283 réponses à ce sujet

[shepskisaac]

DocLasty wrote...
Still too much shooter! In fact, Shepard shouldn't use guns at all. This game should be turned based, and he should have a sword twice the size of his body, and cast magic spells! This is an RPG, damn it!

Seriously, people are sometimes so stuck on these genre definitions... I understand they enjoy hardcore RPGs for their particular features, but the rage any departure from the 'rules' of the genre is met with is just ridiculous sometimes. While removing RPG (or any other) big features in a second/third installement in the already established franchise is a not a good thing, since removing major features is simply a regress, criticizing new features like omni-blade or action set-pieces for being too action-adventurish/shooterish/whateverish is nonsense to me. BW can do something different, bring elements from other genres and shouldn't shy away from doing it just some people think RPG games cannot step outside of the genre's boundaries, which are artificial creation anyway.

[KainrycKarr]

Rock =/= "dark-themed". This is generally where the average teenage Goth kid goes wrong.

Two Steps from Hell...now THEY have some "dark" music.

A few TSfH songs that I think fit the "dark" them of ME3; Asimov, Destiny of Mankind, Freedom Fighters, Smell of Victory.

[onelifecrisis]

Legbiter wrote...

Because many of the amorphous lumps of humanity who refer to themselves as "fans" here, are in truth monomanical shut-ins or at least very close to qualifying as ones, with no other social outlet but to show up here, acting very concerned about how ME 3 light armor objectifies women, etc, etc, etc, etc.

The details of every complaint are as banal as they are many.

If I worked at Bioware I'd engineer some way to have most of the "fans" drowned in tar sands. Sorry.

Hmm. This rather begs the question: what are you doing on this forum?

[Anihilus]

Seriously... I mean come on look at KoToR. No one complained when people in that game were using blasters/lightsabers/Force instead of arrows/swords/magic.

In regards to ME3s music: It'll be interesting to see what Clint has to bring to the table. That being said however, I'd like to see SOME of the music from the previous two games appear at some points. I particularly liked the score in Arrival. It has that We-are-so-dead feel to it.

[Father_Jerusalem]

I don't know. I honestly don't.

I've been playing BioWare games since BG1, and PnP games longer than that. I despise CoD and GoW and Halo... mostly because I suck at them.

I love the story of Mass Effect, it's epic in scope and is treated as such, but some people are just going to be pessimistic about anything and everything... I used to think I was a pessimist and a cynic, but reading BSN depresses the hell out of me.

[Legbiter]

onelifecrisis wrote...

Legbiter wrote...

Because many of the amorphous lumps of humanity who refer to themselves as "fans" here, are in truth monomanical shut-ins or at least very close to qualifying as ones, with no other social outlet but to show up here, acting very concerned about how ME 3 light armor objectifies women, etc, etc, etc, etc.

The details of every complaint are as banal as they are many.

If I worked at Bioware I'd engineer some way to have most of the "fans" drowned in tar sands. Sorry.

Hmm. This rather begs the question: what are you doing on this forum?

Thanks for the self-identification. Stay strong.

[onelifecrisis]

Legbiter wrote...

onelifecrisis wrote...

Legbiter wrote...

Because many of the amorphous lumps of humanity who refer to themselves as "fans" here, are in truth monomanical shut-ins or at least very close to qualifying as ones, with no other social outlet but to show up here, acting very concerned about how ME 3 light armor objectifies women, etc, etc, etc, etc.

The details of every complaint are as banal as they are many.

If I worked at Bioware I'd engineer some way to have most of the "fans" drowned in tar sands. Sorry.

Hmm. This rather begs the question: what are you doing on this forum?

Thanks for the self-identification. Stay strong.

No problem. You gonna answer the question or not?

[Gatt9]

onelifecrisis wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

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?

Yeah, I agree with that. The handful of screens we've already seen had more RPG elements than all of ME2, so at this point the argument that it'll be too much of a shooter is moot. If it's too much of a shooter for you, you should have left the series after ME2.

