409 réponses à ce sujet

[Firewolf99]

Seboist wrote...

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

Kuriby wrote...

@OP
Honestly, this whole BIOWARE games as "rpgs vs. actions games vs shooters vs etc etc" is just idiotic, the term "RPG" isn't even defined officially, unless you go back to the age of dungeon and dragons pen and paper, and if you use that definition of an RPG, you will find yourself in a hole where no game is truly an RPG.

Furthermore, the genre of RPGs have been changing every decade or so with the change of technology and the gaming experience. Compare your Baulder's gate to diablo 2, to final fantasies, to mmorpgs, to dragon age, to mass effect 2, if you really honestly believe that ME2 is not a "RPG", your just an arrogant fool. RPGs = Role Playing Games, if you can role play within a game, it is a RPG, simple as that, unless you can prove me wrong with some oxford University definition that truly defines RPGs in a non-dynamic environment.

Yup, STALKER=RPG because you play a role and make choices for your character; choices that define the world around you.

Many would call that a shooter/survival horror-RPG because the shooting is so fluid and there's no leveling up to speak of but I disagree.

this ME2 is not an RPG nonsense (to put it bluntly) is substantiated with archaic concepts of character progression. Just because you can't level up each and every weapon, just because there is no equipment menu, just because you shoot a lot doesn't mean that you don't make choices that effect the world around you.

Indeed, there's more role playing in 10 minutes of ME2 than the entire series of "Final Fantasy".

Hang on a minute. I didn't think we were talking about Mass Effect 2 (where the comment above is true)? I thought we were talking about Arrival (Where the comment above is nowhere near as true)?

[Seboist]

Firewolf99 wrote...

Seboist wrote...

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

Kuriby wrote...

@OP
Honestly, this whole BIOWARE games as "rpgs vs. actions games vs shooters vs etc etc" is just idiotic, the term "RPG" isn't even defined officially, unless you go back to the age of dungeon and dragons pen and paper, and if you use that definition of an RPG, you will find yourself in a hole where no game is truly an RPG.

Furthermore, the genre of RPGs have been changing every decade or so with the change of technology and the gaming experience. Compare your Baulder's gate to diablo 2, to final fantasies, to mmorpgs, to dragon age, to mass effect 2, if you really honestly believe that ME2 is not a "RPG", your just an arrogant fool. RPGs = Role Playing Games, if you can role play within a game, it is a RPG, simple as that, unless you can prove me wrong with some oxford University definition that truly defines RPGs in a non-dynamic environment.

Yup, STALKER=RPG because you play a role and make choices for your character; choices that define the world around you.

Many would call that a shooter/survival horror-RPG because the shooting is so fluid and there's no leveling up to speak of but I disagree.

this ME2 is not an RPG nonsense (to put it bluntly) is substantiated with archaic concepts of character progression. Just because you can't level up each and every weapon, just because there is no equipment menu, just because you shoot a lot doesn't mean that you don't make choices that effect the world around you.

Indeed, there's more role playing in 10 minutes of ME2 than the entire series of "Final Fantasy".

Hang on a minute. I didn't think we were talking about Mass Effect 2 (where the comment above is true)? I thought we were talking about Arrival (Where the comment above is nowhere near as true)?

Well, this topic went from Arival to "Is ME2 an RPG?" some pages back.

[LeVaughnX]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

PoliteAssasin wrote...

Now that is a company who focuses on it's strengths rather than conforming to another market simply because that's where the larger consumer base resides. This is what Bioware should have done. Bungie was the first in my most respected developer list. Then they got too cocky. Next was epic games, and then they committed an act that I will not discuss publicly. Right after them was Bioware. Now Bioware's forsaking their original fanbase and jumping ship for the shooter crowd. Now there's bethesda, and based on this comment above they're resolve is unquestionable. This is what I would have expected from Bioware.

-Polite

Apparently you didn't play Oblivion. Or visit the forums after release. You heard all the same melodrama that you do on these boards.

I've also been a Bioware fan since Kotor, played every subsequent game, then went back and played the originals. I hardly consider Bioware to have 'forsaken' me.

