434 réponses à ce sujet

[habitat 67]

DominusVita wrote...

There are certain developers, like Telltale games, who are still trying to keep the genre alive. They recently announced doing a very ambitious fact - they're making a jurassic game park which is going to blend the adventure-based work they do now, and more high-paced intense moments(You know...with the dinosaurs?). More genre blending. Yummy? Their recent work on the Back-To-The-Future series has been pretty well recieved thus far as well.

...or is this going off topic?

Well no, I hope not as I really think Bioware games would be nowhere near as exciting as they are without the (IMO) influence of adventure games. RPG's started out as dingy high fantasy dungeon crawlers after all, and it was adventure gaming that first utilized intense dialogue, choice options and HUMOUR (my favorite).

DominusVita wrote...
Can we bring the reputation of the Mass Effect forums to something better? Yep. But we need to make sure to stay away from feeding the trolls/whiners that will inevitably come onto the website. What we need is a banner to use on threads, a non-violent disclaimer saying "This thread will lead to certain destruction make your time."

-Every time a troll posts a nasty thread, a squadmate dies. Please, Think of the squadmates.-

"Whenever  trolls post nasty threads, Kaiden looses hairs on his head."   Say no to bald Kaiden.

[Lumikki]

When I listen the comment what some people are making. It becomes more and more clear this isn't really about "critism" of ME2 features, they are more like excuse for other cry. This is they personal WAR agaist direction where ME2 has gone in Biowares hands. Why ME2? Mostly because these people feel like the gendre change has happen between ME1 and ME2. I can understand this, but is this reason to "insult" ME2 and it's player base and make this hole forum to they personal war zone?

I my self fighted few times in MMO forums to keep MMO orginal spirit alive. What waste of time. There is absolute zero chance to affect direction where some game gendre is going because new technology enables the development of a new direction. Better or worst, it will happen. I have seen this happen before and there is nothing what anyone can do here to change it and this includes game developers. You can screem you lungs out, but in the end, it will not stop the change.

Now I'm long time RPG players, they are my favoured game gendre. I don't like shooters game gendre that much at all. How ever, how we see situation as where RPG is going can be different. I don't fear the future like as some others here do. I don't blame other people for the change, like some others do. I don't live in past, like in dreams, thinking everyting will be fine if we just screem harder enough so that others would understand our pain what is comming from love of game gendre. They allready do understand it. It's battle what can't be won, even how someone is trying, you just can't stop time causing changes, because people and technology change around us.

I think my sorrow is what this war cause for other people in this forum, when some nice place to talk is filled with screems of desperation. So, when we ask why developers aren't here. I think we should look inside our self and maybe we causing it. Because we can't accept the truth that things change and nothing what we do can stop it. No one can stop the flow of development forward, not even game developers. They are forced to change with society and technology as well we are and adapt they games with it.

Some people are afraid of changes, while some welcomes them. Good or bad, the change is coming sooner or later.

Modifié par Lumikki, 26 janvier 2011 - 02:37 .

[PSUHammer]

Terror_K wrote...
Look at Dragon Age for instance. Most of the fans on the forums finished the game, usually more than once. Then BioWare reveal some statistics that showed that most people didn't even finish the game once, so now with the sequel we're getting a game that's about one third the size of the original. How exactly is that tailoring a game to your fans as opposed to the mainstream masses?

That is quite the assumption.  Can you quote a dev comment stating this?  If you are jumping to conclusions here, you may be just trying to convince yourself that this is so.

A lot of the discussion I am seeing here is some old school Bioware fans (which I am one) fear the direction of the company in terms of the types of games they are developing.  And, there are others who think it is evolutionary and great.  I am not sure we can ever come to any agreements.  It's basically..."I loved this movie because of reason A, B and C" vs. "I hated this movie, also because of A, B and C".

[PSUHammer]

bjdbwea wrote...

SithLordExarKun wrote...

Do you guys seriously think bioware is making these great games just to please you? Not saying they don't have the intention but they need to survive too.

