115 réponses à ce sujet

[ianmcdonald]

HTTP 404 wrote...

Imagine if bioware actually used ALL of our suggestions....

It would be the s***iest game ever.

[The_11thDoctor]

Alraiis wrote...

aang001 wrote...

CO-OP or Multiplayer... This is a key feature to ALL shooters.

Bioshock. Deus Ex. Dead Space. Fallout 3. Resident Evil 4. Metroid Prime. Uncharted: Drake's Fortune. All sit somewhere on the "shooter" spectrum. All hailed as great games. None launched with multiplayer. I'm sure there are many more examples.

How do I dignify your responce with one with that list?! Wait... Bioshock, Dead Space, Uncharted all gained a multiplayer or co-op or both... RE gained both in 5. Metroid doesnt count cause it's nintendopes and they dont do online...So that;s 2 games that may not have it...

[nicethugbert]

I hear what you're saying Bert

But the fact remains just because its been done before means nothing and does NOT detract from BW ability at programming and making a good game.

Some games are made for MP, some aren't. and as you've said they HAVE made MP style games in the past.
None of that has ANYTHING to do with Mass Effect. You're using an apples to oranges argument that makes no bearing on the game itself.

In that case why wasn't MP implemented in ME1? or 2? or Dragon Age Origins? or DA 2?

and not only does bioware know how to do Multiplayer... they're in the process of making an MMO (SWTOR) so they understandabily know the ups and downs of the process.

Once again, they've decided that they'd rather focus on a single player story (which is what Mass effect has ALWAYS been about) rather than worry about tacking on a MP segment if they felt it would be sub par.

Honestly I dont play MP components of games much, so having an MP mode in ME doesn't really turn me one way or another. But I do get the feeling you just like to argue the point.

That or you just like to say BW has lowered expectations...which of course would mean there was an expectation for MP from the start when there wasn't.

None of that makes MP impossible or a bad idea in ME3. That fact that MP/SP has been done successfully does mean something. It means that you have no proof that it is impossible or a bad choice.

And you are lowering expectations for BW when you say that having MP detracts from the game. It's saying that BW is not good enough to do both well in one game so you'll settle for just an SP game.

[AdmiralCheez]

mrsph wrote...

It would be a dating sim.

Funny story: I actually played a dating sim for sh*ts and giggles the other day.

It was horrible.  I wanted to kill everyone and everything in that game.  There was no dramatic tension, no decent character development, and no action apart from a few pre-rendered cutscenes.  Nope, just get money, buy items, talk to cute people, give presents to cute people, wait for your score to be high enough so you could marry/screw the cute people.

So I said to myself, well gee, they can't all be that bad, and tried a couple more.

Nope.  Those sucked, too.

Bioware's goofy little five-minute romances >>>> entire game devoted to romance.

[Gatt9]

michaelrsa wrote...

You're right, you're right.

Look at all the great things we lost from ME1 to ME2.

We lost that amazing, cluttered inventory, beautiful, repetitive level design and our much loved clumsy cover system.

Look at the pile of shit we got called ME2. It was this awful game, nothing but a well crafted third person cover based shooter with a an excellent story to compliment it.

Wtf Bioware? Why did you shit on everything we hold dear?

I'm guessing you didn't play the same ME2 I did.  Because what we got was a really crappy Gears of War wannabe,  with AI that hasn't been seen since the Quake series,  and a story with so many plot holes and contrivances it's impossible to believe it was actually sold at retail.

Further,  with ME2 we got no inventory,  nothing we found made any difference,  most certainly not the "5% health bonus" item we could buy.  We got repetitive level design so incredibly predictable that you knew as soon as waist-high walls and crates appeared that you would be fighting,  while wandering the corridors so linear it almost seems they stole some of Final Fantasy 13's design.doc.  Then we got a cover system so horrible that you could just crouch,  wait for the predictable pause when enemies quit firing,  aim 1.5 inches above where they were crouched,  and head-shot them when they stood up.  Everytime,  in every single battle,  from begining to end.

So I'm not real sure why you're putting it on a pedastle,  10 years ago when the gaming press was honest,  it would've gotten universally panned. 

Edit:

Oh yes,  and we got the wonderfull design of mandatory planet scanning.  How that one made it through development without someone saying "God,  this is mind-numbingly boring" I dunno.

Modifié par Gatt9, 19 mai 2011 - 03:20 .

[Voods07]

 Its already been confirmed that ME3 will not have multiplayer. So this thread is a waste of IP Bandwidth.

[HTTP 404]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

mrsph wrote...

It would be a dating sim.

Funny story: I actually played a dating sim for sh*ts and giggles the other day.

It was horrible.  I wanted to kill everyone and everything in that game.  There was no dramatic tension, no decent character development, and no action apart from a few pre-rendered cutscenes.  Nope, just get money, buy items, talk to cute people, give presents to cute people, wait for your score to be high enough so you could marry/screw the cute people.

So I said to myself, well gee, they can't all be that bad, and tried a couple more.

Nope.  Those sucked, too.