As a matter of fact I did play Oblivion, and while it had some bugs here and there, it never lacked in the story department, and never strayed from it's genre. You can't say the same for Bioware with Mass Effect. Oblivion wasn't a killing gallery. ME2 is.

-Polite

Alright no offense but let me clear some stuff up for you right now.

1.) Elder Scrolls 3 and 4 suck. The story may be good but the combat ruined it completely for me considering it took me (a pure melee fighter) maybe seven hours to traverse through one oblivion portal while resting every five steps because I didn't want to just die fighting a monster that is at least one or more levels above mine - which is total crap. So lets not get started on that **** fest while I pray Skyrim had a friggen make-over so the combat is at least enjoyable for everyone.

2.) Mass Effect 1 was a poor mans shooter with RPG conversations but horrid RPG based inventory. I mean seriously you had one or two guns / upgrades / pieces of armor you REALLY HONESTLY FRIGGEN USED but they gave you like a hundred useless choices just to cluster-flark your screen up. Thank you ME2 for stream lining the damned 4000 guns into like twenty useful weapons.

3.) ME2 is high on the RPG elements though they refined it into a more beautiful shooter (though your squaddies are still as useful as an **** on your elbow - just like in DA2). You have the typical RPG Cinimatics / Conversations / Situations / and you generally PLAY A ROLE in the game as Shepard. Some situations call for more intense or less intense combat / action - get over it nancy.

4.) The Arrival was short as all hell but my god was it fun. I was sick and tired of my squaddies dieing on me left and right so the single man combat was an interesting twist that I was waiting for the whole damn time. The fact that it had less real forceful choices didn't really phase me though I'm a die-hard RPG fanboy. The choices were stream-lined mainly because (as a lot of people are saying) of the mission itself. It was an on-going mission that you technically were sent in to AID not START which basically meant a lot of it was done for you. Sure you can argue that the Arrival had some holes, sure you can whine about the combat, sure you can **** that you didn't get to spend the 2 days that the Reapers had to show up talking about the birds and the bees with Doctor Husklover, but my god when you are thrown into a frying pan what the hell do you expect?

The Arrival's major flaw was its in-ability to be longer but what do you expect from a cheep little bridger? I mean for what it was it was good, 8/10 in my opinion. The conversations were just deep enough while I could explore a bit more into it / the cinimatics were done well of course / the shooting was annoying and tough as all hell because I solo with an Infiltrator without an AR and on Insanity - but fun and challenging / stealth - well damn it gave my camoflague technique a work out / it was over all a fun little "test" for the future of ME3. Hell for all we know it could be a big test to see just how Solo Missions might work out - think about it for a while.


Relax, chill out, stop being so quick to point a finger, enjoy the story, enjoy the game, immerse yourself into the game, and if you REALLY are a MASSIVE DIE HARD RPG CORE FANNY - go play some DND with a few other people and have a five year session about how you built a house in minecraft or something okay?

[CmdrKankrelat]

So BioWare has changed markets. Good, let them, I say. I like the direction personally. I know some people don't, and that's more than all right. Even though I don't agree with him/her, I am glad that PoliteAssassin serves as a "voice in the wilderness" to let BioWare know that there are still fans like that out there. After all, while I liked ME2's direction, some pressure from BioWare's RPG fans leading to some more RPG elements in ME3 is a great thing for all of us. So while I politely disagree with you, Polite, I understand the function you play here and I greatly respect it. Good luck!

[TwistedComplex]

PoliteAssasin wrote...


As a matter of fact I did play Oblivion, and while it had some bugs here and there, it never lacked in the story department, and never strayed from it's genre.

-Polite

"Chosen oooone! I saw you in my dreeeeaaam! You must destroy and aaaanchient eviiiiil! Clooose the jawwws of oblivioooon!"


Your comment made me puke in my mouth

[TwistedComplex]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

Here's a quote from an article that just recently came out, regarding Skyrim.


IGN: I know you probably get this question a lot but we have to ask, is there any plan to include multiplayer features or co-operative play in Skyrim, or will The Elder Scrolls continue to be a single-player only franchise?

