39 réponses à ce sujet

[GuardianAngel470]

Turnip Root wrote...

It's mostly PC gamers that like to whine. Anything that doesn't have at least a 300 page book which explains how to use the menu they will deem to be "dumbed down" for consoles.

Which is in itself quite humorous since ME1 was supposed to be a 360 only title until one year after release.

Maybe its the other way around, maybe after Bioware released the game on PC, they had to dumb it down because the PC gamers didn't read the manual .

In all seriousness though, I just think people should stop and remember what ME2 did right. Yeah there are flaws but at the end of the day, it did a lot of things right and a lot of things fans asked for.

[Zack56]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...
In all seriousness though, I just think people should stop and remember what ME2 did right. Yeah there are flaws but at the end of the day, it did a lot of things right and a lot of things fans asked for.

[Bluko]

I don't think Bioware is dead or will be for very long time.

Thing is though all good things come to an end. Eventually someday all of the original Devs that have been with Bioware, will be replaced by new people.  That's the thing. From my understanding a number of the people who originally worked on ME1 are not working on the series anymore or only in a very reduced role. I can already tell it happened with ME2 to a degree, and if anything it's obvious by the credits themselves. That said most people approve of the re-invisioned Mass Effect so it has worked out for them. So I'm pretty sure most of the ME2 team is working on ME3. Which hopefully means there's nothing to worry, although some of ME2's shortcomings could damper the series if they persist in the third game.

Look ME1 is not a perfect game, ME2 is not a perfect game, and ME3 won't be either. But I am hoping ME3 will be a more perfect game then the previous two. Which frankly is asking a lot.

What concerns me most is that ME3 is coming out this year. I'm sorry, but something about that does not feel right. If there's any reason DA2 isn't all it could be, it's because the game did not spend enough time in development. This worries me as before I knew Bioware would not release stuff until they were mostly good to go. Now it seems like they're trying to rush stuff out sometimes. And yes I do think Arrival was rushed, namely to coincide with the after-release of DA2. (Although Arrival was made by a different studio then the other DLCs). And if Bioware is rushing things and is as a result sacrificing quality that does concern me, since I don't like buying half-finished games.

Look you can believe whatever you want, but ME3 was not being fully worked until after ME2. I'm pretty sure Casey himself stated this in interviews after ME2 released. Heck he even said they took a month off as break and then they had to go back to the drawing board  regarding all of ME2's various decisions and how they would handle them. The only thing that's helped them out at this point is that they're essentially just going to re-use ME2's game engine variation. I'm sure there will be a few improvements, but expect ME3 to handle just like ME2. This is a tad disappointing to me since the ME2 engine could still use some work, especially with character animations. And now I'm not sure they'll get ironed  out.

But ultimately what this means is ME3's actual content has only been in the works for about a year now, since they probably didn't start until April or May 2010.  To me that seems awfully rushed, since they only have a few months left to get things done. I'm very concerned that ME3 may be very lacking in content in comparison to the first two games. I'm sorry but it takes time to develop levels and missions. If that time isn't put in you either get very few unique ones or a lot of "copy and paste". I'm afraid ME3 may then suffer from a lot of "copy and paste", which ultimately no one will like.

Why do you think we have seen nothing of ME3 yet? It's not because it's a marketing ploy or that they're trying to keep spoilers to a minimum. It's cause the game isn't complete enough to be shown. If you saw the game right now without the HUD and all the other stuff you'd probably barf. This worries me, since if the game isn't even close to a finalized state yet then a November/December release is really going to be pushing it since it will not have received enough "polish" time.

Modifié par Bluko, 07 avril 2011 - 07:28 .

[CroGamer002]

Eclipse mercs use tech powers while Blue Suns none.

[GuardianAngel470]

Bluko wrote...

I don't think Bioware is dead or will be for very long time.

Thing is though all good things come to an end. Eventually someday all of the original Devs that have been with Bioware, will be replaced by new people.  That's the thing. From my understanding a number of the people who originally worked on ME1 are not working on the series anymore or only in a very reduced role. I can already tell it happened with ME2 to a degree, and if anything it's obvious by the credits themselves. That said most people approve of the re-invisioned Mass Effect so it has worked out for them. So I'm pretty sure most of the ME2 team is working on ME3. Which hopefully means there's nothing to worry, although some of ME2's shortcomings could damper the series if they persist in the third game.