Bioware's goofy little five-minute romances >>>> entire game devoted to romance.

reminds me of some real life dates

[The_11thDoctor]

So other than the improved shooting and conversation system in ME2, what improved RPG wise if those against Co-OP and Mult dont want to improve the shooter side of this game? The exploration took a dive, the customization for you and party took a dive, the loot, the inventory, the leveling all went south! You cant talk to all people on your own ship, nothing really happens on board(normandy), There are no ship battles even though you wasted time grinding for minerals, they took out the minigames like slots etc that you could do, you cant romance everyone on your crew or party, they kept the mini-lame mining-to-stretch-time device again, Biotics became useless, etc. What if anything has Bioware focused on that makes anyone think that if time or a different team worked on MP or CO-OP, that the single player would suffer? They already said they have DICE working with them, so why not have them help on that? The writer will keep writing and nothing will change about the story. They have a writing team. The writing is one of the good parts of ME. I dont see that changing. The full game was playable last year. They have a system and engine built, the story has been planed minus whatever they got feedback wise to make their tweaks, other than QA or fleshing out some random parts of story, I dont see how adding a CO-OP or a MP mode would hurt them? Everyone who is against it only says "I dont want it to take away from SP" and I only see how it would benefit ME. Then people seem to forget Bioware is owned by EA... They have too much money to count and I doubt if Bio asked for more money to help their game bring in more money, that EA would turn them down. Mirrors Edge was an amazing game, but due to no CO-OP or MP, the game didnt do as well as it could have. The SP was amazing, innovative and fun, but after you beat it, if you didnt like time trials, you kind of had no reason to go back in. EA felt that having no MP or CO-OP for that game was a mistake. I would have loved to go thru that game with a partner and take out a room together or have one as distraction while I grabbed the files or whatever and we both make a great escape etc. It would've added extra replay value and SP would not have suffered. Well, the MP/CO-OP issue is more minor to my argument, but Im just trying to understand some random fears people in here have over that issue. Just feels like they're living in the dark ages on a subject that makes too much sense and they look at you like your crazy. "Fire?!! What's that none sense?! I got sunlight and the moon!"... But yeah, on to the RPG side, It's just severely lacking... It's a fun game for what it is(ME2), but 3 will need to finally bring it's A game.

Another side note...The better improve their romances... ME2's were horrible. Why add love scenes if your not going to take the time to make them right? You should be able to start a romance if they are in the game early enough in that you can see the effects. Like in DAO, you could romance your partner after a fight or randomly at camp. If you get their love/ friendship/rivalry up enough they gain new abilities... Well I guess Loyalty is like the last part, but you get the idea. I would just like to see them expand that and put effort in the L.I. scene. Maybe let you hang out with them on the Normandy. Eat with the crew you traveled around the galaxy for to get the shopping done... DO a ship battle to see the improvements you made in action. Or like when you got boarded by the collectors, be able to fight someone trying to take your ship etc.

[The_11thDoctor]

Voods07 wrote...

 Its already been confirmed that ME3 will not have multiplayer. So this thread is a waste of IP Bandwidth.

Your responce was a waste of bandwith... I asked if you had any worries on ME3. I stated why I was woried and I mentioned MP/ CO-OP as one of the things I would like to see. If it doesnt happen, that's fine. A lot of people responded only to the MP part so I responded to it. If you have worries or dont, state them. If not, stop trolling like Hazama...

Modifié par aang001, 19 mai 2011 - 05:10 .

[nicethugbert]

[quote Gatt9 wrote ...
I'm guessing you didn't play the same ME2 I did. Because what we got was a really crappy Gears of War wannabe, with AI that hasn't been seen since the Quake series, and a story with so many plot holes and contrivances it's impossible to believe it was actually sold at retail.

Further, with ME2 we got no inventory, nothing we found made any difference, most certainly not the "5% health bonus" item we could buy. We got repetitive level design so incredibly predictable that you knew as soon as waist-high walls and crates appeared that you would be fighting, while wandering the corridors so linear it almost seems they stole some of Final Fantasy 13's design.doc. Then we got a cover system so horrible that you could just crouch, wait for the predictable pause when enemies quit firing, aim 1.5 inches above where they were crouched, and head-shot them when they stood up. Everytime, in every single battle, from begining to end.

So I'm not real sure why you're putting it on a pedastle, 10 years ago when the gaming press was honest, it would've gotten universally panned.

Edit:

Oh yes, and we got the wonderfull design of mandatory planet scanning. How that one made it through development without someone saying "God, this is mind-numbingly boring" I dunno. [/quote]

I didn't miss the inventory. Why would you want one? You're in a hurry to save the world, not rearrange your shoe collection.

I'm playing ME1 now and I don't appreciate the increased complexity associated with the inventory. It seems pointless to me. There is no in game help in understanding the comparative advantages of all these items and it breaks immersion because Shepard is supposed to be an expert in all this stuff and clearly he is not. Having to manage all this for the entire team is a baby sitting chore. Switching ammo is clunky.