Todd Howard: The two most requested features we get are dragons and multiplayer. We got one of them this time! We always look into multiplayer, put lots of ideas on the whiteboard, and it always loses. It's not that we don't like it. I can think of ways it would be a lot of fun, but at the end of the day, that dev time is going to take away from doing the best single player game we can, and that's where our hearts are.

Now that is a company who focuses on it's strengths rather than conforming to another market simply because that's where the larger consumer base resides. This is what Bioware should have done. Bungie was the first in my most respected developer list. Then they got too cocky. Next was epic games, and then they committed an act that I will not discuss publicly. Right after them was Bioware. Now Bioware's forsaking their original fanbase and jumping ship for the shooter crowd. Now there's bethesda, and based on this comment above they're resolve is unquestionable. This is what I would have expected from Bioware.

-Polite

You're right. Bioware should put dragons in Mass Effect

Modifié par TwistedComplex, 01 avril 2011 - 10:23 .

[tonnactus]

Il Divo wrote...


How is this not doing any research?

Testing other scenarios then "land war in asia" maybee to stop the collectors? Stopping the collectors without putting all on one card?

Because Shepard, a soldier, didn't reach the conclusion "HEY LET's DROP AN ASTEROID ON THE RELAY!"

Right,providing such options is the job of the cerberus research teams.

So, wait a minute, it's dumb that Shepard and Illusive Man investigated the ship of the enemy they're actually fighting, rather than one that's been long dead?

Yes it is.How edi gets the confirmation then an iff is needed? Right,scanning the databases. The illusive man/cerberus teams even guessed that this is the case. The confirmation for that would be possible to get with researching the derelict reaper.

They didn't even know they needed an IFF until they hit the Collector Ship

That is wrong. They had guesses about that and the data from the collector vessel confirmed it.

Wrong. The story of the Mass Effect trilogy is to stop the Reapers.

Mass Effect 2 is about stopping the collectors destroying human colonies.The iff was needed only to get to their homeworld and stop them there.

[tonnactus]

Lukertin wrote...

I know, an RPG-Shooter centered around a space marine who can't fire a rifle .

And now these marines are to dumb to switch weapon ammo without points in a "skill". That is so much better.

[tonnactus]

DarkSeraphym wrote...

Personally, I found that to be a pretty good explanation for why ME2 was more linear than ME1. We certainly could not expect them to release a Mass Effect 2: Paragon, Mass Effect 2: Renegade, and Mass Effect 2: Insert any percentage between 100% Paragon and 100% Renegade.

Then they shouldnt make a trilogy when they couldnt handle this.As simple as that.Otherwise all previous games would be nearly pointless.

Modifié par tonnactus, 01 avril 2011 - 11:44 .

[Il Divo]

tonnactus wrote...
Testing other scenarios then "land war in asia" maybee to stop the collectors? Stopping the collectors without putting all on one card?

Right,providing such options is the job of the cerberus research teams.

Which they didn't consider. Your argument is "Hey, Cerberus didn't think of and test every single possible scenario so it's a plothole!!!!". Try thinking this through. Mass Effect relays have largely been considered indestructible. And Illusive Man doesn't want to destroy the relay in the first place. Why is he going to order his scientists to research possibilities which he doesn't want to consider? 

Yes it is.How edi gets the confirmation then an iff is needed? Right,scanning the databases. The illusive man/cerberus teams even guessed that this is the case. The confirmation for that would be possible to get with researching the derelict reaper.

Fail. Complete, utter fail.

They had 'suspicions', which still doesn't go every far. All the Reaper would get them would be the IFF itself, which at the time they didn't fully know if it would get them through the Relay. EDI's data mine was what allowed them to figure that piece of knowledge out.

The derelict reaper has been around for millions of years, it's not going anywhere fast. The Collector Ship is on a time table as far as Shepard knows. Illusive Man had already sent a team into the derelict reaper anyway to obtain information. It's not until the aftermath that we learn the team stopped responding. Keep trying.

Mass Effect 2 is about stopping the collectors destroying human colonies.The iff was needed only to get to their homeworld and stop them there.

This post has led me to the conclusion that you are an idiot, for fairly obvious reasons.

