainty that we listen to our fans Why else would I bother reading and posting on the forums if we didn't? However, everyone does need to remember that while we're listening for great ideas, the art of making great games is taking all those amazing ideas and weaving them into a fantastic storyline that contextually makes sense and is technically feasible given the crazy hard constraints of working on Xbox360, PC and now PS3 at the same time - All the while living under the constraint that we must produce something that is a 'BioWare Quality' product. That's why you're idea may or may not make it into one of our games

Oh, I totally understand and respect that Mr. Houston. I just wish some of the others on this forum got that concept too, but I digress. Some people arn't too keen on logic and reason. 

[Moondoggie]

I'm sure they do take on board how people recieve the games the best way to get better at something is to listen to what people think about it.

They probably have enough sense to know a good idea from a boneheaded idea when it comes to fans though so not every single idea is taken on board.

[Lumikki]

Better game as how game developers defines they game, not as how we players want to see the game. To who, that's good question, I ques for those people who are target customers for the game, defined by game company. Meaning if the player did not like the game at all, you where not target customer.

We players just choose what games to play and give feedback what we liked or not. We don't design games, that is the game companies job. We are just users and we vote with our money.

Meaning we players can suggest what we like and want, but game company does what they want, way they wanted and define what the game really is, not we players.

Modifié par Lumikki, 16 décembre 2010 - 10:30 .

[BiancoAngelo7]

They listen A LOT, and the proof of that is the horrible HORRIBLE decision to take out elevators and decontamination and manually reboarding your ship and replace all that with...wait for it...*takes a deep breath* oh yeah loading screens like any other game.



So yeah , they listen a lot, and while they dont always agree with their fans, the real danger is that sometimes they do. :|

[Captain_Obvious_au]

Good point Bianco. I'm really quite fond of the decontamination and then hearing "CO is aboard, XO Pressely stands relieved"

[Nohvarr]

Terror_K wrote...

BioWare was the company that always just seemed to be "we make our games the way we want, and we don't care if they're not popular with the mainstream masses."

I think you're projecting your own views and biases on Bioware's past actions. They made games their way, for the intended audience. BG 1-TOB targeted a speific set of gamers, while KOTOR targeted another, same with Sonic Chronicles, MDK 2 and Jade Empire. The Mass Effect series seems to be designed for people who want an exciting action/rpg with a strong story whose outcome they can influence, while allowing for signigicant customization of their character. You have gone on record in the past stating that you feel ME would've been fine had they stuck with the Old KOTOR gameplay. So Bioware is stil making the games they want, how they want, it's just that this time it might not be in a manner you want. 

Modifié par Nohvarr, 16 décembre 2010 - 11:23 .

[Terror_K]

I'm actually not so much concerned about them not listening to our ideas so much as them not listening to our constructive criticism of their own ideas (even if quite often said criticism comes complete with an idea or example of how one may improve said weakness).

One of the big differences between the boards here post ME1 and the boards there post ME2 is that afterwards the devs were at least humble enough to admit where their mistakes were and sometimes even asked our opinions on these things and why we felt they were weak and didn't work. With ME2 there just seems to be none of that. Aside from things (until rather recently with the ME3 teaser's debut) being pretty dead on the forums after ME2 came out, there just seems to be either nothing or some semi-smug vague comments that come across as if to say "ME2 was perfect" and hinting that if we have a problem with the game it's not their fault, it's ours.

I'd be a lot less critical and frustrated about my issues with ME2 if the devs actually acknowledged them in some way and at least said, "okay, we admit this could have been done better" or "perhaps this feature could be richer", etc. But I just get the impression that all the devs just seem to think ME2 did no wrong and could do no wrong and that there's nothing worth discussing. Beyond a single comment way back on Christina Norman's GDC presentation about a month after the game came out, there's really been no indication that the criticisms and issues have even been taken to heart.

Nohvarr wrote...

I think you're projecting your own views and biases on Bioware's past actions. They made games their way, for the intended audience. BG 1-TOB targeted a speific set of gamers, while KOTOR targeted another, same with Sonic Chronicles, MDK 2 and Jade Empire. The Mass Effect series seems to be designed for people who want an exciting action/rpg with a strong story whose outcome they can influence, while allowing for signigicant customization of their character. You have gone on record in the past stating that you feel ME would've been fine had they stuck with the Old KOTOR gameplay. So Bioware is stil making the games they want, how they want, it's just that this time it might not be in a manner you want. 

Actually I don't think turn-based combat would have worked with Mass Effect, so that KotOR gameplay comment isn't entirely true.

In either case, I can simply say this: the original Mass Effect was made in a way that was very much the way I wanted. So you'd think that the sequel should therefore also be made very much in the way I wanted too, right?

