461 réponses à ce sujet

[Vena_86]

Silmane wrote...

It's funny cuz it's true.

[Lumikki]

Terror_K, you do understand while you defend more compex RPG, what I'm fine with, Mass Effect serie was never ment to be complex RPG, not even first one.



You are so angry, because things change, when no-one can stop the change, not even game companies. They have to change with the technology and customers as they change in time too.

[Whatever42]

T_K, you seem to be the one coming in and whining because the game wasn't made to suit you. Yes, FPS and TPS games are all the rage in the west. Yes, Bioware combined RPG storytelling with TPS mechanics, likely to break into that very popular and lucrative market. Oddly, they seemed to carry more RPG fans into TPS games then really attract TPS fans to RPGs but that is neither here nor there. The point is that no matter how much you nerdrage, people who enjoyed ME2 will continue to enjoy ME2. That you try to convince them that they're wrong to like the game is a little sad.



But I continue to marvel at one point. That you don't like ME2 is fine; different strokes for different blokes. But that you think that ME1 was significantly different than ME2, I continue to find incomprehensible. Please don't defend your stance, I know your arguments. You simply assign weight to details that most people find trivial.

[yoomazir]

Lumikki wrote...
 They have to change with the technology and customers as they change in time too.

I'm not sure if you even understand what you wrote, does that mean that you're also expendable when the time comes?


also,

Silmane wrote...

Sir, you won this topic


But we still haven't seen anything like that related for ME3 yet, so wait & see.

Modifié par yoomazir, 14 février 2011 - 06:46 .

[Lumikki]

yoomazir wrote...

Lumikki wrote...
 They have to change with the technology and customers as they change in time too.

I'm not sure if you even understand what you wrote, does that mean that you're also expendable when the time comes?

I mean while technology change and provides new possibilities to do different stuff, we people also starts demand those new better stuff. So, our taste change with it. Like if we would give todays players 1980 games to play with, they would find them not so fun, because people knows they could be different (better). Meaning when our technology level change we people change with them too. Not sure if can I say it better with my english?

Modifié par Lumikki, 14 février 2011 - 06:50 .

[Gleym]

Lumikki wrote...

 Like if we would give todays players 1980 games to play with, they would find them not so fun, because people knows they could be different (better). meanign when our technology level change we people change with them too. Not sure if can I say it better with my english?

This comment is B.S. because plenty of kids today love games from the 1980's. Nintendo has an entire market value on making their old games from the 80's and 90's available on the Wii, even. There's videos on YouTube of old-generation gamers letting their kids try the games out to see how they like it. One guy even made a project out of it to see how a young pair of young gamers today would enjoy playing old-school games.

Modifié par Gleym, 14 février 2011 - 06:52 .

[Whatever42]

Gleym wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

 Like if we would give todays players 1980 games to play with, they would find them not so fun, because people knows they could be different (better). meanign when our technology level change we people change with them too. Not sure if can I say it better with my english?

This comment is B.S. because plenty of kids today love games from the 1980's. Nintendo has an entire market value on making their old games from the 80's and 90's available on the Wii, even.

You can find a niche for everything. The existance of a niche doesn't mean its the best business model or the best way to tell a story.

[yoomazir]

Lumikki wrote...
I mean while technology change and provides new possibilities to do different stuff, we people also starts demand those new better stuff. So, our taste change with it. Like if we would give todays players 1980 games to play with, they would find them not so fun, because people knows they could be different (better). Meaning when our technology level change we people change with them too. Not sure if can I say it better with my english?

Okay, no wonder people like Lady Gaga over the Rat Pack, must be evolution

And don't worry, your english is fine (better that mine at least).

[Gleym]

Considering the amount of b*tching and moaning about ME2, it doesn't look like pandering to dumbed down mainstreams is a good niche. Well, at least it's not if you're wanting to keep longterm customers satisfied. But then, I guess that's why it's called a business model; money comes before integrity.

Effectively, I equate conforming the mainstream niches to something like.. I dunno.. if the Jim Henson studio suddenly decided 'Ya know what? F*ck making convincing, life-like puppets that are made with dedication and effort and create an imaginative world. Let's just go make crappy 3D CG models like everyone else is doing!'

Modifié par Gleym, 14 février 2011 - 06:55 .

[Lumikki]

Gleym wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

 Like if we would give todays players 1980 games to play with, they would find them not so fun, because people knows they could be different (better). meanign when our technology level change we people change with them too. Not sure if can I say it better with my english?

