283 réponses à ce sujet

[FluffyScarf]

The new skills evolution has more depth than ME1's system of "add a point for 1% increase". Don't see how that's not an improvement.

[KainrycKarr]

The *only* rpg element still missing open-world exploration(mako). I don't think we'll get it. I'd like it. But I don't think we will. And, honestly, I can live without it if I need to.

[vwpoon]

Gatt9 wrote...

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.

You're not the first person (nor last ) to suggest the gaming industry is headed for a reboot. The TV and movie industry is doing it right now. Also for a more 'historical' example, look at the tech market. Anyone here remember when they were coming out with crap CPU's every 7 months and charging an arm and a leg for it? And now? It's more like every 14 months. Why? Cause they were expending millions in development and getting crap speed for it. Like I said, the moment you burn the consumer is the moment you lose them. The gaming industry is starting to go that way. Dev budgets are through the roof and the quality coming out of the pipeline isn't looking too hot. You're asking someone to shell out $60 USD for a copy and now with DLC? You're asking them to pay anywhere from $10 + USD.

[Cf UnrealKiller]

The only worry I have is about how they will deal with squad members. I'm happy to see the return of Liara and Virmire Survivors, but as of now they and James Vega are the only squaddies certain people will even see. I think the way Bioware handled importing saves worked to perfection with Me2, but the only things that were drastically changed were a few cameos. If Wrex died, we didn't see him in Tuchanka. Not a huge issue. If Ashley died, we get Kaiden as a cameo. Not too difficult to handle, just bring back the original voice actors, have them read the same script, and you're fine. 

Those things worked great, and the whole idea of having potentially everyone die at the end 2 was an awesome idea also. It worked very well to tie together the suicidal nature of the mission, and the realistic approach to the series. However, they made a big mistake in just that, they allowed EVERYONE to potentially die. Not just characters like Samara or Thane who weren't anything beyond cool aliens with a fun backstory, but the single most important character in all of Mass Effect 2 (besides Shepard and IM); Miranda. Of all the squad members in both games, Miranda is the only one squaddie whose importance extends beyond her fighting skills, as she brought Shepard back to life, and no one else has her level of knowledge of Cerberus (besides Jacob, but screw Jacob). Everyone else was expendable, they are all very fun and well-loved, but the series can live without them. Miranda, however, NEEDED to survive the mission, Bioware should have designed it so unless Shepard died, Miranda would live. Or I suppose Jacob if he's the romance option, but as I said earlier, screw Jacob. Miranda was simply too relevant to the story to be killed. They can fill her in with another character, but her absence will be a huge and awkward loss for certain players. 

If you need to Bioware, I have an idea for you. It's pretty far fetched, actually extremely far fetched, but necessary. Add a mission early in the game where IM uses all of resources to revive Miranda the way she did for Shepard. I don't know why either, maybe to use her as bait so Shepard will come save her, since they are enemies in this one, apparently. Anyways, since Cerberus has already done it once before, reviving Miranda is much quicker and cheaper. I don't know how much time there is between the end of 2 and Shepard's trial, but assuming at least a few months it shouldn't be too hard to explain. Just go with it. So she's all spiffy and back to life, and obviously excited about this fact, but then WAIT, IM is keeping her prisoner at Cerberus HQ. So that happens, and Shepard hears about this (after he's safely away from Earth, that is). He decides to go and save Miranda, but it's actually all a set-up (which I'm sure Shep didn't manage to pick up on, he/she is pretty oblivious), so Shepard has to fight his way to Miranda, save her, and run out guns-a-blazing. Guns-a-blazing both ways, actually. They get to the Normandy, IM smokes a cigarette, and go from there. 

I think the best part of this whole, over the top M. Night Shyamalan scenario is that you can use it even if Miranda did not die. During Shepards trial, she tries to hang low, and gets captured by IM. Soon as Shepard is off of Earth, he hears about this. Queue guns-a-blazing and cigarettes. The only thing you have to change is a couple lines about Miranda being a bit stiff, seeing as she's been in a seemingly permanent case of dead, and Shepard can choose to make a crude joke about this or not. 

Not sure if I had to give my phone number while signing up for an account, but if I did feel free to call me about writing for you.

[Pepper4]

not even a bit.

[snfonseka]

IsaacShep wrote...

snfonseka wrote...
Even in E3 BW gave priority to action elements rather than RPG elements.

Not sure why anyone would be surprised, E3 is a visual show, all non-fans and general gaming audience expects the most exciting and blood-pumping demos & trailers. Many RPG elements play great but they don't look great/are not particulary exciting being just watched. Microsoft conference opened with Modern Warfare 3 demo that started with a 2 minutes underwater level and people screamed "boooooooooring!'. Since they're trying to bring new fans in obviously they will present action that is the most tempting/exciting for people who haven't jumped into the franchise yet.

I am OK with their public presentation in E3. They should follow the trend there. But they should have shown more RPG related elements in so called "closed doors presentations".