They always had to and they did, for many years during which they produced great RPGs for the RPG fans. And Bethesda proves that good RPGs can still sell very well, in fact better than ME 2 did.

I highly disagree here.  I played Oblivion once and didn't have any urge to revisit it.  I played through ME2 a few times and enjoyed it immensely.

I think you need to consider the economics of game development and how it has evolved.  Mike Laidlaw had a great post about how much resources went into Baldur's Gate development vs. DAO.  The amount of people on the team increased exponentially, the talent level was much higher, the production values had to increase.  And this is in every department.  As such, they have to sell enough units to pay all these people.  SO, any company that wants to push the envelope is going to need the cash to do so.

[habitat 67]

/\\ Lumikki you are very right!

Nohvarr wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

It's more the fact that I don't want them on my swingset because they already have an entire playground to use at their disposal. Why do they need my swingset in the first place? It's all I have, and they want to take it from me.

The problem is, It's not your swingset, it's Biowares and they are allowed to invite whoever they want to play. You don't have to join in if you don't like the company, but the fact that you've played on their swingset before doesn't grant you any special rights to it now.

Nohvarr, thanks to the combination of what you're saying with Jacob's deadpan face, I can see this whole situation playing out in a future ME game, like maybe at the games kiosk on the Citadel with an angered RPG fan hostage crisis.
Jacob's all calm, trying to talk him down like" ok sir, we understand your frustration but it's not your swingset."

[PSUHammer]

Terror_K wrote...

Wizz wrote...

Well they've catched traditional rpg audince with DAO and perhaps now they want to keep old audience and catch some casuals with DA2. I've read DA2 subforum and most of people are pleased with those changes, so DA2 should have better sales. In theory.

That makes it sound like BioWare are doing a bait-and-switch by deliberately going, "Let's sucker in the old-school RPG fans with the first game by making it something they'll love, and once they're hooked we'll change it all up on them for the next game which'll be all moderized and mainstreamed!"

That idea doesn't exactly fill me with confidence in BioWare you realise... <_<

Why can't you just enjoy the games for what they are?  I loved Baldur's Gate.  I sort of liked Oblivion.  I loved gold box D&D games.  But I also loved ME2.  I think some of us need to accept the direction of the designer.  It ain't changing unless people stop buying their games.  Time marches on...so does game design.  I highly doubt anyone seriously wants to play Baldur's Gate 24.

[habitat 67]

Hammer6767 wrote...
Why can't you just enjoy the games for what they are?  I loved Baldur's Gate.  I sort of liked Oblivion.  I loved gold box D&D games.  But I also loved ME2.  I think some of us need to accept the direction of the designer.  It ain't changing unless people stop buying their games.  Time marches on...so does game design.  I highly doubt anyone seriously wants to play Baldur's Gate 24.

More importantly, we can't be slavedriving jerks and demand they make the same game over and over for years on end. That would be so cruel. 

Modifié par habitat 67, 26 janvier 2011 - 01:00 .

[Terror_K]

Hammer6767 wrote...

Terror_K wrote...
Look at Dragon Age for instance. Most of the fans on the forums finished the game, usually more than once. Then BioWare reveal some statistics that showed that most people didn't even finish the game once, so now with the sequel we're getting a game that's about one third the size of the original. How exactly is that tailoring a game to your fans as opposed to the mainstream masses?

That is quite the assumption.  Can you quote a dev comment stating this?  If you are jumping to conclusions here, you may be just trying to convince yourself that this is so.

I can't remember exactly where or when I saw it, so I can't quote the dev directly, but it actually came from two different comments. One was one of the Dragon Age 2 people saying that according to stats they gathered a lot of players didn't even finish the game, and then there was a separate comment where somebody asked about the size or scale of DA2 compared to DAO and one of the devs said it wasn't huge and was closer to the size of Mass Effect.

[Terror_K]

Hammer6767 wrote...

