245 réponses à ce sujet

[axl99]

@Paci - Around 2007 I think? A friend of mine was hired at Bioware just a week before they were acquired by EA.

In regards to EA's "practices", they've cleaned up relatively speaking. Over the past few years they've suffered a financial decrease in their repeat franchises. I'd think that by now they have an understanding of the concept of innovating and experimentation in the development of new IP. If only for the sake of keeping the audience interested in their properties.

Bioware might make an FPS at some point in their game dev life cycle, but it might not be with ME. That's what new IPs are for.

Modifié par axl99, 23 décembre 2010 - 06:07 .

[ObserverStatus]

personally, i think that 3rd person is a more sophisticated format, as being able to see behind your character helps to compensate for senses you lose in video games like being able to feel footsteps, or an enemy breathing down your neck, or being able to sense where your body is in 3d space.

[Jaron Oberyn]

archurban wrote...

don't bring COD blops or halo leak crap here. it will ruin entire game. of course, Bioware won't do it. it's story based RPG action game. if it is FPS, you can't even see Shepard by yourself. I don't want it. if you want FPS, don't buy ME game. go and play blops or something else.

Exactly my thoughts. Couldn't agree more. 

Fortlowe wrote...

Polite, that view is very limitiing. There is no room for experimentation or innovation with a dogma such as that. Bioware should branch out I think. FPS's, open world games, platformers, or even fighting games. Bioware's strength is not RPG's, it's storytelling. If they develop games in other genres based on that strength, then perhap's their RPG's would be all the stronger from that experience, no?

ME2's story suffered in contrast to ME1 just in case you hadn't noticed. As I stated above, I don't have a problem with implementing some shooter mechanics such as the ones we have currently. But when it comes at a cost to the story and single player experience, if they add multiplayer, then they will begin to lose a lot of their "solid" fan base in favor for a different one. Because once you add one shooter element, they'll want co-op, multiplayer, dlc maps, and more and then the focus shifts from single player and story to creating a multiplayer system that will appeal to the shooter fans. In case you hadn't played Halo:Reach the game's story was terrible. It was rushed, too short and poorly designed. But guess what? The multiplayer was almost flawless. They had a quick 5-6 hour single player campaign and spent most of their time developing multiplayer. I, and many other hardcore Bioware fans, do not want this to be the case in ME3. It's the last game of the franchise, just let it be an RPG like it was conceived. If you want a shooter game with multiplayer, first person, co-op, etc... then hope for a spinoff. But just don't touch the trilogy, ME3 to be specific. It will only result in a lot of angry fans. 

-Polite

[sympathy4saren]

Lol a biased view toward a game mechanic? I play games with game me panics I like, and don't play those I don't. BioWare has a loyal base...of rpg fans. Differ from that too much and we won't buy their games. Simple consumer unhappiness.



I play almost exclusively rpgs. I love Assassin's Creed...not as much as ME. I'm playing Brotherhood right now....its fantastic...with sooooooo much to do. I also only buy exclusively rpg games.



If rpg fans get cast aside, competition in the marketplace will know and come scrambling to gobble us up.

[Bourne Endeavor]

Fortlowe wrote...



Polite, that view is very limitiing. There is no room for experimentation or innovation with a dogma such as that. Bioware should branch out I think. FPS's, open world games, platformers, or even fighting games. Bioware's strength is not RPG's, it's storytelling. If they develop games in other genres based on that strength, then perhap's their RPG's would be all the stronger from that experience, no?

In theory, yes. In execution, there are multiple shades of gray. The primary difficulty is determining what each genre classifies as a necessity in their respective games. RPGs adhere to the demand of a compelling storyline with an intriguing and diverse group of characters. The FPS genre places these attributes on the back burner in favor of a compelling multiplayer and subsequent online components. While a MMO favors simplistic, yet partially engaging story. Enough to garner interest but never a demand beyond generic. This is due to the magnitude of players within a live-action world, in comparison to scripted one. Raids, PvP and so forth are the demands of that genre.



One could craft a work of literature that would move Shakespeare and yet in a FPS, if the multiplayer was lackluster, the game would be rendered to obscurity. Storytelling is a fantastic quality to gaming however only specific genres deem to worthy of primary focus. These are generally RPGs and to a lesser degree, Action Adventure games.

[Jaron Oberyn]

Pacifien wrote...

That's really all about personal preference and not something to blame fans of other genres for, Polite. I am a fan of BioWare starting with Baldur's Gate. I was an cRPG enthusiast starting with the Ultima series. I feel I can call myself an RPG fan, and I enjoyed ME2 well enough.

But I read that ME2 is not enough of an RPG. I read that the shooter element dumbed it down. What am I to think about my place in this argument? Is my enjoyment of the game that you so disliked of lesser value? If I wanted to, I'd argue that ME1 suffered well enough from lack of what I deem proper RPG elements.

As it is, I prefer to judge every game I play on its own merits regardless of genre. I'd do away with the whole labeling system, preferring that developers simply design what they felt was a good game regardless of whether it fit in one genre or another. But the last time I mentioned this, there were some who were adamant that such labels have their place in helping them know what sort of game they are getting. I'd think game footage and demos would help, but that's just me.

Really beside the point of this topic, though. I can't really picture the ME series in first person perspective, so don't have anything to add to that discussion.