The cover system in ME1 is a mystery. Some rocks you can hide behind, some rocks you can't. I don't know why. I click to shoot and my PC just stays in hiding.

I've played lots of games without a cover system. ME2's cover system just gets the job done.

I don't see the ME1 AI as better. It's just typical suicidal AI.

[nicethugbert]

I messed up the last post and edit is not working. So, here is my do over.

Gatt9 wrote ...

I'm guessing you didn't play the same ME2 I did. Because what we got was a really crappy Gears of War wannabe, with AI that hasn't been seen since the Quake series, and a story with so many plot holes and contrivances it's impossible to believe it was actually sold at retail.

Further, with ME2 we got no inventory, nothing we found made any difference, most certainly not the "5% health bonus" item we could buy. We got repetitive level design so incredibly predictable that you knew as soon as waist-high walls and crates appeared that you would be fighting, while wandering the corridors so linear it almost seems they stole some of Final Fantasy 13's design.doc. Then we got a cover system so horrible that you could just crouch, wait for the predictable pause when enemies quit firing, aim 1.5 inches above where they were crouched, and head-shot them when they stood up. Everytime, in every single battle, from begining to end.

So I'm not real sure why you're putting it on a pedastle, 10 years ago when the gaming press was honest, it would've gotten universally panned.

Edit:

Oh yes, and we got the wonderfull design of mandatory planet scanning. How that one made it through development without someone saying "God, this is mind-numbingly boring" I dunno.

I didn't miss the inventory. Why would you want one? You're in a hurry to save the world, not rearrange your shoe collection.

I'm playing ME1 now and I don't appreciate the increased complexity associated with the inventory. It seems pointless to me. There is no in game help in understanding the comparative advantages of all these items and it breaks immersion because Shepard is supposed to be an expert in all this stuff and clearly he is not. Having to manage all this for the entire team is a baby sitting chore. Switching ammo is clunky.

The cover system in ME1 is a mystery. Some rocks you can hide behind, some rocks you can't. I don't know why. I click to shoot and my PC just stays in hiding.

I've played lots of games without a cover system. ME2's cover system just gets the job done.

I don't see the ME1 AI as better. It's just typical suicidal AI.

[KenKenpachi]

Shepard Lives wrote...

By golly, I thought this was going to be one of the usual. disgustingly haughty RPG elitist rants and what do I get? A thread asking for multiplayer.

I take my hat off to you, good sir. You took me by surprise.

Also, keep your multiplayer the hell away from my ME.

Pretty much this. I have X-box live Gold, and I don't even touch multiplayer, largely given the player base. Well minus L4D2 rarely.  Multiplayer and RPG's don't or at least shouldn't mix.

[nicethugbert]

KenKenpachi ...

Multiplayer and RPG's don't or at least shouldn't mix.

Wrong, so wrong!

[DecCylonus]

DA2 worries me much more than ME2. The reused maps wreaked of cost cutting and a compressed development schedule. A lot of poor design decisions were made regarding the character leveling and combat systems too. It had its good points, but I would rate it the weakest of any Bioware game I have played.

ME2 was an improvement on ME in many ways. If I have a gripe, it's with the character leveling system. The skills and powers worked fine, but I wanted more. I missed things like Shield Boost. I also didn't like that when I reached some levels, I didn't have enough points to buy anything. To be fair, ME's system was too fiddly. It worked, but improvements were inconsistent. Sometimes a point bought you a tiny upgrade, and sometimes it bought you a massive one. I think a happy medium can be reached.

I do enjoy inventory management, but ME's was badly broken. Mainly, you found tons of items that were worthless except to sell. These cluttered up your inventory while you searched for what you wanted to equip. The inventory interface was clunky. There were lots of cool looking armor and guns, but only one gun type and two armor types that were worth having in the end. In short, I didn't really miss dealing with this mess in ME2, but... ME2 also oversimplified in this area. Mainly, I missed being able to customize my squad's armor. I liked being able to swap the different pieces of Shepard's armor. I wish I could have done it for everyone. Also, it would have been nice to find better Omni Tools and Biotic Amps instead of buying software updates.

There were things in ME2 I thought were clear improvements:
-Every gun felt distinct and had trade-offs for using it. Much better than ME making every gun of the same class the same except for damage output.
-Combat was faster and hands down better than ME.
-Heavy weapons.
-Better AI.
-Character leveling required real trade-offs. You had to sacrifice some powers to be strong in others. In ME, you had enough points to make all of your powers decent.
-Better cover system.
-Dialogue interrupts.
-Visually interesting worlds, instead of the same barren landscape in different colors.
-No more cookie cutter mines and surface habitats.

Overall, the gameplay of ME2 was much better. From what Bioware has said about ME3, it sounds like we will get the best of both games. They are promising a more focused story and a return of gear customization, along with ME2's gameplay and weapon variety. They have also hinted at a more complex character system than ME2. If they deliver on those promises, I think ME3 will be incredible.

Modifié par DecCylonus, 19 mai 2011 - 04:33 .