352 réponses à ce sujet

[88mphSlayer]

they can always make improvements with DA3

but if Bioware cheapens out on the friggin reaper invasion and trilogy climax... i don't know what i'd do, i might have to go back to playing jrpg's... don't make me do it bioware! don't make me do it!

[Lieutenant Flashlight]

I don't think many hate that their trying new things with RPGs. I think it's the fact that they are doing it in the middle of a series. They send out ME1 and people fall all over it and love it, then ME2 comes out and it is completely different but that isn't okay with some of the huge fans.

I think they should have waited to implement these new ideas at the beginning of a new IP rather than in the middle of loved series like DA and ME.

Modifié par Lieutenant Flashlight, 12 mars 2011 - 02:13 .

[Lumikki]

What new ideas?

[Lieutenant Flashlight]

Lumikki wrote...

What new ideas?

The more streamlined combat leading to the loss of multiple RPG elements? 

That seems to be up there with lack of story for ME2.

Modifié par Lieutenant Flashlight, 12 mars 2011 - 02:24 .

[Lumikki]

mm.. did not know that lack of something is new idea, but okey.

The idea is support more faster action based cinematic gameplay, so they did need to cut stuff what makes it more like slow strategy game. That's what they did. I may not agree fully how they did the cuting, but that's other question.

Maybe the inventory base design how they did it in ME2 was little new, but other ways?

Modifié par Lumikki, 12 mars 2011 - 02:26 .

[Gatt9]

Ozzyfan223 wrote...

I mean, the cataclysmic response and aftermath of the DA2 launch has sent repercussive doubt and distaste for a company that has always been loved and respected by it's fans and the gaming community as a whole. Whether DA2 was rushed or not is a matter of debate, and I think the DA franchise can be saved from a stellar 3rd game. But if ME3 fails, or feels rushed, I think its proof Bioware has lost its touch.

I happen to like DA2. Is it their usual greatness? No, but it is something I enjoy playing and I love the characters. If ME3 succeeds, and lives up the hype gathered from ME2, it will put the ME series in to the histroy books of gaming. But if it fails, and we are left with a game thats even 95% done, Bioware will be responsible for containing a wave of flames greater than the world has ever known.

Yes,  yes it is.

First,  lets establish one thing.  EA didn't buy Bioware because they're a massive money maker,  until DAO,  they'd never sold more than 2 million units of one title roughly.  EA bought them for one reason,  and one reason only:  Star Wars.

EA loves MMOs,  EA insisted in the early 2000's that MMOs were the only kind of game to make,  and that's exactly what they did.  Focused only on MMOs.  EA wants WoW revenues,  and EA believes Star Wars will get them there.  EA *really* didn't care about Bioware and it's RPGs.

ME2 burned bridges,  doesn't matter which side of the fence you're on,  you know it upset alot of people.  DA2 just burned alot more.  Bioware's not getting a good reputation out of this.

So if ME3 doesn't do well,  EA will do what EA does best,  roll them up into EA once Star Wars releases.

Personally,  I strongly doubt ME will make it into the history books,  or if it does,  not in the way you think.  Judging it fairly,  as the shooter ME2 was,  it's bad.  It made pretty much every mistake you could make with a Shooter.  Bad level design,  bad AI,  repetitive unremarkable weapons and enemies.  I'm willing to bet in 5 years we see what we saw with EA's Black & White,  alot of sites saying "We're sorry,  we don't know what we were thinking when we proclaimed it such a great game".

[Lumikki]

That's very negative way to look situation Gatt9. When you know very well that ME2 was success, even if you personaly did not like it.

[Bourne Endeavor]

Vyse_Fina wrote...

Very well said. I completely agree, but have to add something to the multiplayer issue though.

As long as it is not forced upon us (As in: it won't have anything to do with singleplayer and rather be handled like the Multiplayer in Uncharted 2 and Assassin's Creed Brotherhood) I am fine with it (allthough the time spent could be used for more important stuff). The thing here is the following: 
Develoeprs try to make you hold onto your games for as long as possible. They don't want you to trade them in at Gamestop or wherever. The reason for that is that they don't get any revenue from used game sales and the number of people selling games while they still get more than half of what they paid for it is enormous. So what do they do? They put in day 1 DLC and a code you can only use if you buy the game new, sp people don't buy the games used. They put in Multiplayer modes so people keep playing the games even after they finished the soloplayer campaign.

