352 réponses à ce sujet

[Pwener2313]

Lieutenant Flashlight wrote...
I was just trying to keep it ME related.

That plan went down the toilet 24 hours ago when the the mods abandoned us to our fates in this forsaken "post apocaliptic mod disapperance" world.

[Pwener2313]

mrsph wrote...

Am I the only person that thinks most stories that Bioware makes just aren't that good to begin with? It's the settings and characters I enjoy, the stories are just the same thing over and over.

There is a small group of writters and readers in the world that consider "imagination" as a dead virtue. I count myself among them.

[Zulu_DFA]

xxSgt_Reed_24xx wrote...

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.

I was thinking once abiut creating a specific thread about this, with pictures, but forgone the idea as totally pointless and lacking any real fun.

But in short, there is the issue with fast aiming. An experienced FPS player usually hits "Aim" while only dragging the crosshair to target, even before actually bringing the crosshair over it. The perspective changes as the camera moves closer to target. So player has to predict how this change of perspective from "normal" to "aiming" is going to affect his aim. That requires certain skill without which one can't "Aim" before bringing the crosshair straight on target, or the target will constantly show up left or right of the crosshair at the end of the player's "aiming arc". In FPSs it's quite intuitive and due to the "view from eyes" is harnessing one's real-life sighting skills.  In TPSs, however, the "view over the shoulder" requires specific skill for each game. Even between the ME1 and 2 there is a slight difference in the aiming perspective (and you can't imagine how it freaked me out when I was readjusting, and thank God for the sniper rifles).

[Ozzyfan223]

Lumikki wrote...

Ozzyfan223 wrote...

I'm not worried about them crashing, no, they'll sell games. But the intergrity of what made Bioware Bioware may be compromised, especially if ME3 is rushed out the door. Which would be their last hope as a company whose goal it is to make great games, not just money.

Don't know what to say, you are little negative. Like making assumptions what motive Bioware has for making games. Is it based actual knowledge or your own assumption based what you know about situation. Yeah, people assume so much, know so little.

Bioware is talking longer time to make ME3, than DA2 or even BG2. In Januar 2010 they where allready starting to make ME3 as far I know.

a little malodramatic on my part I'll admit, I'm not nearly as pesimistic as a lot of others I've seen here. It is an assumption, yes, but would it be wrong to assume such things if the games do feel rushed? When the company's track record proves otherwise?

[Lumikki]

mrsph wrote...

Am I the only person that thinks most stories that Bioware makes just aren't that good to begin with? It's the settings and characters I enjoy, the stories are just the same thing over and over.

Base stories are often based same consept in all movies, series, books and games.

How ever, I would not say Bioware can't make good stories. Example what was wrong in Kotor story? I think it was well writen and had surprices for player. It had layers what revealed slowly for player.

[Ozzyfan223]

Lumikki wrote...

Ozzyfan223 wrote...

I'm not worried about them crashing, no, they'll sell games. But the intergrity of what made Bioware Bioware may be compromised, especially if ME3 is rushed out the door. Which would be their last hope as a company whose goal it is to make great games, not just money.

Don't know what to say, you are little negative. Like making assumptions what motive Bioware has for making games. Is it based actual knowledge or your own assumption based what you know about situation. Yeah, people assume so much, know so little.

Bioware is talking longer time to make ME3, than DA2 or even BG2. In Januar 2010 they where allready starting to make ME3 as far I know.

I'm not nearly as pessimistic as a lot of other people here. I still have faith in Bioware, I'm just presenting possible circumstances. I think DA2, while a very fun game, feels rushed. I think of ME3 feels the same way, which I doubt, then it's a bad sign. I never felt like Bioware rushed a game, even if they did. 

I don't know what situation you're referring to. I'm just saying, if games continue to feel rushed, I don't think people can deny there's a problem.

[Vena_86]

Phaedon wrote...

DA2 has been getting positive professional reviews so far.

The reviewers I actually trust put DA2 on a "satisfactory" level, not great or even good. Reviews that are out before normal people can play it just serve as marketing so EA can advertise with quotes like "It has much blood!", "Lots of gore!", "SPLOSIONSSSS!!!", "Blood".