With all due respect,

Adding one skil that increases all weapons damage,  and a weapon modifying scheme isn't adding in RPG elements.  Adding non-combat skills would've been.  Yes,  it's definitely a step in the right direction,  but honestly,  weapon modifying isn't remotely RPG.

I could modify my weapons in Bioshock and no one was trying to call it an RPG.

You may also want to avoid telling people to leave instead of letting them express their feelings.  Mass Effect really isn't that big of a seller,  it's been outsold by almost all of it's competition,  drive people away and you won't see anymore ME games.

I'll ask other way. What other solution would you propose? Game budgets are enormous these days in high-developed western countries, dev studios need constant strong financial backing.

That's a very good question sir!

My thoughts are this...

Hollywood,  TVLand,  even Books,  they're not so different than Gaming.  Each markets a number of different genres,  with varying potential sizes.  I'll explain "potential" in a moment.

The other mediums do not budget every offering as if every single movie watcher,  TV watcher,  or book reader is going to buy in.  They all realize that each market segment has different normal sales.  A horror movie,  or a fantasy movie,  is very likely to do worse than a comedy,  or an action movie.

So they don't budget them as such.  They look at it,  say "Well,  fantasy movies usually only make X million,  so we'll give you X/2 as your budget".  The buisness model works,  because the average sales equal X,  so they budget carefully so that they'll at least make their budget back on nearly every movie.

Then,  occasionally they get an X-men or a Blair Witch,  where they budgeted to the market,  but it penetrated far far better than expected and they made a ton of profit.

Gaming doesn't do this.  Every game is budgeted as if every gamer on the planet's going to buy a copy.  Every game is a Blockbuster.  If the game idea is deemed just an "Ok seller",   it doesn't get made.  The Sims is a great example of what I mean here,  EA forbade it's development,  Will Wright did it secretly and dropped it on them.  They expected it to bomb,  it sold 13 million units.

So the solution is to budget games according to their pentration,  not as if every one was a blockbuster.  If that means in-game cutscenes instead of rendered,  so be it. 

That's the problem with the Game Industry,  with EA,  and why it's very likely we're going to see a market crash soon.  The game industry isn't run by buisness's best and brightest,  they're in Hollywood or TVLand,  the Suits just want to be the guy that found the next Doom or Warcraft,  and blow off any idea that won't be.  They want everything made to appeal to everyone,  budget everything like it's going to sell 10 million copies.

The Game Industry is in desperate need of a different buisness model,  that's one of it's biggest problems. 

I'm guessing alot of you are under 30,  you've *gotta* remember:  Gaming wasn't always cool,  it used to be an embarassing job that got you sideways glances and snickers,  people didn't respect it even 10 years ago.  So the people running the show aren't the best the world has to offer,  in most cases,  they were the average ones.  This is why the entire industry is so horribly mismanaged,  too many people out for the next big payday without the vision to understand the market and what it needs to be healthy.

Start googling video game history,  and how the industry was born,  you'll be very surprised by what you learn.

[MonkeyLungs]

TexasToast712 wrote...

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

Why do you feel like you have to insult people who prefer ME1. ME1 is lightyears and several hundreds of Mass Relays ahead of ME2.

[MonkeyLungs]

ohupthis wrote...

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)

DA2 is in NO WAY a tribute to DA1. It's like the opposite of a tribute and in gamin g terms we call that a REBOOT. For a sequel all you need is REFINEMENT.

[Father_Jerusalem]

MonkeyLungs wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

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

Why do you feel like you have to insult people who prefer ME1. ME1 is lightyears and several hundreds of Mass Relays ahead of ME2.

In your opinion, it is. In my opinion, ME2 is fantastically more advanced than ME1 was. I still love both games, but going around these forums it's pretty much tacitly implied that if you like ME2 at all, you're a herper-derper who should stfu and go back to playing CoD.