Mass Effect 2 is a continuation of the Reaper story arc. Collectors = servants of the Reapers, as Horizon proved. That's the reason why Shepard even becomes involved. You have this assinine notion that by simply blowing up the Omega IV relay everything becomes perfectly fine, not taking into account the need for information and technology. Illusive Man himself brings up the question, why are they taking human colonists? Your 'idea' (and here, I'm giving you far too much credit) results in absolutely nothing gained.

Shepard needs to find out everything he can to stop the Reapers. This does not involve blowing up random Mass Effect relays, which we didn't even fully know is possible or what the potential consequences are. Shepard  blows up the Alpha Relay because the Reapers are about to enter the system in two days. Shepard at the start of ME2 has no reason to believe that the Reapers are suddenly going to pop through the Omega IV relay.
 
If you can't realize this Tonnactus, I can't help you.

Modifié par Il Divo, 01 avril 2011 - 02:06 .

[Ice Cold J]

I wouldn't say LotSB was purely a shooter. The upgrades and info you get from the base and the car chase on Illium aren't really FPS staples.

[GuardianAngel470]

Firewolf99 wrote...

Seboist wrote...

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

Kuriby wrote...

@OP
Honestly, this whole BIOWARE games as "rpgs vs. actions games vs shooters vs etc etc" is just idiotic, the term "RPG" isn't even defined officially, unless you go back to the age of dungeon and dragons pen and paper, and if you use that definition of an RPG, you will find yourself in a hole where no game is truly an RPG.

Furthermore, the genre of RPGs have been changing every decade or so with the change of technology and the gaming experience. Compare your Baulder's gate to diablo 2, to final fantasies, to mmorpgs, to dragon age, to mass effect 2, if you really honestly believe that ME2 is not a "RPG", your just an arrogant fool. RPGs = Role Playing Games, if you can role play within a game, it is a RPG, simple as that, unless you can prove me wrong with some oxford University definition that truly defines RPGs in a non-dynamic environment.

Yup, STALKER=RPG because you play a role and make choices for your character; choices that define the world around you.

Many would call that a shooter/survival horror-RPG because the shooting is so fluid and there's no leveling up to speak of but I disagree.

this ME2 is not an RPG nonsense (to put it bluntly) is substantiated with archaic concepts of character progression. Just because you can't level up each and every weapon, just because there is no equipment menu, just because you shoot a lot doesn't mean that you don't make choices that effect the world around you.

Indeed, there's more role playing in 10 minutes of ME2 than the entire series of "Final Fantasy".

Hang on a minute. I didn't think we were talking about Mass Effect 2 (where the comment above is true)? I thought we were talking about Arrival (Where the comment above is nowhere near as true)?

Were you able to make choices in LotSB? If you romanced Liara in ME1, yes you were. You were able to make the choice of continuing a romance with Liara as well as several dialog choices that defined your character (quite a few actually).

Were you able to make choices in Arrival? Yes, believe it or not, you were. Compared to LotSB, you were able to make a choice that a lot more gamers had access to. Not everyone romanced Liara in ME1 but everyone had the option to A) Kill or avoid batarians and Kill Dr. Kenson. These choices may not seem like much but they define the difference between a Paragon and a Renegade. Spare slavers or kill them? Try to save Dr. Kenson or kill her because you said you would?

They also define your interaction with Hackett at the end of the mission, affecting the world around you.

Also, many agree, though I believe the OP doesn't, that LotSB was superior and a well made DLC for an RPG. Many disagree, along with the OP, that Arrival was a good DLC for an RPG. The OP makes the assertion that because Arrival was not a good DLC for an RPG it is a sign that ME3 will be a bad RPG.

This is technically possible but highly unlikely based on existing evidence (like LotSB, Overlord, and even Kasumi). In each of those cases, DLC made by the same development team contain choices that could (or did) affect the ME world. Keep or destroy evidence, Leave or save David, Romance or dump Liara. Arrival is one DLC out of several that provided the key element of role playing; choice.

I will admit that Arrival was not up to the standard that LotSB set so well. Character models were generic, much dialog was relegated to cutscenes (though well executed cutscenes that voiced most player's opinions just fine), and combat was ME2 norm. There were no spectacular set piece bosses like Vasir and the SB.