Look ME1 is not a perfect game, ME2 is not a perfect game, and ME3 won't be either. But I am hoping ME3 will be a more perfect game then the previous two. Which frankly is asking a lot.

What concerns me most is that ME3 is coming out this year. I'm sorry, but something about that does not feel right. If there's any reason DA2 isn't all it could be, it's because the game did not spend enough time in development. This worries me as before I knew Bioware would not release stuff until they were mostly good to go. Now it seems like they're trying to rush stuff out sometimes. And yes I do think Arrival was rushed, namely to coincide with the after-release of DA2. (Although Arrival was made by a different studio then the other DLCs). And if Bioware is rushing things and is as a result sacrificing quality that does concern me, since I don't like buying half-finished games.

Look you can believe whatever you want, but ME3 was not being fully worked until after ME2. I'm pretty sure Casey himself stated this in interviews after ME2 released. Heck he even said they took a month off as break and then they had to go back to the drawing board  regarding all of ME2's various decisions and how they would handle them. The only thing that's helped them out at this point is that they're essentially just going to re-use ME2's game engine variation. I'm sure there will be a few improvements, but expect ME3 to handle just like ME2. This is a tad disappointing to me since the ME2 engine could still use some work, especially with character animations. And now I'm not sure they'll get ironed  out.

But ultimately what this means is ME3's actual content has only been in the works for about a year now, since they probably didn't start until April or May 2010.  To me that seems awfully rushed, since they only have a few months left to get things done. I'm very concerned that ME3 may be very lacking in content in comparison to the first two games. I'm sorry but it takes time to develop levels and missions. If that time isn't put in you either get very few unique ones or a lot of "copy and paste". I'm afraid ME3 may then suffer from a lot of "copy and paste", which ultimately no one will like.

Why do you think we have seen nothing of ME3 yet? It's not because it's a marketing ploy or that they're trying to keep spoilers to a minimum. It's cause the game isn't complete enough to be shown. If you saw the game right now without the HUD and all the other stuff you'd probably barf. This worries me, since if the game isn't even close to a finalized state yet then a November/December release is really going to be pushing it since it will not have received enough "polish" time.

To be perfectly honest, I fully expect ME3 to be delayed until January or February. I would also like to point out that ME1 came out on 360 November 20, 2007. ME2 came out January 26th, 2010. That's 2 years and 2 months of development time.

In that time, Bioware overhauled graphics, overhauled combat, overhauled the engine, and created a game that is longer and more varied than the original.

If ME3 were released on December 31st, 2011 that would be a dev cycle of 1 year and 11 months. That, in total, is 3 months less development time than ME2. Even accounting for a 1 month break that is still only four months less development time.

And they don't have to overhaul the engine or the combat as you said which leaves a lot more time to make the rest of the game.

A lot can be done in four months time but it is also important to remember that a lot has already been done. As a planned trilogy the story is already lain. The minutae of events haven't, but the main plot has.

[GuardianAngel470]

Mesina2 wrote...

Eclipse mercs use tech powers while Blue Suns none.

My mistake. I think I associated Shields vs Barriers with Blue Suns.

[royceclemens]

Allow me to speak to a few things here, Bluko, if you don't mind...

"And yes I do think Arrival was rushed, namely to coincide with the after-release of DA2. (Although Arrival was made by a different studio then the other DLCs)."-Now, I for one enjoyed Arrival, though that's not really a popular opinion to state around here, but in what sense was it rushed? It worked, I didn't encounter any crashes, and aside from a few wonky cover animations (which were present in the main game) I found no glitches. And this is from playing it about ten times. Now if you say it's rushed because you thought it was going to do something else gameplay or storywise, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree here.

"The only thing that's helped them out at this point is that they're essentially just going to re-use ME2's game engine variation. I'm sure there will be a few improvements, but expect ME3 to handle just like ME2."-This... We actually agree on. I expect ME3 to get marginally fewer rave reviews because the graphical jump won't be as apparent as it was from ME1 to ME2. That's just concerning the graphics, though. Whether ME3 fails of its own accord, remains to be seen.