We are in agreement although I will always ponder what could have been if multiplayer is indeed implemented. Regardless, if it does not prove problematic to the story, I shall be content. Regrettably, I do not believe it is feasible given the length of the single player. I hope to be proven wrong.

With regards to used games. I have always been supportive of Project $10, despite some lackluster methods EA has used. In actuality, they could go a step further and remove large portions of game content, providing it free of charge for new game purchasers and I would agree. Frankly, I would prefer this to multiplayer in virtually everything.

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

I'm not an FF fanboy but correct me if I'm wrong here - that series is usually criticized for not innovating while Bioware is being criticized for innovating. And how exactly do you listen to your fans? No one on these boards agrees about anything except that Bioware should do exactly what each of us says because we're special.

To an extent, yes Square Enix has been criticized primarily for their lack of innovation. The qualm amongst the fanbase is they have frequently overhauled perfectly efficient mechanics and/or blatantly ignored their fans. Final Fantasy XI sparked hostility for being a MMO in the prolific series since as a MMO, it is completely divorced from what made the franchise what is. Admittedly, it was arguably petty yet not entirely devoid of merit.

Likewise, one of the developers for FFXIII publicly stated they had a story to tell and they intended to tell it their way. These remarks were the result of numerous concerns regarding the removal of towns, talkative NPCs and other stables in the series. Evidently, this backfired when heavy criticism was levied their way. FFXIV was a reemergence of the MMO, yet is essentially a glorified beta game and outright disaster; to the degree, they have fired the entire production team and offered free service. It is believed the recently rumored FFXIII-2 is their final attempt to salvage the series and quite possibly the company.

Now compare this to the titles to precede the aforementioned. FFX in particular is their second highest grossing game despite similar mechanics to what came before. I may have my personal dislike for FFXII however, it sold relatively high. I need not mention the success of FFVII.

Innovation is a remarkable thing, but if taken too far it can be catastrophic. People become fans of a series because they fancy what is represented. If you continuously alter what it was they adored, they will abandon you.

BioWare is not being criticized for innovation. They are under scrutiny for a complete overhaul, in lieu of slight tweaks to what already worked. Dragon Age warped from a tactical RPG to an action RPG for essentially no reason. This is not innovation but a completely different game. It would be akin to Call of Duty 5 being developed as a MMO. You are certain to appeal to some however, your existing fanbase will become hostile.

InvaderErl wrote...

Stuff

Those polls are irrelevant due to their vague nature. I would vote for ME2 in each yet feel the main plot was fairly poor to downright insulting in some instances. Additionally, there is not a way to determine if it was the same individuals voting in each, therefore their accuracy is further suspect.

xxSgt_Reed_24xx wrote...

Not necessarily.... I happen to love both genres and play ME and CoD! *gasp*
(started bioware with KOTOR fyi)

Besides, it could be argued that they would be "pulling a square enix" by staying with the same old, same old that made their past games great.

As do I, in fact I am a veteran Halo player and was extremely good back in the day, if I do say so myself. In addition, I play Black Ops and a legion of games from other genres. Unfortunately, we are an exceptional minority. The vast majority of FPS gamers are not interested in storylines, character development, and detest things such as loot and dialogue. It is an irritation simply because they prefer immediate PvP action.

For BioWare to attract those individuals whilst retaining their established core, they essentially must create Call of Effect. The cost of such a game would be so astronomical it would never be worth it.

Modifié par Bourne Endeavor, 12 mars 2011 - 02:37 .

[Salarian-Diplomat]

i actually really disagree i thought mass effect 2 proved bioware can still make excellent games i have not tried DA2 yet but i have high hopes bioware has always been my favorite game makers and i trust they wont let me down (hopefully)

[Valmarn]

ifander wrote...

Ozzyfan223 wrote...

