132 réponses à ce sujet

[The BS Police]

Hathur wrote...

In principle it sounds good... but I can't imagine how to make it interesting or fun... ME1's exploration, while immersive at times (was fun to see a new planet and drive around it.. for a minute or 2) ... quickly became a tedious and repetitive bore.

Because constantly scanning and probing planets didn't get quickly tedious and boring right?

[hooahguy]

Well considering that Bioware needs to make money, and the fact that ME2 sold much more than ME1 did, plus ME2 got many more awards than ME1 did, which brought the ME series onto the major gaming stage for ME3, Id say that it was a step forward.

That being said, I do want more exploration, just not a ridiculous amount of it like ME1. I mean, ME1 was great and so was ME2, but the long, endless Mako rides through barren territory was very painful.

And yes, ME1's Citadel was superior to ME2's.

Also, I didnt really mind scanning planets. It didnt take very long, and how can someone who enjoys driving through barren terrain for 5+ minutes complain about some scanning that takes maximum 1-2 minutes? 

Modifié par hooahguy, 26 décembre 2010 - 03:39 .

[femio18]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

shinobi602 wrote...

sympathy4saren wrote...

And continuously shooting at stuff isn't a bore?

We RPG fans don't play shooters, shooters don't have to play ME.

If I wanted to shoot at all times, me and many others would play CoD.

Who are you to decide what RPG fans play and don't play? I'm a big RPG fan and absolutely love shooters.

But the question is - do you like it that a former RPG franchise is starting to turn into a shooter (and a terrible one I might add)? Bioware's trying to appease the shooter crowd, but ME2's combat isn't really that appealing. I wouldn't have a problem with the combat gameplay if they hadn't compounded it with a reduction in RPG elements. They dumbed down the game so much. Exploration. Leveling. Dialogue. Customization. ME2 really isn't an RPG and it's a pain to play. I dread finishing ME1 because in order to get to ME3 I need to go through ME2. We have enough shooters, done by professionals who base their company off of the genre, and we don't need a professional RPG developer trying to conform to a genre that they have little to no experience in.  What sense would it make if a cookie maker decided to start manufacturing weapons? Would you take them seriously? 


-Polite

i think is couse of ea

[SurfaceBeneath]

How about more shooting AND more exploring?

If they can impliment exploration in a way that gives players both a feeling of wonder and danger and impliment it well into the story, I'm all for it.

Modifié par SurfaceBeneath, 26 décembre 2010 - 06:11 .

[SurfaceBeneath]

I want more hub worlds with combo exploration/combat like Overlord. Combine the mobility of the Hammerhead with the durability and weapons of the Mako and have branching missions on worlds. The one thing you definitely don't want to do is have the exploration feel separated from the rest of the game, which is one of the areas Me1 kinda failed.

[Homey C-Dawg]

sympathy4saren wrote...

I sincerely hope there is less shooting and more exploring, non-linear exploring, in Mass Effect 3. How about you?

How about... More shooting AND more exploring.

[rma2110]

Honestly, what I care most about is the STORY. The combat was near perfect, all it needs is adding a few upgrades to weapons and armor to make each one unique.



ME1 had a lot more story. The side quests were much more interesting and told a story all their own. I didn't know about the Cerberus quests until my third play through. It had layers!



ME2 on the other hand had a very shallow story and no layers at all.

[Encarmine]

Its easy to forget, ME2 is a stepping stone game, I think they have got all of the team building out of the way with ME2 and ME3 will merge the almost perfect combat system with the depth of ME1 and we will all not stop talking about it for years!



Roll on the Mass Effect MMO is all i can say!

[SSV Enterprise]

rma2110 wrote...

Honestly, what I care most about is the STORY. The combat was near perfect, all it needs is adding a few upgrades to weapons and armor to make each one unique.

ME1 had a lot more story. The side quests were much more interesting and told a story all their own. I didn't know about the Cerberus quests until my third play through. It had layers!

ME2 on the other hand had a very shallow story and no layers at all.

...layers?  So, walking up to an admiral and chatting him up is a layer? I could say the same thing about an ME2 N7 quest line that starts with busting a Blue Sun operation and leads to finding a Prothean artifact and stopping batarian terrorists from bombing a human colony.

[Hwalkerl]

I think Chris Priestly mentioned earlier somewhere in these forums or in an interview somewhere that they heard the fans and planned to include more of the elements they refined from ME1 including RPG elements. I for one am more for both shooter sequences and RPG elements(exploration etc). The more the merrier!