"But ultimately what this means is ME3's actual content has only been in the works for about a year now, since they probably didn't start until April or May 2010."-By that rationale, ME3 is, as I type this, in a state very comparable to what Dragon Age II is now. Give or take a month or two. Dragon Age II (and this is coming from someone who likes the game) really did need about, oh seven more months of work before it went gold. Which Mass Effect 3 has.

"Why do you think we have seen nothing of ME3 yet? It's not because it's a marketing ploy or that they're trying to keep spoilers to a minimum. It's cause the game isn't complete enough to be shown."-Well, yeah, I am going to say that it's all marketing. They're still marketing ME2. Arrival came out, what, a little over a week ago? The PS3 port is just over two months old. The ME3 push is most likely going to start later this month. Between then and early May, two (and most likely three, if Game Informer winds up doing it) magazines will be doing previews for it. And what are they going to put in those magazines? Concept art? No, there will be screen shots. Now if those screen shots wind up looking like dogs--t, then I will necro this thread from the very bowels of hell itself and post that you were right the whole time, but until then, it sounds just a tad like Chicken Littling to me. No offense.

Modifié par royceclemens, 07 avril 2011 - 08:14 .

[Drake_Hound]

truth is TOR is really the deal breaker sadly so true .
If SWTOR fails , expect a lot of developers and designers in Bioware really dissapointed .
They already felt dissapointed with DA2 , but TOR is there dream project .
One we as fan should support , but sadly it is SCI FI , not a big deal for ME group .
But a big deal for traditionalist who likes only DnD , nothing else .

[CroGamer002]

Turnip Root wrote...

It's mostly PC gamers that like to whine. Anything that doesn't have at least a 300 page book which explains how to use the menu they will deem to be "dumbed down" for consoles.

Ironically, PC version of ME2 is best one do to hotkeys and far more easier modding.

[CroGamer002]

Drake_Hound wrote...

truth is TOR is really the deal breaker sadly so true .
If SWTOR fails , expect a lot of developers and designers in Bioware really dissapointed .
They already felt dissapointed with DA2 , but TOR is there dream project .
One we as fan should support , but sadly it is SCI FI , not a big deal for ME group .
But a big deal for traditionalist who likes only DnD , nothing else .

From what I saw it doesn't seem at all to flop.

Also this is an MMO and EA won't dare to rush since that's a lot of money at stake.
I mean, you have 2 options with MMO's.
Copy WoW and hope to get profitable or do something new and very ambitious.
EA already let them go with 2nd option and there's no way they'll go and rush it.

[GuardianAngel470]

Keltoris wrote...

Mass Effect 2 has never once made me worry about Bioware's liveliness.*

...Although the Hammerhead called their sanity into question.

(For the Hammerhead lovers, I have never finished Firewalker: Volcano Station without dying at least once because the bloody thing decided not to jump. It will always kill me at least once with a little spluttering hop.)


* - ME2 takes me roughly 4 hours longer to do a full playthrough than ME1, while DA1 took twice as long as DA2. That's the only thing that worries me about their "deadness".

I should mention that the dying in the HH is probably due to you boosting too much before you tried to jump. Boost energy and jump energy seem to be linked.

[Palathas]

ME 1 Graphics: On three different systems I've never had texture pop nor has my friend on his system. Actually until you brought it up I've never even heard of it happening with ME1. Then again I've never looked for it.

Galaxy Map tags for ME 2 drive me nuts because they cover and obstruct numerous systems, I'd much prefer looking at the journal and deciding where I was going to head next before I even consider accessing the Galaxy Map.

I was indifferent to the elevators, never really saw what the fuss was about.

Agree with pretty much everything else though

[G1MEE50K]

Bioware's dead now. That's for damn sure.

[FeaturingDark]

Bioware is dying, though not dead yet.

[Kataphrut]

OP forgot to mention another fun thing about ME1s combat - if you died, the last autosave was usually half an hour ago. I usually just play Solider or Adept on casual difficulty- lets me skip through the boring combat and focus on the good parts.

Bioware aint dead or dying - they are on a bit of a downward slope, but lets look at their post-EA output: Mass Effect 2, Dragon Age 2, The Old Republic and Mass Effect 3. A great game, an average game, an MMO and an effing fantastic game capped off by 10 minutes of nonsense that they were nice enough to try and fix.

In my opinion, they could be better, but they could also be a lot worse and they're definately not dead yet.