I mean, the cataclysmic response and aftermath of the DA2 launch has sent repercussive doubt and distaste for a company that has always been loved and respected by it's fans and the gaming community as a whole.

Hyperbole, anyone? I think BioWare deserves some credit for trying to move RPG's in a new direction. The genre is evolving, thanks to their efforts. If it were up to some of the... people... on these forums then the RPG genre would go down the same path as the FPS. Meaning it would never change.

If it ain't broke, don't fix.

Don't "fix" it until it is broken.

[Lieutenant Flashlight]

Lumikki wrote...

mm.. did not know that lack of something is new idea, but okey.

The idea is support more faster action based cinematic gameplay, so they did need to cut stuff what makes it more like slow strategy game. That's what they did. I may not agree fully how they did the cuting, but that's other question.

Maybe the inventory base design how they did it in ME2 was little new, but other ways?

The "lack of something" you're saying was their intention and new idea.  New as in new to the Mass Effect series.  Getting rid of the RPG elements was something new to Mass Effect in ME2. 

Also, "slow strategy game" is basically how your typical hardcore RPG plays.  Which they called ME1 and 2 from the start.  They did this change in the middle of the series but it came up short because the story was lacking which is what I was trying to say.

[Valmarn]

adneate wrote...

It's not so much as "A Last Hope" as a kind of last straw. If BioWare ignores the fans once again and doesn't address some of the issues that ME2 has I think a lot of people will lose interest in the company. Since it will prove that they are too arrogant to accept criticism of any kind.

Honestly, I still have no regrets about cancelling my ME 3 pre-order. Sure, I did so simply because the Wall of Sound team wouldn't be composing the soundtrack, but one could also see their absence as a bad omen.

[Lumikki]

Valmarn wrote...

ifander wrote...

Hyperbole, anyone? I think BioWare deserves some credit for trying to move RPG's in a new direction. The genre is evolving, thanks to their efforts. If it were up to some of the... people... on these forums then the RPG genre would go down the same path as the FPS. Meaning it would never change.

If it ain't broke, don't fix.

Don't "fix" it until it is broken.

This depense how you see the RPG genre. I mean there has been few stuff broken in RPG for decades. Example inventory system has allways been one.  I mean when there isn't something to complain about it.

[Lumikki]

Lieutenant Flashlight wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

mm.. did not know that lack of something is new idea, but okey.

The idea is support more faster action based cinematic gameplay, so they did need to cut stuff what makes it more like slow strategy game. That's what they did. I may not agree fully how they did the cuting, but that's other question.

Maybe the inventory base design how they did it in ME2 was little new, but other ways?

The "lack of something" you're saying was their intention and new idea.  New as in new to the Mass Effect series.  Getting rid of the RPG elements was something new to Mass Effect in ME2. 

Also, "slow strategy game" is basically how your typical hardcore RPG plays.  Which they called ME1 and 2 from the start.  They did this change in the middle of the series but it came up short because the story was lacking which is what I was trying to say.

Yeah, but ME serie was never ment to be typical hardcore RPG, it was allways ment to be hybrid, so same RPG elements doesn't necassary work well.  How much game changed for, is based what kind of player you are.

Example if you are so called "hardcore RPG fan" then between ME1 and ME2 did happen big change and not neccassary in better direction. How ever, if you are like me wider consept RPG fan, then the change between ME1 and ME2 wasn't that big, because we can accecpt both directions just fine.

Modifié par Lumikki, 12 mars 2011 - 03:05 .

[Zulu_DFA]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

The vast majority of FPS gamers are not interested in storylines, character development, and detest things such as loot and dialogue. It is an irritation simply because they prefer immediate PvP action.

There is another, and very simple reason why the CoD crowd will never be attracted to Mass Effect, and it's called 3rd person perspective. It's (a) awkward, and ( not "serious", if you know what I mean.

[Lieutenant Flashlight]

Lumikki wrote...

Yeah, but ME serie was never ment to be typical hardcore RPG, it was allways ment to be hybrid, so same RPG elements doesn't necassary work well.  How much game changed for is based what kind of player you are.