[Ozzyfan223]

Vena_86 wrote...

Phaedon wrote...

DA2 has been getting positive professional reviews so far.

The reviewers I actually trust put DA2 on a "satisfactory" level, not great or even good. Reviews that are out before normal people can play it just serve as marketing so EA can advertise with quotes like "It has much blood!", "Lots of gore!", "SPLOSIONSSSS!!!", "Blood".

while reviews are generally good, I think most will agree there are aspects of DA2 that seem like they weren't fully developed. If they were, then it's a poor decision on the developers side, but, I dunno....

[petipas1414]

I would say that I enjoyed Mass Effect and Origins about the same amount.

My feelings while playing Mass Effect 2 and DA were very different however.

During ME2 I was awestruck. I loved almost everything (outside of the Horizon cameo). I still start new Sheps and play them the whole way through just because.

With DA2 I had to kind of force myself to like it. I'm not saying it wasn't worth the money... but I will say it's disappointing and my faith in the DA team has effectively been halved. Not to mention that the responses from BW on the DA2 forums have been unprofessional to say the least... borderline childish.

That being said however... I know ME3 will be awesome. In fact, after playing DA2 I'm really grateful we have Casey Hudson behind the wheel

[Zulu_DFA]

Lumikki wrote...

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.

Sorry, but in a game such as Mass Effect, inventory and customization is very story related. Because the story is set in a universe, and the universe must be well-built. When you play a galactic hero working for powerful organizations with access to a lot of wealth, and literally decide fates of some races, the mechanic "pick Gun X at Point A" does not work. Especially when every other merc of those dozens you've mowed down during the last mission wielded Gun X. That's just... immersion-breaking.

Of course, it's always nice to start with a crowbar and go for the pistol-shotgun-SMG sequence... in a game that has a story spanning less three days from the protagonist's PoV.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 12 mars 2011 - 04:13 .

[Whatever42]

Valmarn wrote...

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.

Metacritic scores of Bioware games:

Baldur's Gate II: 95%
Neverwinter Nights; 91%
Neverwinter Nights 2: 81%
KotoR: 94%
Jade Empire: 89%
Mass Effect: 91%
Dragon Age Origins: 91%
Mass Effect 2: 96%
Dragon Age 2: 84%

Mean Metacritic rating: 90.2%
Median Metacrici rating: 91%

Yes, at 93% of their mean rating, a full 6% lower, Dragon Age 2 is not exactly a triumph. A disaster? Hardly.

Now lets look at their innovation over those games. The NWN series imo had pretty weak stories - I never could get into them. They had their fans and the concept was very interesting. However a lot of people who adored BGII couldn't really get into NWN, including me. It got great marks for its toolset and innovation but their single player campaigns were far from brilliant (imo).

KotoR inovated with a more cinematic style and fully voiced dialgoue. They also introduced darkside/lightside mechanics. Smash success.

DA:O was a traditional RPG, fully voiced. Not innovative. Called a love note to old school gamers.

Mass Effect tried to go even more cinematic with faux TPS mechanics. Again, innovative. Good success, some very nice praise but few actual rave reviews. With more time and money, it might have done better but graphics problems and cookie cutter environments kept it from greatness, in most reviewers eyes.

Mass Effect 2 innovated further, making it even more cinematic. Rave reviews, even more than KotoR. While BG2 is probably my favorite Bioware game and KotoR is the favorite game of others, for a lot of younger gamers, this is their BG2 and KotoR.

Dragon Age 2 tried to go to a more action style, simplified RPG mechanics but far more cinematic and a more personal story. The story is more personal and dramatic but crunch time nailed the again - reused resources, limited scope, and some design problems.

Bioware has always innovated. DAO was actually a rare step back for them, not an innovation. They have not always hit the mark but they always come out with at least a very good game; and DA2 is a very good game by the measure of almost all professional reviewers. It will sell well and Bioware and EA will make money from it and there will be a DA3.