Why can't you just enjoy the games for what they are?  I loved Baldur's Gate.  I sort of liked Oblivion.  I loved gold box D&D games.  But I also loved ME2.  I think some of us need to accept the direction of the designer.  It ain't changing unless people stop buying their games.  Time marches on...so does game design.  I highly doubt anyone seriously wants to play Baldur's Gate 24.

Again, it's about consistency within their own series. If Mass Effect 2 had had the same basic gameplay and overall style, but was a new IP and a new series rather than being the sequel to Mass Effect 1 then most of my issues with it would melt away completely and I'd really love the game, just like if Dragon Age 2 was a Dragon Age spin-off or a separate game with a seperate new IP it'd pretty much be the same thing. But when I play the sequel to a game, I expect it to maintain the same overall basic style, tone and feel of the original.

Starcraft 2 didn't come along 10 years later and suddenly change into an action shooter game for example, and even the Bethesda/Obsidian Fallout games got a revamp while remaining true to the core ideals of the originals. So why does Mass Effect --a supposed trilogy no less-- suddenly have to take a sudden change in tone, style and direction in the second game?

I've actually personally got more issues with it changing from being a great homage to classic sci-fi media from around the 80's in the first game to becoming more like a bombastic, over-the-top modern Hollywood action movie style affair in ME2 than I do with most of the gameplay problems. It just feels like the whole direction of the game shifted from something I fell in love with with the first game to becoming more like the very type of thing I despise these days, where the integrity of the universe it constantly thrown aside for the sake of something that's "cool and badass!" and where gameplay changes have taken away a lot of the things that I felt made Mass Effect immersive and more than just a game.

I can't enjoy the games for what they are because they're not what they were originally supposed to be and they're not what I got into the series for any more. Or at least not as much as they used to be. ME2 sucked most of the fun out of what got me into Mass Effect in the first place, and now Dragon Age 2 is coming along and dropping the epic nature of fantasy RPG and the true choice of roleplaying in favour of a shorter, shallower experience that forces me into a pre-defined role. As much as I love the original Mass Effect, I don't want Dragon Age 2 being it gameplay wise and style wise because I go to Dragon Age for a different experience than I do for Mass Effect. I like Starcraft but that doesn't meant I want Starcraft 3 to be an RPG even though I love RPGs, and I love Unreal Tournament but that doesn't mean I want Unreal Tournament IV to be an RTS even though I love RTS's.

[Phaedon]

This is getting off-topic, if you have your complaints about the direction than ME2 took, you can post them in more appropriate threads.

[habitat 67]

Terror_K wrote...
Again, it's about consistency within their own series. If Mass Effect 2 had had the same basic gameplay and overall style, but was a new IP and a new series rather than being the sequel to Mass Effect 1 then most of my issues with it would melt away completely and I'd really love the game, just like if Dragon Age 2 was a Dragon Age spin-off or a separate game with a seperate new IP it'd pretty much be the same thing. But when I play the sequel to a game, I expect it to maintain the same overall basic style, tone and feel of the original.

So you are holding a fabricated set of rules against Bioware that developers have never consistently followed?
A lot of game developers make drastic changes from one game to the next, even in the same series. Where would Super Mario be today if Nintendo had not been interested in doing this?

Terror_K wrote...
Starcraft 2 didn't come along 10 years later and suddenly change into an action shooter game for example, and even the Bethesda/Obsidian Fallout games got a revamp while remaining true to the core ideals of the originals. So why does Mass Effect --a supposed trilogy no less-- suddenly have to take a sudden change in tone, style and direction in the second game?

Mass Effect 1 & 2 will always both be RPG/ Shooter hybrids.

Terror_K wrote...
I've actually personally got more issues with it changing from being a great homage to classic sci-fi media from around the 80's in the first game to becoming more like a bombastic, over-the-top modern Hollywood action movie style affair in ME2 than I do with most of the gameplay problems.

