616 réponses à ce sujet

[Darth Death]

stonbw1 wrote...

I think you guys may be mistranslating the "broader audience" reference. To me, combat in ME2 was great, so why change it much? A better way to attract a "broader audience" is to make ME3 a stand alone game, not dependent on ME1 or ME2. From an investor's (read "old, rich folk's") perspective, the majority likely doesn't know anything about what a "shooter", "rpg", etc is.. Rather, they are concerned with the obvious: how do you get sales on a third installment? In theory, the sales would be less than the previous installments (which were not impressive compared to the big shooters), so how can we (investors) be confident this isn't a waste of money??
Broader audience = stand alone game.

I believe you're on to something. Great post nevertheless. 

[Leonia]

Galad22 wrote...

leonia42 wrote...

Hey I am a big fan of BG/NWN/KOTOR and *I* am fine with RP-lite. It's not just something for the "new kids". I hate wasting time managing an inventory or spending countless hours going through some filler content to get on with the story. Does that make me a poor RPG fan?

And the pacing in DA:O was horrid. Fade? Deep Roads? There was a lot of crap that one had to get through to get on to the next plot point. Thank goodness for DA2's shorter experience, for all its faults, at least it didn't get boring halfway through.

I got bored for teleporting ninjas in about ten hours and got annoyed crawling through same cave over five times quite soon.

That's cool, I recognise not everyone likes DA2. But I liked the improvements it made on the combat/inventory/voice protagonist/story progression from DA:O. I know I'm in the minority though so no worries.

[Alienmorph]

MajesticJazz wrote...

Walker White wrote...

MajesticJazz wrote...
I can see why a game like DAO would be too much for you.

These types of statements are not helping your point.  All they do is suggest that you are a narrow part of the market that will never accept any change.

Some of us on the forums are very old school RPG players.  Back in the days when computer RPGs had text graphics (like Island of Kesmai, the first "MMO").  Or the old SSIs. Baldur's Gate, which everyone lauds as the holy grail, is a relatively new game.

And games continue to change.

There is a difference between changing as in evolving and taking a current formula and just making it better. Versus change as in taking something, stripping it down from what it really is/was and making something entirely new.

Baldur's Gate was nothing more than an evolution from RPGs such as Ultima and yet BG still held on to many of the core aspects that made games like Ultima so great. So BG from Ultima is an example of changing in the terms of evolving and making things better.

Dragon Age 2 was more of a change in direction from DAO from a tactical isometric dungeon scrolling RPG into just an 3rd Person Action/Adventure button mashing game with some RPG elements. DA2 from DAO is an example of stripping something down and taking away from what it really is/was and making something entirely new.

I am not opposed to change, as long as many of the core values still are present. What core RPG values will be present in ME3 is my main concern.

Again. Your problem is that you suppose that BW should make only "core RPG" games to don't be a sellout company. 

[Someone With Mass]

Is it really that hard to accept that Mass Effect isn't trying to go the KOTOR/DA:O route at all and is trying something new?

To stand on its own legs, if you will.

Modifié par Someone With Mass, 05 mai 2011 - 04:17 .

[Galad22]

Darth Death wrote...

They're not going to screw up so don't worry.

Why do you believe this so blindly?

I mean whatever one thinks of DA2 there were some claring faults there, so how can you believe that they will completely avoid those in ME3?

Although I do also find it hard to believe that they could mess ME3 that badly. Unless they try to change their direction completely like they did with DA2.

[Leonia]

They've already said they aren't overhauling the game again (like they did between ME1 and ME2) and are sticking to the ME2 system with extra RPG elements added. Sounds good enough to me.

[Darth Death]

Galad22 wrote...

Darth Death wrote...

They're not going to screw up so don't worry.

Why do you believe this so blindly?

I mean whatever one thinks of DA2 there were some claring faults there, so how can you believe that they will completely avoid those in ME3?

Although I do also find it hard to believe that they could mess ME3 that badly. Unless they try to change their direction completely like they did with DA2.