So this talk of last hope and Bioware is becomign Square Enix when they couldn't be a more different company is ridiculous. That they don't listen to a few dozen very loud customers spamming hate mail onto their forums is not a sign of the apocalpyse, it's good sense. Blizzard doesn't listen to their forums - they've come right out and said that its a waste of time. I remember when Ronald Moore said that he was going to start ignoring the BSG forums because there were too many haters just mucking up any reasonable exchange of thoughts.

Its not arrogance. Its simply once you reach a certain level of popularity, its pointless. There are too many people jumping up and down banging pots and pans yelling for everyone to listen to them, that only they can save civilization.

Bioware is just fine. No saving is necessary. They are probably making more money than they ever have and selling more games. And their quality is about where its always been, if you look back realistically on their games, and they will continue to innovate, despite the yelling and hollaring of a small minority.

[AlanC9]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Sorry, but in a game such as Mass Effect, inventory and customization is very story related. Because the story is set in a universe, and the universe must be well-built. When you play a galactic hero working for powerful organizations with access to a lot of wealth, and literally decide fates of some races, the mechanic "pick Gun X at Point A" does not work. Especially when every other merc of those dozens you've mowed down during the last mission wielded Gun X. That's just... immersion-breaking.

Really? I thought it was a lot more immersion-breaking for Shepard to go around buying upgrades in shops when either the Alliance or Cerberus could have afforded all of them before the game begins.

[Ozzyfan223]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

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.

Sorry, but in a game such as Mass Effect, inventory and customization is very story related. Because the story is set in a universe, and the universe must be well-built. When you play a galactic hero working for powerful organizations with access to a lot of wealth, and literally decide fates of some races, the mechanic "pick Gun X at Point A" does not work. Especially when every other merc of those dozens you've mowed down during the last mission wielded Gun X. That's just... immersion-breaking.

Of course, it's always nice to start with a crowbar and go for the pistol-shotgun-SMG sequence... in a game that has a story spanning less three days from the protagonist's PoV.

I disagree. I thought the inventory in ME1 added nothing, and was more of a hassle than anything. You don't need to find 50 different armors in an hours time in order for a game to be immersive.

[Zulu_DFA]

AlanC9 wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Sorry, but in a game such as Mass Effect, inventory and customization is very story related. Because the story is set in a universe, and the universe must be well-built. When you play a galactic hero working for powerful organizations with access to a lot of wealth, and literally decide fates of some races, the mechanic "pick Gun X at Point A" does not work. Especially when every other merc of those dozens you've mowed down during the last mission wielded Gun X. That's just... immersion-breaking.

Really? I thought it was a lot more immersion-breaking for Shepard to go around buying upgrades in shops when either the Alliance or Cerberus could have afforded all of them before the game begins.

Have you talked to the Normandy's Intendant?

Anyway, in ME2 it's a lot worse: every item you can get, you can get only in one place in the entire frigging galaxy, even if its a piece of crap every merc has got.

[Whatever42]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Sorry, but in a game such as Mass Effect, inventory and customization is very story related. Because the story is set in a universe, and the universe must be well-built. When you play a galactic hero working for powerful organizations with access to a lot of wealth, and literally decide fates of some races, the mechanic "pick Gun X at Point A" does not work. Especially when every other merc of those dozens you've mowed down during the last mission wielded Gun X. That's just... immersion-breaking.

Really? I thought it was a lot more immersion-breaking for Shepard to go around buying upgrades in shops when either the Alliance or Cerberus could have afforded all of them before the game begins.

Have you talked to the Normandy's Intendant?

Anyway, in ME2 it's a lot worse: every item you can get, you can get only in one place in the entire frigging galaxy, even if its a piece of crap every merc has got.

I think the concept in ME2 was that Cerberus gave you top gear but as you explored the galaxy, you found new technologies. So some mercs have a new design that Cerberus hasn't got yet, so you scan it and make use of the technology.

In ME1, you stripped the dead like a vulture.

[Lumikki]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Have you talked to the Normandy's Intendant?

Anyway, in ME2 it's a lot worse: every item you can get, you can get only in one place in the entire frigging galaxy, even if its a piece of crap every merc has got.