This comment is B.S. because plenty of kids today love games from the 1980's. Nintendo has an entire market value on making their old games from the 80's and 90's available on the Wii, even.

Sure there is, but this is because limitation of technology on those devices. Example hand held games has different standard than higher more powerfull game devices. Also of course there is people who likes old stuff, but that's not what mass market likes. Meaning what use to be in PC 1980 good game, isn't same in PC 2010, because technology is different and modern society has also changed with all technogy around of them.

Modifié par Lumikki, 14 février 2011 - 06:56 .

[Gleym]

Lumikki wrote...

Sure there is, but this is because limitation of technology on those devices. Example hand held games has different standard than higher more powerfull game devices. Also of cause there is people who like ld stuff, but that's not what mass market likes. Meaning what use to be in PC 1980 good game, isn't same in 2010, because technology is different.

Except that Nintendo sells those old games as downloadables on the Wii console, not a handheld.

Modifié par Gleym, 14 février 2011 - 06:57 .

[Whatever42]

Gleym wrote...

Considering the amount of b*tching and moaning about ME2, it doesn't look like pandering to dumbed down mainstreams is a good niche. Well, at least it's not if you're wanting to keep longterm customers satisfied. But then, I guess that's why it's called a business model; money comes before integrity.

Effectively, I equate conforming the mainstream niches to something like.. I dunno.. if the Jim Henson studio suddenly decided 'Ya know what? F*ck making convincing, life-like puppets that are made with dedication and effort and create an imaginative world. Let's just go make crappy 3D CG models like everyone else is doing!'

No matter what you do, someone on the Internet will b*tch and complain about it. If avoiding b*tching and complaining was your goal, best not to do anything at all. Fortunately, Bioware ignores the senseless nerdrage on these forums.

[Lumikki]

Gleym wrote...

Except that Nintendo sells those old games as downloadables on the Wii console, not a handheld.

Yeah, but I think you get my point, when I sayed we can't really stop the change. It will happen no matter what we want.

[Gleym]

Doesn't mean I have to accept it if the change is dumb as bricks. Mainstream =/= Good. If something being popular in the mainstream and won awards meant that something was a genuinely good product, then we'd be repainting the Sistine Chapel to look like Edward Cullen reaching out to Bella.

[Terror_K]

Lumikki wrote...

You are so angry,
because things change, when no-one can stop the change, not even game companies. They have to change with the technology and customers as they change in time too.

Bull pies! They don't need to change, they merely choose to. DAO and Fallout: New Vegas have proven that. It's their choice if they want to go for the more mainstream audience, but not doing so isn't going to make them go broke. It'll just mean a little less profit.

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

T_K, you seem to be the one coming in and whining because the game wasn't made to suit you.

I'm complaining because the first game was, and then the second one wasn't. Had ME1 been like ME2 from the start in style, then I wouldn't have complained at all really. I wouldn't have become a Mass Effect fan either of course.

In either case, why shouldn't I complain? How is my complaining worse than all the others who go "Waah! Waah! Mass Effect should be made for me like every other game out there is! All RPGs should be watered down and turned into shallow action-based games! How dare you want some depth and choice in your games, you elitist hater troll! How dare you want some non-generic titles! How dare you want one game out of every thousand to not appeal to the same audience as those other thousand!"

Yes... I'm the bad guy for wanting one or two games a year to appeal to me, instead of just silently letting every single game out there be the same brown mush that everybody else likes without comment.

But I continue to marvel at one point. That you don't like ME2 is fine; different strokes for different blokes. But that you think that ME1 was significantly different than ME2, I continue to find incomprehensible. Please don't defend your stance, I know your arguments. You simply assign weight to details that most people find trivial.

Firstly, I don't "don't like" ME2. I still think it's a good game. And I admit some things are an improvement. But I think that BioWare went too far with most of their changes and removed too much or overcompesated for ME1's failings.

Secondly, I find it just as incomprehensible that people can't see the big differences between ME1 and ME2. And while many of the faults with ME2 may seem trivial, when you add them up they come to a lot of really annoying faults that paint an overall picture I simply don't like. ME2 is clearly a very different game made for very different people judging from the direction it took. It was more about getting that moneymaking audience than it was about actually improving the game itself, and that's probably the biggest overall failing of ME2 as a whole, IMO.

Modifié par Terror_K, 14 février 2011 - 07:15 .

[Whatever42]

Gleym wrote...

Doesn't mean I have to accept it if the change is dumb as bricks. Mainstream =/= Good. If something being popular in the mainstream and won awards meant that something was a genuinely good product, then we'd be repainting the Sistine Chapel to look like Edward Cullen reaching out to Bella.