Example if you are so called "hardcore RPG fan" then between ME1 and ME2 did happen big change and not neccassary in better direction. How ever, if you are like me wider consept RPG fan, then the change between ME1 and ME2 wasn't that big, because we can accecpt both directions just fine.

No.  Sorry, you misunderstood me.  I'm not a typical hardcore RPG fan.  I was just saying that those who are those types of fans lost a lot in ME2. 
They actually wanted an inventory that was better and more organized than ME1.  What they got was less skills, practically no inventory, and a complex morality system that limits Role Playing.  Those are big deals for huge RPG fans that probably just asked for better combat.

Modifié par Lieutenant Flashlight, 12 mars 2011 - 03:05 .

[Reptilian Rob]

Ozzyfan223 wrote...

I mean, the cataclysmic response and aftermath of the DA2 launch has sent repercussive doubt and distaste for a company that has always been loved and respected by it's fans...

And still is...

I hardly would categorize a metacritic of above 8.0 as "cataclysmic response." Much of the Bioware crowd are overreacting to a ridiculous level.

This thread should be more properly titled "Sanity, humankind's last hope?"

[xxSgt_Reed_24xx]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

The vast majority of FPS gamers are not interested in storylines, character development, and detest things such as loot and dialogue. It is an irritation simply because they prefer immediate PvP action.

There is another, and very simple reason why the CoD crowd will never be attracted to Mass Effect, and it's called 3rd person perspective. It's (a) awkward, and ( not "serious", if you know what I mean.

Idk, I actually prefer TPS to FPS ever since gears of war 1 came out.
But I agree, hardcore CoD fans probably hate it.

[88mphSlayer]

Lieutenant Flashlight wrote...

I don't think many hate that their trying new things with RPGs. I think it's the fact that they are doing it in the middle of a series. They send out ME1 and people fall all over it and love it, then ME2 comes out and it is completely different but that isn't okay with some of the huge fans.

I think they should have waited to implement these new ideas at the beginning of a new IP rather than in the middle of loved series like DA and ME.

eh, ME2's backlash wasn't anything like what's going on over in age of dragons land... sci-fi has always been receptive to action & guns so ME2's combat changes really weren't that bad, the interactivity with gear was muffed up some but that's easily fixable even with the new tps gameplay... as for DA2... man, never mess with nerds who are promised Baldur's Gate level quality at every corner and AD&D strategy combat... you won't come out alive (or sane)

[Lumikki]

Lieutenant Flashlight wrote...

Yeah, they wanted it because they are hardcore RPG fans, who can ONLY accept typical traditonal RPG consept. How ever, you did not get me, ME serie was NEVER ment to be typical traditional RPG, it was allways ment to be hybrid of TPS and action RPG.

Now why then these hardcore RPG fans then liked ME1? Because ME1 was allmost totally typical traditional RPG, because Bioware totally failed to make it hybrid. In ME1 there was NO shooter side at all, it's was allmost none existent. ME1 was more like traditional RPG + action RPG.

Now to make ME serie as hybrid as action RPG with shooter side they HAD to cut features what was making the game worst as total. Now don't get me wrong. Yes they cut too much of many customation stuff. How ever, example weapon based combat and inventory system was done so how they need it to be done. Even if some stuff was still missed in inventory system in ME2.

Modifié par Lumikki, 12 mars 2011 - 03:28 .

[Zulu_DFA]

Lumikki wrote...

Example if you are so called "hardcore RPG fan" then between ME1 and ME2 did happen big change and not neccassary in better direction. How ever, if you are like me wider consept RPG fan, then the change between ME1 and ME2 wasn't that big, because we can accecpt both directions just fine.

I'm not an RPG fan, neither "hardcore", nor "wider concept". Yet I think the change between ME1 and ME2 was gigantic and for the worse. I didn't mind so much the powers streamline, but taking out the inventory (with all the consequences it head on squad armor, weapon mods, helmet toggle, etc.) was a universe-breaking change.

The ME1 inventory upheld the sense of the large scale of the story, while the ME2 shooter-style "pick Gun X at (and only at) Level Y" is simply unsuited for the story being told in the game.