[KingDan97]

Honestly, I want exploration yes, but not at the expense of how unique ME2 at least made each planet feel. You wanna know what I thought when I played BDtS and looked up at the asteroids and saw the awesome Plasma Thrusters? "Why the hell weren't scenes like this in the main game?" Every Non-Essential planet in ME1 looked like it was cookie cut from one of three bases. I'll give this, I didn't do the side missions in ME2, because honestly, as soon as I was done scanning that was it. I didn't ever wanna fire another probe, no matter what. But seriously? If we're gonna say ME1 has good exploration then we might as well put Assassin's Creed 1 in the bucket of RPG goodness too.

Honestly, I loved ME2, I loved the improvements in the base gameplay so much that I struggle to get more then 15 mins in when I try to play the Male Shep I've been working on for more then 5 months. You may view ME2 as having too much "pew pew"(Which horridly oversimplifies the Shooter genre honestly, you people really need to see some of the competitive multiplayer strategies, they're insane) but really, did you honestly think rolling up impossible cliffs in a vehicle that couldn't even reach some of the "hidden objects" on the planet without some serious fidgeting was exploration?

If so, go outside, take a breath of fresh air and go find a Starbucks that won't ask if you mean "Venti" when you order a large coffee. There's a fetch quest you regret accepting.

I see that people mention Bethesda as one of the last true RPG developers. Well let's just look at their current release calendar shall we?

-Brink(An online FPS with very little Single player support, Yes, you can play alone, but that's not gonna be the "right way")
-Hunted: The Demon's Forge(Described as "Gears with magic", hmm... doesn't sound very RPG to me, does it to you?)
-RAGE(According to Wikipedia "A first-person shooter", dang... 3 for 3)
-Doom 4(Not gonna even bother)
-Prey 2(A First Person Shooter)
-"The Crossing"(Not much is known about this, and it is on hold but it is also an FPS)

And finally, the coup de grace, Skyrim. The game that will be used to defend Bethesda's honor in ever imaginable situation. But let's be fair here, how RPG will it even be? Assuming Bethesda's making it with Todd Howard at the head, it'll be very much like Oblivion or Fallout(Both of which I loved) and how RPG were they? I never got pulled in, never really cared about a character. Never felt I myself was having a significant impact on the worlds. Hell, in Oblivion, even after everyone started calling me a Hero I was still just "Criminal Scum" whenever I did anything wrong. Bethesda doesn't make RPG's, they make very good, very fun and very enjoyable SANDBOX GAMES.

That's all, there's the cover pulled back and the ugly truth exposed. They make Sandbox games, I don't care how much damned stat and gear management they put into a game, if I can kill everyone in the Imperial City then stroll over to Anvil and no one knows I did anything, something is wrong. If they can never once make me care that someone has died, they have failed if they were trying to make an RPG.

But hey, that's still better then Bioware's planned releases right? I mean they're not RPG at all.

-Star Wars:TOR(An mmoRPG, hmm. Well MMO's aren't even real RPG's, they certainly don't count. I mean there's only stat management and equiptment.... oh wait, bit of a Catch 22 eh? You can't claim something is an RPG for the very reasons you claim something else is not.)
-Dragon Age 2(A "Hack and Slash" RPG, at least according to people who haven't even touched the final build... But their opinions are valid right? Right? Well it doesn't matter anyway because doing an art revamp and removing some elements of companion customization is punishable by death)

Yet again, the biggest game the firm is releasing Mass Effect 3. We know nothing about this game honestly, and yet STILL you all insist on claiming it will be casual or that it will be further dumbed down. Well here's a little secret, come in close I want you to hear this well. IT WON'T!(Sorry for the caps mods, it's just... well I think that shouting there was worthwhile to prove my point)\\

But how do I know? I'm just a fan, I couldn't possibly have a source to back up what I say! Oh wait, I do. Christina Norman(The head gameplay designer for the ME trilogy incase you all forgot) did this little presentation called "Where Did My Inventory Go? Refining Gameplay in Mass Effect 2" and funnily enough, all three of her bullet points addressed your concerns, but you all seem to ignore them. Oh, you want to know exactly what they were? I mean you can't ignore my point if you don't know exactly what it was right? Okay here they are:

-"Richer RPG features."
-"More Combat Options."
-"More Complex Enemies."

"I Don't see anything about exploration in there RAWR!"

