283 réponses à ce sujet

[Sarevok Synder]

Canadish wrote...

Sarevok Synder wrote...

Clonedzero wrote...

Sarevok Synder wrote...

One reason: EA

EA has owned bioware for longer than you realize.

No, a lot of the games I liked were well into development when EA took over. It's the ones since I've the problem with.

Very true. Mass Effect 1 and Dragon Age Origins were both underway when EA bought out Bioware.
That means critical early development was fully under Bioware control.

Dragon Age's post release DLC was, on the whole, sub par.
Awakenings was a big let down from Origins.

Mass Effect 2 was their first major production out the gate made entirely under EA's watchful eye.

Considered fantastic, but dumbed down. DLC was hit and miss.
LOTSB was fan-bloody-tastic. Good value for money.
Arrival was a slap in the face and a big let down ending for ME2. Over priced for what you got.

Then Dragon Age 2 rolled in and....well, it was Dragon Age 2. It was awful because it was rushed, which lead to a huge list of problems with the game
Not going to derail this with a mega rant.
Either way, it was made fully under EA supervision.
So far no major DLC.

And now we have Mass Effect 3.
Things have been slowly getting worse and worse with Bioware.
Quality is declining.
TOR is said to be draining them from the various leaks.
More and more over priced DLC.
Rumors and reports of EA having DA2 review scores fixed.
Metacritic user score fixing from Bioware staff.
General name calling by angry DA2 devs, locking fans out of games.

So yeah, there is worry from their recent track record.
However, the Mass Effect team on the whole seem to be holding up better then the DA team.
On top of that all we've seen of Mass Effect 3 so far looks pretty damn great.
So, you'll see mixed reactions, but this is why everyone started out pretty negative

Hope that helped! 

I agree with most of what you've said. I wouldn't be surprised if there weren't any major DLC releases for DA2, next to nobody will buy them. The brand name is pretty toxic, it will take something special to rectify this.

[88mphSlayer]

because being optimistic and denying the possibility that DA2 might suck - months before the DA2 demo even hit - didn't do anything to change the fact that well... DA2 sucked compared to DAO

SO, the lesson people learned was to be pessimistic and skeptical, hoping that the pessimism and skepticism would rub off on bioware and they would put double extra plus good effort into ME3 and all future titles

[sympathy4saren]

Many people, including myself, are very concerned the Mass Effect is turning into a full fledged third person shooter, like Gears of War.

It's pretty close...its almost there right now. No further towards shooter

[GreenDragon37]

It's the last game in the trilogy and we don't want them to **** it up.

Pretty valid reason to be concerned.

Modifié par GreenDragon37, 13 juin 2011 - 12:01 .

[Erwin1984]

How ME3 is developing, it's sure to drift further away from ME1. Many signs already point to that, and the latest "Fall of Earth" confirms this: ME is going full on Halo. Gameplay is pure 3rd person shooter fare and rail/turret sequences and scripted action scenes seem abound. Also note the rock music that is a far cry from the brilliant scifi tunes from ME1 and ME2.

What you can also see is that technically and gameplay wise, ME3 will have very little progression compared to ME3. The same smallish maps, the same textures and objects and instances. The Omni Blade is just a cool way to show off the EA logo.

Now, this isn't necessarily a bad thing. Casey Hudson did say that ME3 was going to be a writer's game. Expect many decisions from your saves being carried over. I also expect the same awesomeness to be present in subplots and conversations. The depth and breadth of the locations (Earth, Mars, Salarian homeworld,...) is also promising. Also nothing has been mentioned yet about exploration, so that part may be great too.
Also, even if it a shooter now, this may not be so bad. So many are praising ME1, but the shooter, rpg and team mechanics were wonky. ME2 had much better streamlining. With Kinect, smoother control and hopefully better AI, ME3 might have even better gameplay. There's nothing wrong in a pitched battle on flanks and levels vs Cerberus commandos, if this is executed well. And if there's weapon and skill customization, that just makes it even more awesome.

So am I concerned? Yes. I liked Dragon Age 2 (one of the few maybe..) but it was Bioware's weakest outing in a long time. Nobody stays top dog and CD Project probably already took the RPG crown..but in Shepard we trust. Go ME3.

[OH-UP-THIS!]

zeoduos wrote...

I noticed that several people on this forum are a little bothered that ME3 might end up being like DA2.

Now, I have never played DA2. I have seen gameplay videos and such, and I can somewhat understand what fans are bothered about.

My question is: Aren't there two different teams of devs for ME and DA?

Not worried in the slightest. Why? Because the TEAMS are in SEPARATE CITIES.(don't go there, you know you want too.)

DA2 is great, it is to DA1 a tribute. Not to be confused/ compared to ME1or2, in any way people.