But all that tells me is that it was a bad egg that didn't get much attention. Notice that, if you assume that each DLC was started affer the previous was released, Lair of the SB took 3 months to develop; Arrival took 7. You are thus left with two options: The Bioware team really, really screwed up because how could they release a DLC after so long and not make it wicked awesome sauce or the development team was downsized to focus on ME3 and it took longer for a smaller team to make as much content as we see.

Personally, I find the latter possibility more likely.

In closing, although I believe Arrival provided choice many disagree and because it is a subjective decision no one will ever win that argument so it isn't worth having. Claiming that because Arrival was so bad ME3 will be terrible and only a shooting gallery is a foolish leap in logic since LotSB, Overlord, and Kasumi provide evidence of continued attention to dialog and role playing even after the release of ME2.

[GuardianAngel470]

Ice Cold J wrote...

I wouldn't say LotSB was purely a shooter. The upgrades and info you get from the base and the car chase on Illium aren't really FPS staples.

I'm personally reminded more of the Search for Liara with Vasir, Vasir's betrayal, the car chase with the banter (that's something you don't get in FPSs or many TPSs), Vasir confrontation, Vasir's death, Liara in the shuttle, Liara banter at the door, Feron in the torture chair, the SB, post SB fight dialog, invitation dialog and possible romance when I think of RPG staples in LotSB.

[GuardianAngel470]

TwistedComplex wrote...

PoliteAssasin wrote...

Here's a quote from an article that just recently came out, regarding Skyrim.


IGN: I know you probably get this question a lot but we have to ask, is there any plan to include multiplayer features or co-operative play in Skyrim, or will The Elder Scrolls continue to be a single-player only franchise?

Todd Howard: The two most requested features we get are dragons and multiplayer. We got one of them this time! We always look into multiplayer, put lots of ideas on the whiteboard, and it always loses. It's not that we don't like it. I can think of ways it would be a lot of fun, but at the end of the day, that dev time is going to take away from doing the best single player game we can, and that's where our hearts are.

Now that is a company who focuses on it's strengths rather than conforming to another market simply because that's where the larger consumer base resides. This is what Bioware should have done. Bungie was the first in my most respected developer list. Then they got too cocky. Next was epic games, and then they committed an act that I will not discuss publicly. Right after them was Bioware. Now Bioware's forsaking their original fanbase and jumping ship for the shooter crowd. Now there's bethesda, and based on this comment above they're resolve is unquestionable. This is what I would have expected from Bioware.

-Polite

You're right. Bioware should put dragons in Mass Effect

That would be sweet.

Blood Dragon for Squadmate and LI in ME3!

EDIT: We could totally go Donkey on the Normandy. A bunch of half-human, half-dragon babies running around spouting fire from their nostrils, lighting Kelly on fire.

It would be beautiful...

Modifié par GuardianAngel470, 01 avril 2011 - 02:53 .

[nov_pl]

Yes. It was a hudge dissapointment. It looked so rushed. I was hoping to sit in front of my PC, open a bottle of Johnny Walker and enjoy few hour of something new in ME universe.
Instead, after not more than 2 hrs, I was like "wtf, that's it?". We were few minutes from invasion and after that everyone just chillin'?
Destroying the Relay was nice cutscene, but it was just nice. I didn't feel the epicness nor dramaticness of the situation, and BW was good in creating mood.
The only light in the tunnel is that, after all, it is a DLC. Hopefully BW will work much harder with Mass Effect 3. I'm only afraid that it will follow DA2 which sucked.

[CptAwesomePhD]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

PoliteAssasin wrote...

Now that is a company who focuses on it's strengths rather than conforming to another market simply because that's where the larger consumer base resides. This is what Bioware should have done. Bungie was the first in my most respected developer list. Then they got too cocky. Next was epic games, and then they committed an act that I will not discuss publicly. Right after them was Bioware. Now Bioware's forsaking their original fanbase and jumping ship for the shooter crowd. Now there's bethesda, and based on this comment above they're resolve is unquestionable. This is what I would have expected from Bioware.