Of course mainstream != good. Mainstream often means generic to such a degree that the widest possible audience enjoys it.  Liking something because it's popular is as lame as hating something because it's popular. Like what like, hate what you hate.

But the unavoidable reality of the matter is that very good indy bands will inevitably go mainstream for the money. And hardcore RPG developers will inevitably adopt popular game mechanics because they're popular. It just so happened that I enjoyed the result of the RPG storytelling and you didn't. I accept you didn't like it, I appreciate that you didn't like it, I think the reasons you don't like it are fully legit and I won't criticise them. I just wish you extended me the same courtesy.

I still believe that CRPGs can move beyond the old turn-based, THACO based, stats-driven, 1970s Gary Gygax wargaming models. Maybe you don't. Or maybe you disagree with the direction Bioware took. But I hope for a bit more depth to our forum dialogue than "ME2 sucks because it doesn't have an traditional inventory system".

Modifié par Whatever666343431431654324, 14 février 2011 - 07:35 .

[Lumikki]

Terror_K wrote...

Secondly, I find it just as incomprehensible that people can't see the big differences between ME1 and ME2.

I just quick comment this one. We can see the difference, but how big those changes where to someone is depending how IMPORTANT those changed stuff where for player. It's like when something get changed, but what got changed where not important for that person at all, then the affect isn't that big to that person.

You feel ME2 changes stronger, because what got changes where important to you. For me they where not so big, even if I do agree with you, that some of changes did not go right direction while some did. How ever, I do see the changes.

Modifié par Lumikki, 14 février 2011 - 07:39 .

[Lunatic LK47]

[quote]Terror_K wrote...


This is the kind of modern BS attitude I'm sick of today. There are plenty of games out there for those who find RPGs too complex. In fact, the market is saturated with them. Why should RPGs have to keep suffering for those of us who enjoy the RPG aspects that others find too complicated just because some of the mainstream gamers of today find it so? Why must all the games these days be shifted to conform to the one majority audience instead of having some variation and diversity to suit different audiences? If you're going to jump into our sandbox you should have to play by our rules, and not just change the rules of the game to suit you better because things are too complex for you.[/quote]

That's the elitist BS attitude I'm sick of today. Two can play that game, ****. Let me get the record straight. I hate casual gaming, especially the ****ing Wii, but I also hate the "Artificial difficulty due to questionable design= good challenge" . Second of all, I hate most modern games (shocker, huh?) mainly for that most of the games end up being little more than $60 paperweights and only buy whatever I really want to get, and I'm already at the point where I give up on gaming after Mass Effect 3 just because of today's current trends (i.e. "ZOMG, Games need multiplayer 1111"). Third, only very niche audiences can play the traditional RPG. What are you going to tell the average joe? You're only allowed to play said games when you hit college just because that's the only age you can comprehend them? Not going to ****ing fly here.

[quote]You like the look of the game? Fine, then come on in and play, but don't start whining that it should be made to suit you just because it wasn't quite what you came in for. Don't just in the deep end and start flailing about because you can't swim and start expecting those of us that like a deep pool to accept your wishes that it be shallower for you. Or for your own example, there's plenty of schools out there for you, so don't enter the nuclear physics class and expect it to lower itself just so you can understand it.[/quote]

Do you love talking out of your ass here? Not everyone thinks or acts like you. It's your ****ing attitude that gives gamers a bad name. I only got into BioWare's games mainly for the accesibility department. What you want is Western RPGs to go the same way as the JRPG formula (i.e. Different story, except with the same old **** different day, minus the convoluted plot.).


You play games for fun? Fine. So do I. So do a lot of us. And I don't find shallow, linear, overautomated dumbed down crap in RPGs fun at all: I find it tedious. And the things I found fun about the original Mass Effect were things that were mostly gone from the second game or were simply made so shallow as to take away their fun aspects. There are plenty of games out there for you to find fun, so is it too much to ask that I get just a small handful of games every few years to satisfy my own tastes?[/quote]

And I don't find convoluted gameplay formulas fun at all. I shouldn't have to waste hours of my 50+hour experience looking at menu screens just to see if I'm leveling up my character correctly.

[AlanC9]

Gleym wrote...

Considering the amount of b*tching and moaning about ME2, it doesn't look like pandering to dumbed down mainstreams is a good niche. Well, at least it's not if you're wanting to keep longterm customers satisfied. But then, I guess that's why it's called a business model; money comes before integrity.

Oh, please. Since when have you, or even Terror_K,  spoken for all longterm customers?