Actually that's not true. You can get same items sometimes from different places too, but ones you have that item you don't anymore get it in anywhere after that, because you allready have it. That's the hole point of ME2 inventory, not to have induvidual items multible times. That's the base problem on traditional type of inventory. ME2 is about technology levels, not induvidual items. Meaning when you have learn one consept of item (like blueprint), you don't need to learn it multible times.

Modifié par Lumikki, 12 mars 2011 - 04:34 .

[JG The Gamer]

[quote]
Metacritic scores of Bioware games:

Baldur's Gate II: 95%
Neverwinter Nights; 91%
Neverwinter Nights 2: 81%
KotoR: 94%
Jade Empire: 89%
Mass Effect: 91%
Dragon Age Origins: 91%
Mass Effect 2: 96%
Dragon Age 2: 84%

Mean Metacritic rating: 90.2%
Median Metacrici rating: 91%
[quote/]

Is this thread a joke? I am honestly not sure what to make of this. Based on the scores above, BioWare is getting straight 'A's across the board even on their considered lesser titles.  And it's very likely other critics are giving out the same scores more or less. I don't see how this is their last chance. Hell, after Mass Effect 2's results they have breathing room and then some.

Modifié par JG The Gamer, 12 mars 2011 - 04:30 .

[Zulu_DFA]

TomatoTomato wrote...

I thought the inventory system in ME1 was far more immersion-breaking than ME2's "on the ground" sort of approach. Collecting and sifting through 150 different weapons, armour, and
upgrades in the midst of a firefight that somehow were in your
"pocket" at all times...

In that case, everything is immeriosn breaking, including the "Combat Pause". You do realize that you could deal with the excessive equipment out of combat?

TomatoTomato wrote...

Not to mention a majority of these items being of little difference than the other.

The majority of intems in the real world have little difference from one another, so that was kinda immersion-enforsing factor, making the universe feel more real and larger-scale.

TomatoTomato wrote...

I mean, I realise these are standard RPG mechanics, believe me, but I felt they were a bit of an awkward fit for the Mass Effect series.

I didn't care if they were "RPG" or not "RPG" mechanics, but felt they were quite in their right place in Mass Effect. The whole system was was unbalanced, granted with too little revenue at the start, and excessive amount of stuff towards the end, but the solution was to balance it, not to throw it out and replace with a more choresome and less sensible mineral mining system.

TomatoTomato wrote...

I thought ME2 was a step in the right direction in a number of ways, though I do agree that things could have been added such as armour for squadmates, more variation in weapons, etc.

In other words, an inventory system. (Which by BTW was called "Equipment" in ME!)

[Whatever42]

JG The Gamer wrote...

Metacritic scores of Bioware games:

Baldur's Gate II: 95%
Neverwinter Nights; 91%
Neverwinter Nights 2: 81%
KotoR: 94%
Jade Empire: 89%
Mass Effect: 91%
Dragon Age Origins: 91%
Mass Effect 2: 96%
Dragon Age 2: 84%

Mean Metacritic rating: 90.2%
Median Metacrici rating: 91%

Is this thread a joke? I am honestly not sure what to make of this. Based on the scores above, BioWare is getting straight 'A's across the board even on their considered lesser titles.  And it's very likely other critics are giving out the same scores more or less. I don't see how this is their last chance. Hell, after Mass Effect 2's results they have breathing room and then some.

Seriously. I do appreciate that not every game is going to click for everyone but I love these people who sweepingly declare the end of civilization and the collapse of  Bioware because they think the game needs an inventory system. Ignore the excellent sales and 150 GOTY awards, including almost every major award. Only they can see how utterly awful things are - everyone else is the lowest common denominator.

Modifié par Whatever666343431431654324, 12 mars 2011 - 04:44 .

[Whatever42]

TomatoTomato wrote...

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

I love these people who sweepingly declare the end of civilization and the collapse of  Bioware because they think the game needs an inventory system.

Did anyone say that, lol?

Oh, constantly. We have posters who refuse to acknowledge that ME2 is even an RPG. Its now some sort of bastard demon child in their eyes. Its the child of the dark one, here to consume us all. Only they can save us, but like Cassandra at Troy, they're cursed so no one believes their prophesies and we are all doomed.