Now wait, just read between the lines, what does "More Combat Options." sound like to you? It could be more powers, or more weapons, maybe it's a few new classes. Or maybe it means you'll have the ability to bypass fights, flank enemies and find alternate routes.... Well, I guess if you wanna be pessimistic then sure, they're abandoning their roots(Although hybridization works well for every other form of popular media).

Just remember, it doesn't matter what you take, only where you take it. And I think Bioware has done a fantastic job with taking RPG and Shooter elements to exactly where I want them to be in the ME franchise, and I know ME3 will be even better.

Modifié par KingDan97, 26 décembre 2010 - 07:53 .

[GnusmasTHX]

Should do it like Darksiders... Where the environments are interesting, detailed and there's actually something to find (compared to ME1's exploration). Also sprinkle some combat here and there.

Modifié par GnusmasTHX, 26 décembre 2010 - 08:53 .

[Spartas Husky]

joking:



I WANT OBLIVIONG SIZE EXPLORATION!!!!!!!!... but in space!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[femio18]

mass effect 2 is a shooter but with choices..... not an rpg....

[hamtyl07]

I for one like the shooter aspect but it might be a little more interestion if they opended up a little bit of exploration but kept the shooting aspect which does keep me entertianed overall

[Pepper4]

I don't think that there should be less shooting, but more exploring is seriously needed.
They completely dumped the whole exploration concept in ME2, but I hope that we are gonna get it back in ME3. The two things that I really want are

• Bigger locations. In ME1, each on the main planets was quiet big and featured a lot of side quests and big environments. I hope they are gonna do this again in ME3.
• Planet exploration using the hammerhead. I really want this feature, which was a good idea that was executed poorly in ME1, and completely forgotten in ME2.

[Ahglock]

Both games could use improvement in various areas. ME2 was absurdly linear at virtually every stage, but ME1 wasn't different in most levels. I liked the ME2 Tali recruitment end game stage a lot. While still a bit linear, it gave 3 paths to victory.(a 4th if you are a vanguard), using that style for every stage would be nice IMO. Add in some alternate victory methods like through environmental effects, talking etc and it would be great IMO.

[IndigoWolfe]

By the time of ME3, Earth is burning under Reaper siege. I think the time for exploration has come and gone.

[DJBare]

I'd like to see more exploring but only if there is "something" to explore, some of these planets that have a population but there is no option to land on them, I don't care that they are rich in eezo or irridium, let us go down and meet the natives!

[femio18]

IndigoWolfe wrote...

By the time of ME3, Earth is burning under Reaper siege. I think the time for exploration has come and gone.

its a rpg game exploring its a big deal

[femio18]

DJBare wrote...

I'd like to see more exploring but only if there is "something" to explore, some of these planets that have a population but there is no option to land on them, I don't care that they are rich in eezo or irridium, let us go down and meet the natives!

i agree

[shinobi602]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

But the question is - do you like it that a former RPG franchise is starting to turn into a shooter (and a terrible one I might add)? Bioware's trying to appease the shooter crowd, but ME2's combat isn't really that appealing. I wouldn't have a problem with the combat gameplay if they hadn't compounded it with a reduction in RPG elements. They dumbed down the game so much. Exploration. Leveling. Dialogue. Customization. ME2 really isn't an RPG and it's a pain to play. I dread finishing ME1 because in order to get to ME3 I need to go through ME2. We have enough shooters, done by professionals who base their company off of the genre, and we don't need a professional RPG developer trying to conform to a genre that they have little to no experience in.  What sense would it make if a cookie maker decided to start manufacturing weapons? Would you take them seriously? 

-Polite

Well, first off I wouldn't say it's "terrible". On the contrary, having played ALOT of third person shooters, I was pleasantly surprised at how good ME2 played in that regard. Very well made and it worked great. I agree about the customization elements, I feel that and the sense of scale/exploration were the only two things that were "dumbed down" and I hope they fix that for ME3.

Not sure how the dialogue got worse, it seemed the same and even better mostly....

Anyway, I'm sure Bioware has noticed these complaints, as evident from Christina Norman's "What to improve for ME3" with the "Richer RPG elements" in there, so I'm not too worried about ME3.

[Haventh]

I only wish for exploring that has a purpose, and isn't meaningless. I want the exploring to involve NPCs, quests, missions, shops and a like, i have no interest in dead zone exploring.

[shnizzler93]

IndigoWolfe wrote...

By the time of ME3, Earth is burning under Reaper siege. I think the time for exploration has come and gone.

Earth can wait until I get the maximum amount of resources possible (with or without a gibbed save editor)