Its called "faith", something you don't have I'm afraid. :innocent:

[Someone With Mass]

It's also called "not having the same development team as DA2"

[Galad22]

leonia42 wrote...

They've already said they aren't overhauling the game again (like they did between ME1 and ME2) and are sticking to the ME2 system with extra RPG elements added. Sounds good enough to me.

DA2 was more or less Mass Effect with swords, and it wasn't very good. So in my opinion possibility of them messing up is still there.

[Kandid001]

Hot topic, did I miss all the fun?


I hate how the Dragon Age team turned DA2 from a CRPG to Sims Medieval because of EA, but I absolutely have no fear for ME3. ME1 wasn't exactly a hardcore RPG to begin with, and we already know that the game won't be streamlined, on the contrary they are reintroducing elements they removed in ME2 like weapon customization.

I think (and I HOPE) what they were trying to say was, ME3 is a game which doesn't require you to play the prequels, hence a larger audience.

Modifié par Kandid001, 05 mai 2011 - 04:19 .

[Galad22]

Darth Death wrote...
Its called "faith", something you don't have I'm afraid. :innocent:

That's true.

[nelly21]

MajesticJazz wrote...

There was nothing wrong with the pacing of DAO as it was paced at the same rate of many other tactical RPGs. (Read: Slow)

I get it though, I'll just agree to disagree. It is clearly evident that you are (or your attitude towards RPGs) is the new target market of Bioware. You might be a prominent Bioware fan now which is great, but it is clear that by listening to you open up more and more that you are the "newage" RPG fan that wants a more "RPG-Lite" experience that is very button mashing or "pew pew" as you describe. I do not know how old you are but if you were around here during the BG and NWN/KOTOR days, then your head would probably explode. (Read: I am calling you stupid despite telling you that I'm not)

Am I an RPG elitist? YES I am and at least I am honest enough to say it. Once upon a time I was like you, I would pick up a RPG and be taken to the character level up screen and would see crap like Dexterity, Intelligence, Endurance, Willpower and a whole bunch of nonsense like that. I would be turned off and I would go back to my NBA Jams and Mario Karts.....games that were more easy to pick up and play. However I was told that those types of games require a lot of strategy and you just have to learn the ins and outs. So I decided to take the plunge and it has been history ever since. (Read: Because I am older, I assume that everyone wants to hear my life story.)

Just because you find a game like DAO overwhelming doesn't imply that you're slow. It just implies that those types of games weren't meant for gamers like you and this is why until now, RPGs were never as profitable as FPS or Shooter games. Now don't get me wrong, RPGs WERE profitable, I mean.....how in the hell do you think Bioware survivied from 1998-2003 by JUST making those types of tactical RPGs? Bioware during that time had profit out of their azz and yet they did it by making PURE RPG games. People act like the only way to be profitable with RPG games is to go the "pew pew" route or "button mashing" route. Bioware was a $$$$ machine prior to the EA buyout. The problem is, EA wasn't satisfied with Bioware being a $$$$ machine so they made Bioware "tweak" their games to now become a $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ machine. I guess that isn't bad if the only thing you care about is money. (Read: Since we have established that I am older, the assumption that I am still in high school and never had a job cannot be made. Therefore, I am telling you flat-out that I am an rpg hipster that believes video game companies should disregard income, since surely all their employees will work for free.)

Bioware is is walking on thin ice. People do not look at them like Gods like they used to 8 years ago. There are now other options. Eidos Montreal is cooking up a real Shooter/RPG hybrid in Deus Ex: Human Revolution and Bethesda is going to turn heads with Skyrim and Obsidian will eventually get their acts together and create that one huge hit like Bioware back in 1998. There is always a bigger fish.....(Read: Because I am an rpg elitist, I need not be bogged down by inconveniences like "facts". Therefore, I will state that BioWare's standing in the gaming community has fallen despite coming off ME 2 undisputed GotY honors and Game Informer's nine page article on a game still six to nine months away.)
 

Decided to make some Cliff Notes for you Cheez. Makes this post slightly more digestable.