[Lunatic LK47]

Terror_K wrote...

I'm complaining because the first game was, and then the second one wasn't. Had ME1 been like ME2 from the start in style, then I wouldn't have complained at all really. I wouldn't have become a Mass Effect fan either of course.

What, you like to play a game where your S.A.S. operatives have to spend skill points just to shoot their guns competently? That's how Mass Effect 1 felt like, and I consider that gameplay mechanic bull****. There's something called SPECIAL TRAINING.

In either case, why shouldn't I complain? How is my complaining worse than all the others who go "Waah! Waah! Mass Effect should be made for me like every other game out there is! All RPGs should be watered down and turned into shallow action-based games! How dare you want some depth and choice in your games, you elitist hater troll! How dare you want some non-generic titles! How dare you want one game out of every thousand to not appeal to the same audience as those other thousand!"

How about this: "Waah! Waah! Mass Effect should be made like the hundreds of JRPGs made for the past thirty years! How dare they try to change the formula, you elitist hater troll!" Two can play that game, ****.

Yes... I'm the bad guy for wanting one or two games a year to appeal to me, instead of just silently letting every single game out there be the same brown mush that everybody else likes without comment.

Oh yeah, and I'm the bad guy for saying RPG's are alienating just because the complexities are unnecessarily confusing for someone that never played RPGs their entire lives.

[Lunatic LK47]

AlanC9 wrote...

Gleym wrote...

Considering the amount of b*tching and moaning about ME2, it doesn't look like pandering to dumbed down mainstreams is a good niche. Well, at least it's not if you're wanting to keep longterm customers satisfied. But then, I guess that's why it's called a business model; money comes before integrity.

Oh, please. Since when have you, or even Terror_K,  spoken for all longterm customers?

Alan, you're definitely on the "Free beer" list.

[AlanC9]

Terror_K wrote...
Secondly, I find it just as incomprehensible that people can't see the big differences between ME1 and ME2.

Do you mean that people don't notice the differences, don't care enough about the differences to suit you, or like the differences that you think they should dislike?

And while many of the faults with ME2 may seem trivial, when you add them up they come to a lot of really annoying faults that paint an overall picture I simply don't like.ME2 is clearly a very different game made for very different people judging from the direction it took. It was more about getting that moneymaking audience than it was about actually improving the game itself, and that's probably the biggest overall failing of ME2 as a whole, IMO.

For someone who's usually scrupulous about acknowledging that people have different tastes in games, you seem to be awfully certain that Bio's designers agree with you about their changes. You really think that they didn't consider the changes to be improvements? On what evidence?

[Gleym]

AlanC9 wrote...

Gleym wrote...

Considering the amount of b*tching and moaning about ME2, it doesn't look like pandering to dumbed down mainstreams is a good niche. Well, at least it's not if you're wanting to keep longterm customers satisfied. But then, I guess that's why it's called a business model; money comes before integrity.

Oh, please. Since when have you, or even Terror_K,  spoken for all longterm customers?

I speak for myself as a longterm customer. As does Terror. That makes us two longterm customers who are unhappy. If you add to us the other longterm customers who are also unhappy, then I suppose that means that we speak for a percentage of longterm customers, don't you think?

[Terror_K]

Lunatic LK47 wrote...

How about this: "Waah! Waah! Mass Effect should be made like the hundreds of JRPGs made for the past thirty years! How dare they try to change the formula, you elitist hater troll!" Two can play that game, ****.

What the hell are you talking about? I despise JRPGs. Can't stand the things: they're too linear and don't offer enough proper roleplaying and defining of your character, and tend to want you to build their characters in a certain way. Not to mention usually having awful storylines and stereotypical and shallow characters.

Oh yeah, and I'm the bad guy for saying RPG's are alienating just because the complexities are unnecessarily confusing for someone that never played RPGs their entire lives.

Then don't play RPGs. Play all the genres out there that don't do this. Why does every genre have to suit the same audience? The very things in RPGs that alienates you are the same things in RPGs I enjoy. And that's the problem when BioWare come along and mainstreamline their games part the way through the series: they red rid of the things that put off the casual gamer, but those are the very things that the RPG will often like.

AlanC9 wrote...

Do you mean that people don't notice the differences, don't care enough about the differences to suit you, or like the differences that you think they should dislike?

I just mean those who don't see them at all. Those who think ME2 is pretty much the same as ME1 with only a few tweaks. Those who can't see the overall presentation differences as well as the gameplay ones. If you can see the differences and prefer them, that's cool. I probably don't agree with you in most cases, but that's all good. People can like and dislike what they want.