As stated above these 'teams' are in Edmonton, Alberta and some rathole in quebec.(J/K it's Montreal)

[Sarevok Synder]

Erwin1984 wrote...

How ME3 is developing, it's sure to drift further away from ME1. Many signs already point to that, and the latest "Fall of Earth" confirms this: ME is going full on Halo. Gameplay is pure 3rd person shooter fare and rail/turret sequences and scripted action scenes seem abound. Also note the rock music that is a far cry from the brilliant scifi tunes from ME1 and ME2.

What you can also see is that technically and gameplay wise, ME3 will have very little progression compared to ME3. The same smallish maps, the same textures and objects and instances. The Omni Blade is just a cool way to show off the EA logo.

Now, this isn't necessarily a bad thing. Casey Hudson did say that ME3 was going to be a writer's game. Expect many decisions from your saves being carried over. I also expect the same awesomeness to be present in subplots and conversations. The depth and breadth of the locations (Earth, Mars, Salarian homeworld,...) is also promising. Also nothing has been mentioned yet about exploration, so that part may be great too.
Also, even if it a shooter now, this may not be so bad. So many are praising ME1, but the shooter, rpg and team mechanics were wonky. ME2 had much better streamlining. With Kinect, smoother control and hopefully better AI, ME3 might have even better gameplay. There's nothing wrong in a pitched battle on flanks and levels vs Cerberus commandos, if this is executed well. And if there's weapon and skill customization, that just makes it even more awesome.

So am I concerned? Yes. I liked Dragon Age 2 (one of the few maybe..) but it was Bioware's weakest outing in a long time. Nobody stays top dog and CD Project probably already took the RPG crown..but in Shepard we trust. Go ME3.

If they go full shooter, it's game over. They will be trounced. Take a look at BF3, superior game play and vastly superior graphics. Biowares strength is in RPGs, if they move away from it they will crash and burn.

[nitrog100]

I'm worried about little things within the game, but as far as the game in general goes, I'm really looking forward to it. From what we've seen, ME3 is going to be the most amazing entry in the series. Dragon Age 2 sucked because they did everything wrong. Mass Effect 2 was slightly disappointing because the changes they made weren't implemented nearly as well as they could have been. ME3 is fixing that mistake. Dragon age can't do that.

[agn25]

Using DA2 as an excuse to worry about ME3 doesn't make much sense in my view.ME was always set to be a trilogy of games, so the devs always had their minds set to that end.DA2 was only considered once DA was the success it was.It seems to me DA2 suffers the same problems many hollywood sequels do in they were never planned to begin with and end up making very little sense.

Modifié par agn25, 13 juin 2011 - 12:45 .

[Gatt9]

Very well said Canadish!

Ever since EA took over,  the general theme of Bioware games has shifted a great deal away from RPG and a great deal closer to Shooter or Action-Adventure,  more "Mass market" type games.  The people they've put in charge don't seem to understand what an RPG is,  and seem far more concerned with other genres.

They don't appear to be able to handle criticism,  as Laidlaw and Gaider showed.

The fact that there's more than one team doesn't mean anything at all.  It's pretty clear that EA's got a hand in the design,  as I doubt Bioware decided overnight that they hate RPGs.  Further,  in any given company,  regardless of the number of teams present,  there's a "Culture" that pervades,  what one team is doing is what you can expect from the other.  Which is why you saw the "Wheel of Idon'twannahaftaread" in DA2,  along with the more action oriented gameplay.

It's obvious that the same problems exist in the ME3 development team.  Norman talks only about shooter elements,  no significant information about RPG elements at E3,  as if they don't want anyone to know that it's not a straight TPS.  We've still got the TPS style "Have a skill point!" instead of RPG style character progression,  and many other things just show they're not listening or have no care for fan's concerns.

So I'm concerned,  because I'm expecting to yet again discover that Norman put a straight TPS in the box instead of the RPG they've laid claim will be there.

agn25 wrote...

Using DA2 as an excuse to worry about ME3 doesn't make much sense in my view.ME was always set to be a trilogy of games, so the devs always had their minds set to that end.DA2 was only considered once DA was the success it was.It seems to me DA2 suffers the same problems many hollywood sequels do in they were never planned to begin with and end up making very little sense.

Ummm....

EA had Bioware start on DA2 before DAO even released,  while it was delayed,  before they even knew how well it'd be accepted.  They mandated a shift into Action-oriented gameplay before they even knew how well it would sell,  and they stayed that course even after DAO outsold Mass Effect.

It was planned,  it was EA's plan,  which unfortunately doesn't ever include anything that isn't aimed squarely at the very largest market segment (FPS).

It's all in Gaider's,  Laidlaw's,  the guy who quit interviews,  and one artist who's name I can't remember post DA2.