Also, as I've said before, ME2 isn't necessarily something I would call a "bad game" or something that's "Not for me" as such. I enjoy playing shooters and more action-oriented games with less complexity now and then too. My username is actually the name I use(d) for deathmatches in Unreal Tournament after all. But that's not what I expected from the sequel to Mass Effect after what the first game gave me. That's why I say that ME2 isn't necessarily a bad game, but it is -- I feel-- a bad sequel and a weak RPG.

If BioWare want to make a more action-oriented shooter game then that's fine, they can go ahead. I just don't like that they seem to want to change up the sequel to a game I really loved as more than just a game into something that is just another action-oriented game. ME1 was something more than the sum of its parts and something special... ME2 is just another game along with all the rest out there, and the only reason I really give it any attention at all beyond just playing it now and then is because it's the sequel to Mass Effect 1.

Modifié par Terror_K, 16 décembre 2010 - 11:41 .

[adam_grif]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Yes, of course the RPG lovers are going to want more RPG in their game and shooter fans would like more shooter in their game. but it's not about who complains the loudest or who has the best suggestion or who is "right," whatever that means when it comes to preference, tolerance, and bias in an entertainment product or narrative. It's always going to be about what's best for the game.

What exactly is your metric for "what's best for the game"?

It seems to me that any game is going to be at the mercy of an individual's preferences, regardless of the design choices you make. Trying to appeal to the largest number of people simultaneously at the expense of the demographics that initially formed the core of your fanbase is exactly what people are accusing Bioware of doing here.

If pandering to the larger audience isn't what you think is going on, what then is your operational definition for what is "best"?

Modifié par adam_grif, 16 décembre 2010 - 11:38 .

[Forsythia]

I'll see how exactly BioWare listens to the fans when the PS3 version is released. Hopefully they won't screw over the existing fanbase, but I'm doubtful.

Modifié par Forsythia, 16 décembre 2010 - 11:38 .

[Fiery Phoenix]

Dusty Everman explicitly asked us for our suggestions on how to improve the Normandy back in July, Terror. I remember a lot of people were happily responding to him and I could tell he was taking notes at the time.

[Zulu_DFA]

BiancoAngelo7 wrote...

They listen A LOT, and the proof of that is the horrible HORRIBLE decision to take out elevators and decontamination and manually reboarding your ship and replace all that with...wait for it...*takes a deep breath* oh yeah loading screens like any other game.

So yeah , they listen a lot, and while they dont always agree with their fans, the real danger is that sometimes they do. :|

You should have more faith in BioWare. The fans can't take credit for every bright idea they come up with. For example, as far as I remember, nobody complained much about the squadmates' wearing some sort of space marine suits during that space combat thingy in ME1, so I guess the brilliant innovation of replacing it with spandex, tattoes, high heels and "breathers" (leaving eyes bare!) was totally BioWare's own. And they worked hard to implement it. I mean, the other day I was cleaning up my HDD from temp stuff and happened upon a one year old Game Trailers TV progam with ME2 promo material. It contained some earlier version footage of the renegade interrupt when Shepard pushes an Eclipse merc out of a window, and it's clearly seen there that although Miranda was already in her jumpsuit, Jacob still was wearing the old school Medium Armor (Ursa type, I believe, still available in ME2 for Shepard via modding the coalesced.ini).

The clip also contained a marvellous example of BS-ing the audience. Namely, Ray Muzika bragged about how much awesomer the exploration had become in ME2 and also said that he was pleased to make it a surprise for the players to buy the game and find out on their own whether there was an option to make love to squadmates in elevetors or not. I lol'd.

[Fiery Phoenix]

I also wanted to add that Lair of the Shadow Broker is pretty much proof enough that BioWare is, in fact, listening to us with their ears wide open. Odd as it may sound, I actually think those couple hours from LOTSB are more impressive than the main game itself. Easily best DLC I've ever played in any game.

[Zulu_DFA]

FieryPhoenix7 wrote...

Dusty Everman explicitly asked us for our suggestions on how to improve the Normandy back in July, Terror. I remember a lot of people were happily responding to him and I could tell he was taking notes at the time.

No offence to Mr. Everman, but he should consult not with fans, but with NASA guys, a few retired submariners and maybe a guy or two from some yacht-building company on stuff like that.

[adam_grif]

But don't you understand, Zulu_DFA? If the squadmates had to wear hardsuits on all their missions, it would destroy their individuality. Wearing ink-based body armor is an integral part of the subject zero character, just as Miranda would be destroyed as an individual if she didn't wear high heels on war-torn, rocky Tuchanka. I mean, if Miranda doesn't wear a space-**** outfit on all her away missions, how are we even supposed to realize it's her?