[Sarevok Synder]

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?

Rage has more RPG elements than ME2, it's still a shooter. So, what's your point?

[Sarevok Synder]

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.

Oh I agree whole heartedly. For me personally, Bioware are in the last chance saloon with regards to how ME3 turns out. If it's too close to a full on shooter for my tastes, I'll not only leave the series, but Bioware as a whole. Rage is a better RPG/FPS hybrid than ME2, and it's looking superior to ME3 in that field too. I will buy BF3 as it's a shooter I will like. I don't want one with basic corridor shooting and dialog wheels.

[Jorina Leto]

Why I'm worried?
Because Thermal Clips suck. If they weren't there, I could be hyped.

[PlumPaul93]

DA2

[Flashlegend]

PlumPaul82393 wrote...

DA2

You know the DA team and the ME team aren't one and the same right?

[Autoclave]

I am worried about EA abusing their status to promote the hated Origin with ME3.

[PlumPaul93]

Flashlegend wrote...

PlumPaul82393 wrote...

DA2

You know the DA team and the ME team aren't one and the same right?

Yes but EA is involved. I do believe the ME team care more about the fans than the DA team, but we all know what EA cares about.

[The Elder King]

Flashlegend wrote...

PlumPaul82393 wrote...

DA2

You know the DA team and the ME team aren't one and the same right?

Even though I'm not worried for ME3 because of DA2 , do you know that during the DA2 development a lot of users responded to the people that were worried to an influence of ME series on DA2 with the same phrase "You know that the DA team and the ME team aren't one and the same right?"

Modifié par hhh89, 13 juin 2011 - 11:59 .

[Slayer299]

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?

Yes there are 2 teams, but one concern I have is something the Dr's said during an interview about a month ago about no team working alone and that there is a lot of "cross-pollonization" between all the different teams. So you can see a sort of fair concern after the disaster that was DA2, at least in my opinion.

I do concede that Casey Hudson has kept ME pretty well overall and barring my personal annoyances with some things in ME2, but the concern is a valid one for some.

[Flashlegend]

PlumPaul82393wrote...

Yes but EA is involved. I do believe the ME team care more about the fans than the DA team, but we all know what EA cares about. 

Ah yes, EA. Well ME3 already been delayed once. Hopefully thats a good sign and things will go well.

[Sarevok Synder]

Massadonious1 wrote...

Sarevok Synder wrote...
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.

Yes, take a look at BF3, a FPS. The proper game you're looking to compare it to is Gears 3.

And the reasons those games ultimately do better is because they have multiplayer, not because they're technological marvels. Once people beat the 10 hour campaigns, they spend the rest of the life cycle of the game until the next installment is released, fragging others online. 

If Mass 3 is recieved well, any future iteriations of the franchise/universe that feature some kind of co-op or competitive multiplayer WILL start to sell at the Gears/CoD level.

I wouldn't touch GOW with a barge pole. It's a corridor shooter, exactly what the ME series is in danger of becoming. So no, I'm not looking to compare it to Gears 3.

[Sarevok Synder]

KainrycKarr wrote...

sympathy4saren wrote...

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.

We refuse to let the halo/gears of war crowd take over without a fight. We wont go quietly.

Just adding bits and pieces as a bone isn't good enough. We want robust elements, or was I lied to in the face by Norman?

We have full character customization, dialogue choice, story choice, weapon choice, skill choice, just what else do you want?

Yes, because loading a round of ammunition into a gun takes skillzz........

Modifié par Sarevok Synder, 13 juin 2011 - 03:29 .

[FluffyScarf]

I could tape down Mouse 1. That was fun. In fact you could get through M1 with only W and Mouse 1.

[Sarevok Synder]

FluffyScarf wrote...

I could tape down Mouse 1. That was fun. In fact you could get through M1 with only W and Mouse 1.

You're amazing!!!

[Thompson family]

Re: OP.

Whiners gotta' whine. If they don't have a reason, they make one up.

[FluffyScarf]

Well you could. Rush + Spectre AR + 3 mods that decrease RoF but increases damage per shot means a gun that never overheats.

[Sarevok Synder]

FluffyScarf wrote...

Well you could. Rush + Spectre AR + 3 mods that decrease RoF but increases damage per shot means a gun that never overheats.

Again, you're amazing!!! Here's a Blue Peter badge.

[Anihilus]

^ A friend of mine has modified his Spectre assault rifle so that it never overheats. I don't know all of what was put in, but I do know that Snowblind IX rounds are involved.

[Sarevok Synder]

Anihilus wrote...

^ A friend of mine has modified his Spectre assault rifle so that it never overheats. I don't know all of what was put in, but I do know that Snowblind IX rounds are involved.

Doesn't matter what configuration you used, it would still eventually overheat if the trigger was kept pressed. At least we had the option to buy powerful guns and mod them as we wished. Not picking up stupid ammo....... sorry; heat clips lying conveniently behind equally convenient cover.