[Bogsnot1]

Awesome button.

[Gavinthelocust]

Bogsnot1 wrote...

Awesome button.

Conjuring the hateful ones to this place will break the balance in this forum. Unless you wish a tide of comments about Witcher 2 and how Bioware sucks I'd suggest you end it there.

[marshalleck]

Because ME2 and DA2 were both well below Bioware's usual standards

And don't tell me ME2 was "character-driven." Dragon Age Origins was not "character-driven" and it had deeper characters and more character interaction than ME2.

Modifié par marshalleck, 13 juin 2011 - 02:11 .

[shepskisaac]

DA2 broke 2 years cycle rule for sequels, the game came out only a year a few months after the first one so it was a guaranteed disaster. ME3 ain't doing that so I'm not really worried.

[Bogsnot1]

Gavinthelocust wrote...

Bogsnot1 wrote...

Awesome button.

Conjuring the hateful ones to this place will break the balance in this forum. Unless you wish a tide of comments about Witcher 2 and how Bioware sucks I'd suggest you end it there.

You mean these forums arent already filled with hateful people who think Bioware sucks for "dumbing down" games, or "selling out" to EA?

[Gavinthelocust]

Bogsnot1 wrote...

Gavinthelocust wrote...

Bogsnot1 wrote...

Awesome button.

Conjuring the hateful ones to this place will break the balance in this forum. Unless you wish a tide of comments about Witcher 2 and how Bioware sucks I'd suggest you end it there.

You mean these forums arent already filled with hateful people who think Bioware sucks for "dumbing down" games, or "selling out" to EA?

We try to keep them contained in the DA2 forums.
Try.

[Siansonea]

I think everyone is concerned about something. Personally, I liked DA2, but I'm not worried ME2 will be just like it. For one thing, DA2 had some cool aspects to it that I wouldn't mind ME3 borrowing.

My main concern is that all we saw at E3 was combat, combat, combat. All they're talking about is omni-blades, and tactical stuff, and dynamic environments, and customizable weapons and...all the stuff I don't care about. I am much more interested in the events and characters and the dynamic nature of the story. We didn't hear much at all about that.

[DocLasty]

Siansonea II wrote...

I think everyone is concerned about something. Personally, I liked DA2, but I'm not worried ME2 will be just like it. For one thing, DA2 had some cool aspects to it that I wouldn't mind ME3 borrowing.

My main concern is that all we saw at E3 was combat, combat, combat. All they're talking about is omni-blades, and tactical stuff, and dynamic environments, and customizable weapons and...all the stuff I don't care about. I am much more interested in the events and characters and the dynamic nature of the story. We didn't hear much at all about that.

From what I gather, they're not even close to finishing the voicework yet. There's probably nothing much to show on that front.

[diskoh]

I was never concerned with ME3 until i started reading the 50 page forum threads full of suggestions on how to ruin the game.

[Chaos Gate]

TexasToast712 wrote...

Because the Rosy Red tinted glasses wearers believe everything should be exactly like ME1.

Or, the ME2 fans don't want Mass Effect to be an RPG anymore. You can decide on that one.

marshalleck wrote...

Because ME2 and DA2 were both well below Bioware's usual standards

This.

[Inquisitor Recon]

- Assume the worst.
- DA2
- Too much fan-service, not enough epic game.

[MysticMage44]

Im worried that ME3 is going to be too much like ME2 not DA2. I loved ME2 (although i did like ME1 better) however, this game needs to have it's own feel and uniqueness too it. I dont want an ME2 expansion pack, which is how it's looking in the trailers. It seems so similar to ME2 in the trailers so far.

[Placeholder1]

With the way things stand at the moment I imagine I'll pick up ME3 to finish Shepards story but it will likely be the last Bioware title that I purchase.

[Paul Sedgmore]

Jerrybnsn wrote...

I'm pretty sure ME2 was in production for about a year before EA bought them up in 2008. So the lead designer was fully entrenched and in control. When talk of DAII began EA was in full control and the lead designer for DA: Origins ended up leaving over direction of the series.

Actually EA purchased Bioware in October 2007 a month before ME1 was released so ME2 would only have been in production for a few months at most. As for the lead designer for DA:O leaving he said “I’m not the same person I was when I started, and BioWare isn’t the same company.” which simply means that the game he wanted to make wasn't what Bioware wanted to make, this happens all the time in creative industries where the focus of the product is decided by more than one person.

[Lumikki]

Sarevok Synder wrote...

If they go full shooter, it's game over.

Can someone explain to me what this FULL SHOOTER is when everyone here allready knows that ME3 has more RPG elements than ME2 had?

Modifié par Lumikki, 13 juin 2011 - 03:03 .