Believe it or not, I knew this would happen before I even played ME2 because I'm a Star Wars fan.
Do you remember the drastic shift in tone from "A New Hope" to "Empire Strikes Back" ? Star Trek movies change too, and thank goodness they do, because that first one was a real snooze.

Terror_K wrote...
I can't enjoy the games for what they are because they're not what they were originally supposed to be

Ah, you must have gotten a secret special memo from Bioware that the rest of us didn't.

[Mister Mida]

habitat 67 wrote...

*snip*

As Phaedon said, off topic. Take it somewhere else.

Modifié par Mister Mida, 26 janvier 2011 - 02:03 .

[habitat 67]

Phaedon wrote...

This is getting off-topic, if you have your complaints about the direction than ME2 took, you can post them in more appropriate threads.

Yep. Got it.

[SithLordExarKun]

Phaedon wrote...

This is getting off-topic, if you have your complaints about the direction than ME2 took, you can post them in more appropriate threads.

Exactly. Its been an entire year already and some people still can't get over it. Ridiculous.

I don't know why some individuals think they are entitled to everything by bioware and feel that bioware should cater to them and them alone.

[bjdbwea]

Terror_K wrote...

If Mass Effect 2 had had the same basic gameplay and overall style, but was a new IP and a new series rather than being the sequel to Mass Effect 1 then most of my issues with it would melt away completely and I'd really love the game, just like if Dragon Age 2 was a Dragon Age spin-off or a separate game with a seperate new IP it'd pretty much be the same thing. But when I play the sequel to a game, I expect it to maintain the same overall basic style, tone and feel of the original.

I certainly agree with the last sentence of that quote, but not with the rest. Maybe I would have liked ME 2 if games like ME 1 and DA never existed. Because then we wouldn't know how much better video games can be. This fits with what others have said before, that ME 2 feels much more like the first part of the series, whereas ME 1 is much deeper and more refined. But since these and other great games (especially RPGs by BioWare) do exist, it's impossible not to notice the many flaws and shortcomings of ME 2.

So even on its own, I could not recognize ME 2 as an outstanding game that some people make it out to be. But then at least I wouldn't have had reason to care much about it. If they want to develop a stand-alone shooter or even an MMO in the Mass Effect universe, I could just ignore it. But to start a series in such an amazing way as they did with ME 1, and then release something like ME 2 as a supposed successor, that is the reason for much of the disappointment.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 26 janvier 2011 - 03:35 .

[Nohvarr]

Now for those of you looking for an answer to the OP question, read back over pages 15-17 and you'll get an example of another reason devs don't post. What could they say to Terror K, Bjd and others like them? They can't assure them that they'll like how things are done in ME 3, they can't promise them the game will still fit those fans 'vision' of what ME should be, and they obviously don't feel the need to apologize for a game that's won over 120 game of the year awards.

Nothing a dev can say to those fans will make things any better, so instead let them wait, and learn about ME 3 on the devs schedule.

Modifié par Nohvarr, 26 janvier 2011 - 04:35 .

[Aprudena Gist]

They dont care about this game because its already been out a year, sure the ps3 version just launched but it got everything useful thats ever going to come out for the game. They dont have to build up hype or lie about anything to make you want to buy the game anymore.

[Uszi]

Terror_K wrote...

Starcraft 2 didn't come along 10 years later and suddenly change into an action shooter game for example, and even the Bethesda/Obsidian Fallout games got a revamp while remaining true to the core ideals of the originals. So why does Mass Effect --a supposed trilogy no less-- suddenly have to take a sudden change in tone, style and direction in the second game?

I've actually personally got more issues with it changing from being a great homage to classic sci-fi media from around the 80's in the first game to becoming more like a bombastic, over-the-top modern Hollywood action movie style affair in ME2 than I do with most of the gameplay problems. It just feels like the whole direction of the game shifted from something I fell in love with with the first game to becoming more like the very type of thing I despise these days, where the integrity of the universe it constantly thrown aside for the sake of something that's "cool and badass!" and where gameplay changes have taken away a lot of the things that I felt made Mass Effect immersive and more than just a game.