What the ME1 inventory badly needed was an ability to mark multiple items then hit the "Convert All Marked to Omnigel" button, much like you delete spam e-mail. And voila. Improvement ready.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 12 mars 2011 - 03:20 .

[Valmarn]

Phaedon wrote...

DA2 has been getting positive professional reviews so far.

Though I find that statement to be rather ambiguous, I would agree that most of the reviews have been, more or less, positive. I recognize that many "professional" reviewers have given it scores in the 90's, and that would be "most of the reviews" that are positive.

Now, bear in mind that 3 out of 5 or 7 out of 10 I, personally, consider to be mediocre, which I do not consider positive. Given BioWare's reputation as one of the premiere video game developers, I would even go so far as to consider 8 out of 10 to be mediocre.

~60%, ~70% and 80% could be considered postive, but when compared to BioWare's past success (especially Dragon Age: Origins), I find it difficult to do so.

[Lumikki]

Sorry, but inventory was ME1's one huge problem. Sure, ME2 did cut too much of customation in inventory system, but that's totally different than inventory's base design. Inventory is not really story related, it's tool for customation and gameplay.

[Reptilian Rob]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...


Square Enix is an excellent comparison to the direction BioWare could traverse upon if they continue to disregard their current fanbase. The Final Fantasy series is a shell of its former self and arguably has not released a noteworthy title since FFX, although your mileage may vary in regards to FFXII. Any fanbase will accept some deviation from past installments but only to such an extent before they move on. For some, BioWare has exhausted their "blind buy" quota and those individual now approach their games with caution. In contrast, some believe they have evolved for the better. I fall into the former category myself but do not begrudge the latter. That said, Mass Effect 3 most certainly has much to live up to. If concepts are implemented the fanbase vocally abhors (multiplayer comes to mind) it could have a significant impact in the future, especially if they feel cheap.

I posted something elsewhere that bears repeating.

"BioWare is in this egotistical and nonsensical delusion they can capture the CoD masses yet continue to ignore the conundrum in their midst. Those gamers are not interested in story, character development and general plot advancement. In their perception what BioWare adheres to being champions of is tiresome, monotonous and wasteful. It interferes the core objective to their gaming experience; shoot things. We are undoubtedly the most opposite fanbases in existence and BioWare must decide between them. You cannot have your cake and eat it too."

Well gosh, we better just jump ship while we can!

Sarcasm aside this is ludicris, the simple sentence "BioWare is in this egotistical and nonsensical delusion they can capture the CoD masses yet continue to ignore the conundrum in their midst." is just a jumble of nonsense, if you want to talk about nonsense, that is.

There are several reasons this is an inaacurate statment, first and foremost of which is the fact that Bioware has implemented a fan feedback system WITHIN ME2 and DAO to cater to the content and game direction the fans crave. This feature can be turned on and off from the menu setting, Bioware has even given the community an option to participate, not force fed us.

Second, Bioware Games have always gone through reinovation. Need I go back as far as Shattered Steel to prove that point? In a matter of years they went from first person mech combat to the mystisism of Jade Empire. From Jade Empire Bioware went to the spawling universe and tight combat of Mass Effect.

Bioware is doing much the same now with their current direction. They are not catering to multiple crowds as the posted above me as said. Bioware is once again rinventing their genres.

It's funny, how when something is changed, the naysayers come out of the woodwork...

Modifié par Reptilian Rob, 12 mars 2011 - 03:24 .

[Lieutenant Flashlight]

88mphSlayer wrote...

eh, ME2's backlash wasn't anything like what's going on over in age of dragons land... sci-fi has always been receptive to action & guns so ME2's combat changes really weren't that bad, the interactivity with gear was muffed up some but that's easily fixable even with the new tps gameplay... as for DA2... man, never mess with nerds who are promised Baldur's Gate level quality at every corner and AD&D strategy combat... you won't come out alive (or sane)

Yeah, I just brought ME2 into it because... after all we are in the Mass Effect forums. 

I was just trying to keep it ME related.

Modifié par Lieutenant Flashlight, 12 mars 2011 - 03:25 .