-Polite

Apparently you didn't play Oblivion. Or visit the forums after release. You heard all the same melodrama that you do on these boards.

I've also been a Bioware fan since Kotor, played every subsequent game, then went back and played the originals. I hardly consider Bioware to have 'forsaken' me.

As a matter of fact I did play Oblivion, and while it had some bugs here and there, it never lacked in the story department, and never strayed from it's genre. You can't say the same for Bioware with Mass Effect. Oblivion wasn't a killing gallery. ME2 is.

-Polite

You're kidding, right? Are you also the kind of person that enjoys the new Star Wars movies over the old ones? The reason Oblivion 'never lacked in the story department' was that there was pretty much no narrative at all, apart from the lackluster main questline. There was also no character development that was relevant to the story - your dude was simply a silent stack of attibutes and skills, and everyone else was a generic non-entity voiced by one of a total of five or so VAs.

And of course Oblivion was a killing gallery, even more so than either of the ME games, because there is literally nothing else to do other than kill annoying enemies the game throws at you randomly. Only combat was also horrible in Oblivion, partly because of the stupid levelling system where after a while even lowly bandits were wearing glass armor, partly because Gamebryo is a silly engine for anything but static objects.

What little story there was was a linear cookie-cutter fantasy thing where you pretty much just watched Sean Bean save the world while your own guy was basically expendable. Didn't you say earlier you disliked Arrival because there were no choices? Well, there sure as hell weren't any in Oblivion. What was fun about Oblivion was the open world scenario and the moddability. But - at least to me - even that got old pretty quickly, because unlike ME's, Oblivion's world was bland, static, uncompelling and didn't react to you at all. Honestly, it's cool if you liked Oblivion, but I fail to see how anyone in their right minds could play Oblivion and ME and walk away from them thinking that Oblivion beat ME in the storytelling department. It just does not compute.

Also, do you really think sticking to one particular genre and not improving or expanding on it is a good thing?

Modifié par CptAwesomePhD, 01 avril 2011 - 09:15 .

[tonnactus]

Il Divo wrot

Which they didn't consider. Your argument is "Hey, Cerberus didn't think of and test every single possible scenario so it's a plothole!!!!". Try thinking this through. Mass Effect relays have largely been considered indestructible.

And yet an alliance scientiests find out the opposite in no time.

They had 'suspicions', which still doesn't go every far. All the Reaper would get them would be the IFF itself, which at the time they didn't fully know if it would get them through the Relay

Thats what probes for. Not risking the life of shepardt and the possible destruction of the normandy just for an confirmation.

This post has led me to the conclusion that you are an idiot, for fairly obvious reasons.

You are are an obvious fanboy who invent things that didnt even happen in the game to excuse the crappy writing of it.I give the "compliment" back.
I better didnt waste my time with someone who even denied what the whole purpose of the suicide mission was.

A tip: It hasnt anything to do with "learning".

Modifié par tonnactus, 01 avril 2011 - 11:06 .

[ISpeakTheTruth]

shinobi602 wrote...

Legbiter wrote...

Yeah, I wanted a DLC where I could play dress-up and talk and talk. All this shooting was annoying.

Not really, just because we don't want one extreme doesn't mean we want the other.

Why not tread a middle path?

Anders: I removed the chance of compromise, because there is no compromise!

[Il Divo]

tonnactus wrote...

And yet an alliance scientiests find out the opposite in no time.

And she wasn't even sure it would work. She was also placed in a situation where Reapers coming means everyone dies. Which entails thinking outside the box, trying whatever we have to. This is not the case with the Omega IV relay. There is no reason to consider the Reapers simply appearing randomly until we have more information, which your idiotic plan would deny us.  

Thats what probes for. Not risking the life of shepardt and the possible destruction of the normandy just for an confirmation.

What are you even *saying*? How exactly are probes supposed to help Shepard data mine the Collector Ship? Again, no coherency. You are rambling, as always.  

You are are an obvious fanboy who invent things that didnt even happen in the game to excuse the crappy writing of it.I give the "complement" back.
I better didnt waste my time with someone who even denied what the whole purpose of the suicide mission was.