I can't enjoy the games for what they are because they're not what they were originally supposed to be and they're not what I got into the series for any more. Or at least not as much as they used to be. ME2 sucked most of the fun out of what got me into Mass Effect in the first place, and now Dragon Age 2 is coming along and dropping the epic nature of fantasy RPG and the true choice of roleplaying in favour of a shorter, shallower experience that forces me into a pre-defined role. As much as I love the original Mass Effect, I don't want Dragon Age 2 being it gameplay wise and style wise because I go to Dragon Age for a different experience than I do for Mass Effect. I like Starcraft but that doesn't meant I want Starcraft 3 to be an RPG even though I love RPGs, and I love Unreal Tournament but that doesn't mean I want Unreal Tournament IV to be an RTS even though I love RTS's.

Er.  I think your analagy with the Fallout games is a bit of a stretch.  SC2 is a great exampleof your point.

In what ways though, did FO3 not completely change FO and FO2?  What are core ideals?
Initially, to me at least, ME2 does a better job of adhering to the 'core ideals' of ME1 than FO3 does to FO2.  It seems without a definition of "core ideals" its a bit of an arbitrary argument.

The definition I glean from your posts seems to do with the atmosphere, tone or themes of the game.  And this does not define the experience of ME for every single player.  It does for you, but many people want to, for instance, play an RPG and shoot aliens at the same time.  Or any number of other things, really.

But that's fine I guess, since you seem to be defending your personal conviction in the matter.  I think it's weird that we're arguing about people's personal convictions.  If you try to argue that the game is objectively ruined for everyone because of the above, then we'd have something to discuss.

I'll also agree that the, "It's just a game," argument that you are responding to is spurious.  If it is just the case that "It's just a game," then the community should immediately dissapate and cease all discussions altogether.  The "It's just a game argument," undermines everything discussed on the forums, and if one were to truely and not selectively espouse that attitude, I'm not sure why they'd still be posting here. 

Aprudena Gist wrote...

They dont care about this game
because its already been out a year, sure the ps3 version just launched
but it got everything useful thats ever going to come out for the game.
They dont have to build up hype or lie about anything to make you want
to buy the game anymore.

Heh, I didn't know that.    How did you learn that?

I had thought that they cared quite a bit for something that they spent years building.  Guess I was wrong.

Modifié par Uszi, 26 janvier 2011 - 06:00 .

[bjdbwea]

Nohvarr wrote...

Now for those of you looking for an answer to the OP question, read back over pages 15-17 and you'll get an example of another reason devs don't post. What could they say to Terror K, Bjd and others like them? They can't assure them that they'll like how things are done in ME 3, they can't promise them the game will still fit those fans 'vision' of what ME should be, and they obviously don't feel the need to apologize for a game that's won over 120 game of the year awards.

I am quite sure that they know themselves that ME 2 isn't what it should have been. This is BioWare after all, and many of their developers are still the same people who created fantastic RPGs such as BG 2, NWN, KotoR, and of course ME 1. They are RPG experts, they know what makes good RPGs. Already back then, during all those years, generic shooters were always easier and quicker to produce, and sold better than even the best RPGs. Yet still BioWare had, beyond making money, the goal to create the best RPGs. And for all we know, it was always profitable.

Only in recent years did they (have to) change their attitude. Not completely yet, because at least ME 2 was still not a completely generic and linear shooter. But a lot has changed, and while it may be easier palatable for the mainstream and therefore reap more awards (if not sales numbers, because ME 2 apparently did not outsell ME 1, and definitely not DA), it's not better for the quality of the games.

So what could they say? You are right that I don't believe any talk like "oh, it's so great and you'll definitely enjoy the game" anymore. What they could do is tell us whether they acknowledge any criticism about ME 2 at all, and if so, which. Perhaps they could also try to explain why they think that some of the changes were necessary, beyond someone thought that it would sell better to the mainstream. Because video games are a form of art, or at least they can be, but for that it can not all be about mass appeal. And again, BioWare was one of the companies who cared about this, as outdated as it might seem to the generation of casual games and consoles.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 26 janvier 2011 - 06:39 .