I see where you're coming from and I respect your opinion. Just because I felt ME2 didn't meet my standards of an RPG doesn't mean that I disapprove of anyone who likes it. I understand that people have a diverse range of preferences when it comes to video games, and I respect that. So let's just clear that up.  A shooter/RPG would work well if the balance wasn't shifted in favor of one over the other. That's my only complaint. ME2 is more of a shooter than an RPG. If they had balanced it out, I wouldn't have a problem. I played Oblivion and Fallout with first person, and I loved it. They had balance. 

-Polite

[sympathy4saren]

@ Ms. Lovey Dovey:



I'm an American. I say what I want, when I want. Got a problem with that? Tough.

[Jaron Oberyn]

axl99 wrote...

@Paci - Around 2007 I think? A friend of mine was hired at Bioware just a week before they were acquired by EA.

In regards to EA's "practices", they've cleaned up relatively speaking. Over the past few years they've suffered a financial decrease in their repeat franchises. I'd think that by now they have an understanding of the concept of innovating and experimentation in the development of new IP. If only for the sake of keeping the audience interested in their properties.

Bioware might make an FPS at some point in their game dev life cycle, but it might not be with ME. That's what new IPs are for.

http://kotaku.com/30...ioware-pandemic

Might want to read some of the comments below. I found a few of them amusing despite the validity of the statements. 

-Polite

[Ghost Lightning]

sympathy4saren wrote...

@ Ms. Lovey Dovey:

I'm an American. I say what I want, when I want. Got a problem with that? Tough.

wtf...chillax bro.

[ObserverStatus]

@ sympathy don't be such an ugly american

Modifié par bobobo878, 23 décembre 2010 - 06:18 .

[Bourne Endeavor]

Ms. Lovey Dovey wrote...

@sympathy4saren

You must hate what BioWare's been doing lately according to your views then. Don't buy there games. I still will. 1st person or NOT.

While you are certainly entitled to your opinion. I find a post of this nature close to blind fanboy/girling. You make it sound as though Bioware is above error and that regardless of what is implemented in ME3. They will have your purchase. If that is the case, so be it, but you must respect many will disagree.

[saMoorai]

sympathy4saren wrote...

@ Ms. Lovey Dovey:

I'm an American. I say what I want, when I want. Got a problem with that? Tough.

What you Just Said is a Heavy Risk....

[archurban]

Pacifien wrote...

Holy ****, when did EA buy out BioWare?!

haha didn't you know that? it was long time ago. I know it is sad. but for making money, it is better, stick with a big company, gives Bioware more chance of long life. EA.... hey, by the way, Merry Christmas. thanks for banning me for two days-_- avatar looks more cuter. two doctors who created ME game is honored for AIAS last week. celebration, anc congratulation. 

[Dr. Heart]

Eww gross. No.



Keep that FPS crap out of me Mass Effect games.

[Pacifien]

An FPS could have just as compelling a storyline with a diverse cast of characters as the best RPGs. If they don't, it's because people expect an FPS to fit a mold and cry foul if it doesn't. The same goes for people who want their RPGs to fit a certain mold. Expectations to fit the genre are what kill innovation in game design.

[ObserverStatus]

While switching to FPS would screw up the game's shooter elements, I have no doubt it could still be a good rpg. Fallout 3 & NV are better rpgs but worse shooters than ME2.

Modifié par bobobo878, 23 décembre 2010 - 06:23 .

[Jaron Oberyn]

Ms. Lovey Dovey wrote...

PoliteAssasin wrote...

axl99 wrote...

@Paci - Around 2007 I think? A friend of mine was hired at Bioware just a week before they were acquired by EA.

In regards to EA's "practices", they've cleaned up relatively speaking. Over the past few years they've suffered a financial decrease in their repeat franchises. I'd think that by now they have an understanding of the concept of innovating and experimentation in the development of new IP. If only for the sake of keeping the audience interested in their properties.

Bioware might make an FPS at some point in their game dev life cycle, but it might not be with ME. That's what new IPs are for.

http://kotaku.com/30...ioware-pandemic

Might want to read some of the comments below. I found a few of them amusing despite the validity of the statements. 

-Polite

The thread it not about EA conspiracies so please........dismiss them from here.

Paul Blart forum cop much? I simply provided Pacifien with an article about the acquisition of Bioware by EA. 
Relax. 

-Polite

[Ghost Lightning]

Dr. Heart wrote...

Eww gross. No.

Keep that FPS crap out of me Mass Effect games.

Did you not Play Oblivion? FPS isn't crap, it just doesn't fit here. Just look at Deus Ex.

[saMoorai]

Am i the Only one that Plays New Vegas and Fallout 3 in 3rd person?



And An RPG/FPS mix can work. it has in the past, take borderlands for example.

[Dr. Heart]

Ghost Lightning wrote...

Dr. Heart wrote...

Eww gross. No.

Keep that FPS crap out of me Mass Effect games.

Did you not Play Oblivion? FPS isn't crap, it just doesn't fit here. Just look at Deus Ex.

It doesn't fit here, you're right.  That's why I don't want it in ME.

lol in ME. 

Not all FPS are bad.  Oblivion and Fallout are some of my favorite games, but I really don't want to ever see a Mass Effect FPS.