Modifié par nelly21, 05 mai 2011 - 04:24 .

[Leonia]

Galad22 wrote...

leonia42 wrote...

They've already said they aren't overhauling the game again (like they did between ME1 and ME2) and are sticking to the ME2 system with extra RPG elements added. Sounds good enough to me.

DA2 was more or less Mass Effect with swords, and it wasn't very good. So in my opinion possibility of them messing up is still there.

Possible, but unlikely. We knew early in DA2's development that the game was going to be overhauled and much of the elements we had seen in Origins were going to be "upgraded" and "streamlined". We're pretty much hearing the opposie on ME3 but it's still early days. I like to look at the glass as half-full though, ME2 was more successful than DA2 and indicates that no major changes are needed.

[RailTracer]

All I have to say is, come on even George Lucas waited until three movies before screwing the series over.

[MajesticJazz]

Thompson family wrote...

I agree with most of Majestic Jazz' post, the one that begins "There was nothing wrong with the pacing of DAO ..."


If other self-proclaimed RPG Elitists used that post as an example and quit accusing everyone who disagreed with them of being fools, they'd get more respect.

Thank you:ph34r:

[Alienmorph]

RailTracer wrote...

All I have to say is, come on even George Lucas waited until three movies before screwing the series over.

Only two, to be fair. Return of the Jedi should have had a more epic and bittersweet ending instead of finishing with a luao prepared by alien teddybear people, Lucas changed the original plot to make everything more child-appealing, after he saw that they were a big part of the SW followers. But it's not the ME's case.

[Insom]

It's a lost cause at this point. The can't even manage to get the Bethesda crowd, letalone the call of duty crowd.

[Nashiktal]

the problem is that no matter how insightful or intelligent your point may be... If you insult someone while doing so the point becomes moot.

Same thing happened with smudboy. He had all sorts of insights into mass effect, however he did not like being disagreed with.

[Legbiter]

Sometimes marketing must commit necessary evils like this.

[Galad22]

leonia42 wrote...

Possible, but unlikely. We knew early in DA2's development that the game was going to be overhauled and much of the elements we had seen in Origins were going to be "upgraded" and "streamlined". We're pretty much hearing the opposie on ME3 but it's still early days. I like to look at the glass as half-full though, ME2 was more successful than DA2 and indicates that no major changes are needed.

Origins was very succesful. on bar with ME2 I think at least and more succesful than ME was.

www.vg247.com/2010/07/08/bioware-dragon-age-more-globally-successful-than-mass-effect/

Yet Dragon age was butchered.

[Therefore_I_Am]

Developing the ME series under EA is like sex with Kobe Bryant. You can kick and scream and say "NO!" all you want... but it's gonna happen.

Modifié par Therefore_I_Am, 05 mai 2011 - 04:34 .

[aridor1570]

Therefore_I_Am wrote...

Developing the ME series under EA is like sex with Kobe Bryant. You can kick and scream and say "NO!" all you want... but it's gonna happen.

The same can be said about DA:O and ME2, those two games marked with the all evil EA logo went pretty good.

[Galad22]

aridor1570 wrote...

The same can be said about DA:O and ME2, those two games marked with the all evil EA logo went pretty good.

Although this is true, keep in mind that Origins had been in development for years before bioware merged with evil EA.

[ianmcdonald]

As a developer/artist/writer/actor/musician, why wouldn't you want to share your project with as many people as possible?

You people need to stop being so dramatic. If it matters that much to you, make your own video games and only market them to a small, specific group of people and see how long you can afford to do that.

[nelly21]

aridor1570 wrote...

Therefore_I_Am wrote...

Developing the ME series under EA is like sex with Kobe Bryant. You can kick and scream and say "NO!" all you want... but it's gonna happen.

The same can be said about DA:O and ME2, those two games marked with the all evil EA logo went pretty good.

Cue the, "EA HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IT IT WAS DONE BEFORE THEY TOOK OVER AND NOW ALL THE GAMES ARE GUNNA SUCK!!!" response.