If there was one problem with ME1, it was that people wore clothing that was entirely too practical. I'm so glad Bioware decided to fix this huge issue with the game.

Modifié par adam_grif, 16 décembre 2010 - 11:45 .

[Fiery Phoenix]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

FieryPhoenix7 wrote...

Dusty Everman explicitly asked us for our suggestions on how to improve the Normandy back in July, Terror. I remember a lot of people were happily responding to him and I could tell he was taking notes at the time.

No offence to Mr. Everman, but he should consult not with fans, but with NASA guys, a few retired submariners and maybe a guy or two from some yacht-building company on stuff like that.

Now you're just being silly.

[adam_grif]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

FieryPhoenix7 wrote...

Dusty Everman explicitly asked us for our suggestions on how to improve the Normandy back in July, Terror. I remember a lot of people were happily responding to him and I could tell he was taking notes at the time.

No offence to Mr. Everman, but he should consult not with fans, but with NASA guys, a few retired submariners and maybe a guy or two from some yacht-building company on stuff like that.

No, he just needs to visit Atomic Rockets, the greatest hard sci-fi resource known to mankind.

If you leave it up to the fans, the Normandy in ME3 will have a bar that transforms into a Turian nightclub or some such nonsense.

[Zulu_DFA]

FieryPhoenix7 wrote...

I also wanted to add that Lair of the Shadow Broker is pretty much proof enough that BioWare is, in fact, listening to us with their ears wide open. Odd as it may sound, I actually think those couple hours from LOTSB are more impressive than the main game itself. Easily best DLC I've ever played in any game.

Yeah, only where are all the renegade options?

And, you know, there are serious plot holes there.

[Jebel Krong]

it's all very well for Bioware to be listening to their fans, but this thread is a prime example of the fans not listening to what Bioware says...

[Zulu_DFA]

FieryPhoenix7 wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

FieryPhoenix7 wrote...

Dusty Everman explicitly asked us for our suggestions on how to improve the Normandy back in July, Terror. I remember a lot of people were happily responding to him and I could tell he was taking notes at the time.

No offence to Mr. Everman, but he should consult not with fans, but with NASA guys, a few retired submariners and maybe a guy or two from some yacht-building company on stuff like that.

Now you're just being silly. [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/tongue.png[/smilie]

[shrugs]

[Fiery Phoenix]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

FieryPhoenix7 wrote...

I also wanted to add that Lair of the Shadow Broker is pretty much proof enough that BioWare is, in fact, listening to us with their ears wide open. Odd as it may sound, I actually think those couple hours from LOTSB are more impressive than the main game itself. Easily best DLC I've ever played in any game.

Yeah, only where are all the renegade options?

And, you know, there are serious plot holes there.

Regardless, it has a PLOT. An actual, believable, working plot. This is something ME2 barely had.

I loved the cinematic feel in LOTSB. It was almost like a movie: the conversations with Liara, the Liara-Shepard banter, the fight at the end, and of course, the beautifully well done epilogue scene along with the reconciliation scene on the Normandy. And let's not forget the base you get at the end and just how much cool stuff it encapsulates.

Even if there were plotholes here and there, I think they were pretty much compensated for.

[Zulu_DFA]

FieryPhoenix7 wrote...
 and of course, the beautifully well done epilogue scene along with the reconciliation scene on the Normandy.

Which, you know, is one of the plot holes. Since it should have happened between the Azure level and the Shadow Broker's Base level.

[Captain_Obvious_au]

Jebel Krong wrote...

it's all very well for Bioware to be listening to their fans, but this thread is a prime example of the fans not listening to what Bioware says...

Probably because Bioware have BS'd us before - hello Epic Community Event. Besides we are listening and then responding to them, it's a fair exchange.

[Bamboozalist]

FieryPhoenix7 wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

FieryPhoenix7 wrote...

I also wanted to add that Lair of the Shadow Broker is pretty much proof enough that BioWare is, in fact, listening to us with their ears wide open. Odd as it may sound, I actually think those couple hours from LOTSB are more impressive than the main game itself. Easily best DLC I've ever played in any game.

Yeah, only where are all the renegade options?

And, you know, there are serious plot holes there.

Regardless, it has a PLOT. An actual, believable, working plot. This is something ME2 barely had.

I loved the cinematic feel in LOTSB. It was almost like a movie: the conversations with Liara, the Liara-Shepard banter, the fight at the end, and of course, the beautifully well done epilogue scene along with the reconciliation scene on the Normandy. And let's not forget the base you get at the end and just how much cool stuff it encapsulates.

Even if there were plotholes here and there, I think they were pretty much compensated for.

ME 2 had a plot an actual, believable, working plot. Make a crack team, connect with the team and get to know them, kick collector ass. That's called a character driven plot.