Yet I rarely see anyone calling those people out for insulting those of us who prefer ME2.

[FluffyScarf]

Who's worried? It's looking miles better than M1 already.

[JeffZero]

MonkeyLungs wrote...

ohupthis wrote...

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)

DA2 is in NO WAY a tribute to DA1. It's like the opposite of a tribute and in gamin g terms we call that a REBOOT. For a sequel all you need is REFINEMENT.

We don't call anti-tributes "reboots" in any spectrum; a reboot is just what the definition is: a complete relaunch. DA2 is not a complete relaunch.

[JeffZero]

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

MonkeyLungs wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

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

Why do you feel like you have to insult people who prefer ME1. ME1 is lightyears and several hundreds of Mass Relays ahead of ME2.

In your opinion, it is. In my opinion, ME2 is fantastically more advanced than ME1 was. I still love both games, but going around these forums it's pretty much tacitly implied that if you like ME2 at all, you're a herper-derper who should stfu and go back to playing CoD.

Yet I rarely see anyone calling those people out for insulting those of us who prefer ME2.

We ME2-preferring fans have more of a following than these forums typically show -- and I'm not just talking about the media and increased number of customers. I'm talking about other forums. Everywhere else I go, liking ME2 more is considered the norm.

A lot of people here represent the opposite end of the table because they were dissatisfied with certain aspects of ME2 and made accounts to express that dissatisfaction in time for ME3.

[Father_Jerusalem]

JeffZero wrote...

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

MonkeyLungs wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

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

Why do you feel like you have to insult people who prefer ME1. ME1 is lightyears and several hundreds of Mass Relays ahead of ME2.

In your opinion, it is. In my opinion, ME2 is fantastically more advanced than ME1 was. I still love both games, but going around these forums it's pretty much tacitly implied that if you like ME2 at all, you're a herper-derper who should stfu and go back to playing CoD.

Yet I rarely see anyone calling those people out for insulting those of us who prefer ME2.

We ME2-preferring fans have more of a following than these forums typically show -- and I'm not just talking about the media and increased number of customers. I'm talking about other forums. Everywhere else I go, liking ME2 more is considered the norm.

A lot of people here represent the opposite end of the table because they were dissatisfied with certain aspects of ME2 and made accounts to express that dissatisfaction in time for ME3.

I just want to say, that ever since I heard that we were getting a new human squad mate, I've been hoping against hope that the ME staff has some Farscape fans on it and they cast Ben Browder in the VO role for him.

FARSCAPE RULES!

[FluffyScarf]

There's only about half a dozen vocal ME2 haters. No different than HL2 haters or Skyrim haters. Every series has them.

[shepskisaac]

@Gatt9 LOTS of very good points but IMO, budgeting games according to their penetration won't really work with the expectations people have and the content most of video game genres have. RPGs are much less popular than shooters yet still contain 'blockbuster' elements such as combat, huge enemies, monsters, dragons, explosions etc. A comedy doesn't have 'blockbuster' elements action movies do. People don't expect that from a comedy, while they expect certain blockbuster/action elements from RPGs. And they expect them to look good, that's the problem. Comedies look as good/professionally as action movie, they just don't have action sequences which makes them cheaper to produce. A romance novel will have the same 'production value' as an action novel. Gamers expect RPGs' production value to be as high in the action elements as in the shooters and creating good combat/visuals for RPGs or hardcore stealth games costs as much as in shooters that sell better. This is the problem. Notice how some genres such as point&click adventure games are not present in the spotlight these days anymore.

[StarcloudSWG]

Simply put, Electronic Arts is, as they are required to do, attempting to push their profits upward. The only things under their control are release schedules and development costs. As a result, they are attempting to push more games out faster and cheaper.
I was not surprised when EA's original release date was going to be November this year. They clearly wanted to hit the Christmas market, and never mind the fact that this would make the game development period only a year and a half.
I'm certain that the critical panning of Dragon Age 2 and its year and a half development cycle led to management at EA going "Hey, you know, maybe the developers know what they're talking about when they say they need more time?" And then giving Bioware those extra months to finish polishing and testing Mass Effect 3.