For someone who's usually scrupulous about acknowledging that people have different tastes in games, you seem to be awfully certain that Bio's designers agree with you about their changes. You really think that they didn't consider the changes to be improvements? On what evidence?

Based on the way they went about it and what they've said. This whole "simple = better" approach, particularly from Christina Norman, speaks volumes to me. That rather than improve an existing aspect they'd rather just scrap it and reduce it to its simplest elements as the solution. The fact that rather than letting players have full control of things they'd rather automate far too much to the point of making it pointless and so that it requires next to no input or thinking from the player, especially with regards to the research/upgrade system which just God-mods everything to the max with no need for a player to choose or even pay attention.

On top of it all, the overall shift in style from something that seems to be aimed at old-school sci-fi fans as a homage to sci-fi from the late 70's to early 90's into the more bombastic, over-the-top "Modern Hollywood" approach more aimed at today's teenagers. Add to that the babying and oversimplification and in-in-your-face nature of the inferfaces as well as the gameplay (Large simple weapons loadout screens, "Mission Complete" screens that overexplain, large on-screen prompts and large, candy-like pop-ups, etc.) give the whole thing both a "retooled by the network" feel combined with a "Fisher Price: My First RPG" approach. To an experienced RPG player it's like BioWare suddenly decided to throw a bib on me with the Cerberus logo on it, shove me into a high chair and start going "here comes the RPG! Zoooo-ooom!" with a little spoon.

To me all these factors say that Mass Effect 2 shifted from being aimed more at newcomers and mainstream casuals rather than their existing players, and that the game was tuned more in line with satisfying and appealing to them than it was in fixing ME1's issues properly.

Modifié par Terror_K, 14 février 2011 - 08:30 .

[Jigero]

Terror_K wrote...

Bull pies! They don't need to change, they merely choose to. DAO and Fallout: New Vegas have proven that. It's their choice if they want to go for the more mainstream audience, but not doing so isn't going to make them go broke. It'll just mean a little less profit.

Did you think ME1 was like some niche game where only a hand full of people played it or some thing and all of a sudden it got popular with ME2? ME 1 sold more copy's then ME2 and was far more popular and was even in the main stream news. Yet ME2 is mainstream game. Ok and I guess 1+2= cupcakes as well

I'm complaining because the first game was, and then the second one wasn't. Had ME1 been like ME2 from the start in style, then I wouldn't have complained at all really. I wouldn't have become a Mass Effect fan either of course.

In either case, why shouldn't I complain? How is my complaining worse than all the others who go "Waah! Waah! Mass Effect should be made for me like every other game out there is! All RPGs should be watered down and turned into shallow action-based games! How dare you want some depth and choice in your games, you elitist hater troll! How dare you want some non-generic titles! How dare you want one game out of every thousand to not appeal to the same audience as those other thousand!"

Yes... I'm the bad guy for wanting one or two games a year to appeal to me, instead of just silently letting every single game out there be the same brown mush that everybody else likes without comment.

But ME1 wasn't anything special either, it was still about a space marine who goes and saves the world, like every other shooter that has becoming out since 1989. Aswell as had mechanics borrowed for heavily from other games. But you have to be all angsty about it just because you wanna be edgy and not like stuff you consider "main stream" instead of enjoying a franchise for what is simply because it would compromise your Cool Kids Club mentality.

Firstly, I don't "don't like" ME2. I still think it's a good game. And I admit some things are an improvement. But I think that BioWare went too far with most of their changes and removed too much or overcompesated for ME1's failings.

Secondly, I find it just as incomprehensible that people can't see the big differences between ME1 and ME2. And while many of the faults with ME2 may seem trivial, when you add them up they come to a lot of really annoying faults that paint an overall picture I simply don't like. ME2 is clearly a very different game made for very different people judging from the direction it took. It was more about getting that moneymaking audience than it was about actually improving the game itself, and that's probably the biggest overall failing of ME2 as a whole, IMO.

Oh yes they wanted ME1 not to make money. Sure they where just doing it out of the kindness of their heart. ME2 is very different from game from ME1 but that because it just has more of everything. Which you seem to ignore, more universe, more combat, more variety, more choices and  more role play. But you just wanna focus on the nit picking, which was worst in ME1 but your nostalgia vision is getting in the way of seeing you're just talking out of your ass.


Seriously I don't mind people hating on ME2 just for the love of Christ come up with a competent argument that isn't riddled with butthurt and nostalgia vision.

Modifié par Jigero, 14 février 2011 - 08:36 .