A tip: It hasnt anything to do with "learning".

No, you are not the 'complement'. You are giving yourself too much credit here. A child could make the basic connections which you seem to have missed. 

Point of Mass Effect series: Stop the Reapers.

Who are the Collectors? Agents of the Reapers. To stop the Reapers, we need knowledge of the Reapers and their agents. That means learning about the enemy in addition to killing the enemy.

You do not understand this, so yes it has more than a bit to do with 'learning'. I accept people having a different opinion. I do not accept stupidity.

Modifié par Il Divo, 02 avril 2011 - 01:21 .

[Jaron Oberyn]

mrsph wrote...

You people put way too much expectations in these 7-10 dollar DLCs.

The sad thing is that I had no expectations with this DLC. I didn't even plan on getting it. I got it just because I was bored at the time, and figred I'd give it a go. ME2 has been uninstalled for some time now. It was even more disappointing that I went through installing that and all of the other DLC's just for this content.

AlanC9 wrote...

PoliteAssasin wrote...
As a
matter of fact I did play Oblivion, and while it had some bugs here and
there, it never lacked in the story department, and never strayed from
it's genre. You can't say the same for Bioware with Mass Effect.

Never strayed from its genre? Why should anyone care if a game strays from its genre?

I don't know, maybe because the game was conceived as both a trilogy and an rpg. Why should anyone care if it strays from that.

rwilli80 wrote...

The problem with blaming EA is that
without them there might not have been a ME2 or a Bioware now. Bioware
and EA merged for a reason and I am pretty sure it wasn't because EA was
hurting for money.

I'm pretty sure they were doing
fine financially. EA simply acquired the company that owned Bioware and
another developer who's name escapes me. Nothing more to it.

CmdrKankrelat wrote...

So BioWare has changed markets.
Good, let them, I say. I like the direction personally. I know some
people don't, and that's more than all right. Even though I don't agree
with him/her, I am glad that PoliteAssassin serves as a "voice in the
wilderness" to let BioWare know that there are still fans like that out
there. After all, while I liked ME2's direction, some pressure from
BioWare's RPG fans leading to some more RPG elements in ME3 is a great
thing for all of us. So while I politely disagree with you, Polite, I
understand the function you play here and I greatly respect it. Good
luck!

A very mature response to this discussion. There are few here who can express their opinion or disagreement without aggressively attacking their opposition, so I applaud you. I personally think if they had put as much effort into the RPG elements as they did Shooter elements, it'd be a perfect game. But they didn't balance it out, and thats where I, and many others, take issue. But hopefully they'll give both aspects of the game the same amount of treatment for ME3.

CptAwesomePhD wrote...

Also, do you really think sticking to one particular genre and not improving or expanding on it is a good thing?

They
aren't improving it or expanding on it. They're completely changing
from RPG to Shooter. If they were improving, ME2 would have an strong
RPG elements to go along with the strong Shooter elements. However, it
has a watered down RPG system, with strong Shooter elements. It's
transitioning from one genre to another. Not improvement.

-Polite

[Nathan Redgrave]

Yes, let's judge a company's direction based on an hour of gameplay. That's the path to victory.

I say we wait until we actually know something about Mass Effect 3, yes? You know, the game which might actually be expected to include a town section or something.

[tonnactus]

Nathan Redgrave wrote...

Yes, let's judge a company's direction based on an hour of gameplay. That's the path to victory.
.

The huge amount of automatic dialogue was also part in the Lair of the Shadowbroker...(like the op pointed out)

[Jaron Oberyn]

tonnactus wrote...

Nathan Redgrave wrote...

Yes, let's judge a company's direction based on an hour of gameplay. That's the path to victory.
.

The huge amount of automatic dialogue was also part in the Lair of the Shadowbroker...(like the op pointed out)

Not just that either. It was also in the original game. I'm judging the company based on the last 2 titles we've seen since they've been acquired by EA. DA2 and ME2, and the DLC's that are associated with the latter. Obviously there's been a dramatic change in their ability to create RPG's like they used to.

-Polite

[The Spamming Troll]

i agree with the OP.

ME1 is the game ME3 needs to emulate, not ME2.