[MonkeyLungs]

JeffZero wrote...

We don't call anti-tributes "reboots" in any spectrum; a reboot is just what the definition is: a complete relaunch. DA2 is not a complete relaunch.

DA2 was/is a reboot. Basically a complete relaunch of the series to take it in a new direction. Laidlaw himself has said as much. There's a new direction for the DA series and DA2 is the way forward whether the DA:O fans like it or not.

[MonkeyLungs]

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

MonkeyLungs wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

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

Why do you feel like you have to insult people who prefer ME1. ME1 is lightyears and several hundreds of Mass Relays ahead of ME2.

In your opinion, it is. In my opinion, ME2 is fantastically more advanced than ME1 was. I still love both games, but going around these forums it's pretty much tacitly implied that if you like ME2 at all, you're a herper-derper who should stfu and go back to playing CoD.

Yet I rarely see anyone calling those people out for insulting those of us who prefer ME2.

I like ME2 a lot. It's awesome. It's just not anywhere near the greatness of ME1.

[shepskisaac]

MonkeyLungs wrote...
DA2 was/is a reboot. Basically a complete relaunch of the series to take it in a new direction. Laidlaw himself has said as much. There's a new direction for the DA series and DA2 is the way forward whether the DA:O fans like it or not.

Didn't play DA2, did it restarted the lore and erased DAO from the continuity? If not, it's not a reboot.

[Praetor Knight]

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

I just want to say, that ever since I heard that we were getting a new human squad mate, I've been hoping against hope that the ME staff has some Farscape fans on it and they cast Ben Browder in the VO role for him.

FARSCAPE RULES!

That works for me, and why not add some others from the show, like Anthony Simcoe

"John, I gotta tell you something I've never actually put into words before. [pause] I love shooting things."


At any rate, I'm gonna be re-watching Farscape again!

[JeffZero]

MonkeyLungs wrote...

JeffZero wrote...

We don't call anti-tributes "reboots" in any spectrum; a reboot is just what the definition is: a complete relaunch. DA2 is not a complete relaunch.

DA2 was/is a reboot. Basically a complete relaunch of the series to take it in a new direction. Laidlaw himself has said as much. There's a new direction for the DA series and DA2 is the way forward whether the DA:O fans like it or not.

Even if Laidlaw himself were to use the term "reboot", I'd still argue it's incorrect. In order for it to be one, genuinely, it would have to reset the timeline. That is, simply put, how that works.

I haven't played either of the DA games so I can't comment directly on the controversies involving the second installment. But I do have it on perfectly good terms that DA2 didn't completely ignore the events of Origins in favor of a new reality, like say, BSG (2003) to BSG (1978).

Sorry if it seems like I'm targeting you for no apparent reason, I just have a huge pet peeve with people using the term "reboot".I can compromise with you and go along with the idea that most of the core design behind DA2 completely 'rebooted' itself after the first game, but for it to qualify literally as a reboot it would need to be an alternate timeline.

[HTTP 404]

same reason why people on planes worry about a plane crashing.

dying. we are going to die if Me3 sucks.

[JeffZero]

Praetor Shepard wrote...

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

I just want to say, that ever since I heard that we were getting a new human squad mate, I've been hoping against hope that the ME staff has some Farscape fans on it and they cast Ben Browder in the VO role for him.

FARSCAPE RULES!

That works for me, and why not add some others from the show, like Anthony Simcoe

"John, I gotta tell you something I've never actually put into words before. [pause] I love shooting things."


At any rate, I'm gonna be re-watching Farscape again!

It should probably go without saying judging by my avatar that I'd be alright with this.

Great quote, by the way. Ka D'Argo forever.