[Phaedon]

Uszi wrote...
I had thought that they cared quite a bit for something that they spent years building.  Guess I was wrong.

All developers are evil machines, Uszi, that only post for marketing purposes. You know it to be true! 

[Phaedon]

bjdbwea wrote...
I am quite sure that they know themselves that ME 2 isn't what it should have been. This is BioWare after all, and many of their developers are still the same people who created fantastic RPGs such as BG 2, NWN, KotoR, and of course ME 1. They are RPG experts, they know what makes good RPGs. Already back then, during all those years, generic shooters were always easier and quicker to produce, and sold better than even the best RPGs. Yet still BioWare had, beyond making money, the goal to create the best RPGs. And for all we know, it was always profitable.

A brief pause as you research MDK2.


Done?



Okay.


Not only did you just prove yourself to be biased by suggesting that ME2 is yet another generic shooter, but you now also know that Bioware doesn't do only RPGs. I'll try to ignore the fact that you indirectly suggested that innovation is a bad thing.

Only in recent years did they (have to) change their attitude. Not completely yet, because at least ME 2 was still not a completely generic and linear shooter. But a lot has changed, and while it may be easier palatable for the mainstream and therefore reap more awards (if not sales numbers, because ME 2 apparently did not outsell ME 1, and definitely not DA), it's not better for the quality of the games.

Stating your opinion as a fact when you are a part of the minority doesn't really help your case. Also, yeah, mainstream means bad. Am I right, Baldur's Gate? Weren't you mainstream once?

So what could they say? You are right that I don't believe any talk like "oh, it's so great and cool and you'll definitely enjoy the game" anymore. What they could do is tell us whether they acknowledge any criticism about ME 2 at all, and if so, which. Perhaps they could also try to explain why they think that some of the changes were necessary, beyond someone thought that it would sell better to the mainstream. Because video games are a form of art, or at least they can be, but for that it can not all be about mass appeal. And again, BioWare was one of the companies who cared about this, as outdated as it might seem to the generation of consoles and casual games.

Of course they acknowledge the criticism, but only the valid and constructive one. If you read Christina Norman's ME3 plan and you are still waiting for an answer/apology, then, well.

Modifié par Phaedon, 26 janvier 2011 - 06:43 .

[bjdbwea]

Phaedon wrote...

A brief pause as you research MDK2.

Actually, I bought and own MDK 2, like all other BioWare PC games so far. Though that's not entirely correct, DA:O Awakening was the first exception. And where did I ever say that BioWare only produced or should only produce RPGs? That's right, nowhere did I say that, even though I would certainly prefer it. But it's okay if they also create MMOs or even generic multiplayer shooters in the Mass Effect universe. What's not okay is to sell something like ME 2 as the successor to a fantastic game.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 26 janvier 2011 - 07:21 .

[Dominus]

Phaedon... why aren't you a moderator?

[darknoon5]

DominusVita wrote...

Phaedon... why aren't you a moderator?

Lol I agree.

[Phaedon]

DominusVita wrote...

Phaedon... why aren't you a moderator?

Mostly because I am an @ss 90% of the time.

bjdbwea wrote...
Actually, I bought and own MDK 2, like all other BioWare PC games so far. Though that's not entirely correct, DA:O Awakening was the first exception. And where did I ever say that BioWare only produced or should only produce RPGs? That's right, nowhere did I say that, even though I would certainly prefer it. But it's okay if they also create MMOs or even generic multiplayer shooters in the Mass Effect universe. What's not okay is to sell something like ME 2 as the successor to a fantastic game.

Ah yes, "ME2 sucked". Constructive criticism right there.

Modifié par Phaedon, 26 janvier 2011 - 07:36 .