3223 réponses à ce sujet

[Il Divo]

tonnactus wrote...

The removal of forced loot alone would be enough to fix it.(because no one open lockers after having the best things)
In addition,a weight limit instead of a number of items,and it would be perfect.

Removal of forced loot, removal of weapon ranks, omnigel, the ability to stack items, and a drastic reduction in the total number of weapons. That would have been needed merely to make the inventory system tolerable. As in, it wouldn't hinder my enjoyment of the game. The system itself would have needed to be redesigned from the ground up for me to consider it 'perfect'.

[Phaedon]

RedCaesar97 wrote...
 modelling and textures

The model artists and the texture artists are the same.?

Also, don't forget the animation arist. Weapons unfold and fold in the MEverse.

And if you want original particle effects, a visual artist will come in handy.

[Phaedon]

Sarevok Synder wrote...
If that's true it's no wonder games development costs have gone through the roof. 

It's certainly not due to the division of labour. That one saves money. And makes higher quality products.

[Sarevok Synder]

Phaedon wrote...

Programming is the least of the issues in a weapon pack.

You need a game designer to come up with the idea of how each weapon will work and send notes to the rest of the team, you need a concept artist to provide art for the model artist, the texture artist and the sound designer,

you need the model artist to create the model for the weapon, the texture artist to create textures for it, the sound designer to create sound effects for it,

a programer to implement into the game, along with it's stats, and a QA team to test it.

And of course a visual artist if you are not recycling particle effects.

Look there are that many posts flying at me, I don't know who the hell is saying what at this stage. I'm calling it quits.

[Sarevok Synder]

Praetor Shepard wrote...

I think what happened was, that with the speed and volume of our posting, some details were buried in the past five pages or so.

Yeah man, I've lost track of who I'm answering.

[Mister Mida]

Phaedon wrote...

RedCaesar97 wrote...
 modelling and textures

The model artists and the texture artists are the same.?

Also, don't forget the animation arist. Weapons unfold and fold in the MEverse.

And if you want original particle effects, a visual artist will come in handy.

If I remember correctly, animation is nothing more than manipulating the model to simulate motion. So modelling and animating might be done by the same person. Models are the 'stick figures' which define the shape and the texture are slapped on top of them (I think).

[Phaedon]

Sarevok Synder wrote...
Look there are that many posts flying at me, I don't know who the hell is saying what at this stage. I'm calling it quits.

An "OK, I guess I was wrong, now let's switch the topic to x" isn't that difficult. And it's rude not to do that when you have been leaving snarky comments towards everyone for more than an hour on this topic alone.

--

Anyway, back on-topic, we as a community definitely overreacted over Hudson.

Casey Hudson: People really want us to deepen the RPG aspect of the 
experience. We interpret that as being about the kind of intelligent 
decision making around how you progress. To us, the RPG experience isn't
necessarily about stats and loot. It's about exploration and combat and
making a good character-driven story and good progression.

Come on, now, who doesn't want better progression, decisions, a great story and exploration?

[Phaedon]

Mister Mida wrote...
If I remember correctly, animation is nothing more than manipulating the model to simulate motion. So modelling and animating might be done by the same person. Models are the 'stick figures' which define the shape and the texture are slapped on top of them (I think).

That thought feels right, but I don't know... A lot of the weapons fold and unfold in different ways. Take a look at the Cain.

If at least one animation artist is not involved in the weapon pack, I'd be very surprised if they weren't involved on the main game.

[Il Divo]

Phaedon wrote...

Anyway, back on-topic, we as a community definitely overreacted over Hudson.

Casey Hudson: People really want us to deepen the RPG aspect of the 
experience. We interpret that as being about the kind of intelligent 
decision making around how you progress. To us, the RPG experience isn't
necessarily about stats and loot. It's about exploration and combat and
making a good character-driven story and good progression.

Come on, now, who doesn't want better progression, decisions, a great story and exploration?

When you put it like that, I don't think anyone could disagree. People will always prefer a better product. When ME2 was in development, ask anyone if they would've preferred everything you just listed. I doubt you would get a single 'no'.

The problem is that what constitutes 'better' differs from person to person. I think the omniblade looks great, but I've seen some criticism as well, as an example.

[Mister Mida]

Phaedon wrote...

Come on, now, who doesn't want better progression, decisions, a great story and exploration?

Sure. It's only too bad that ME2 overall didn't really do that for me. Some factors were on par, some were disappointing. I hope ME3 will do those things better.

[Sarevok Synder]

Phaedon wrote...

An "OK, I guess I was wrong, now let's switch the topic to x" isn't that difficult. And it's rude not to do that when you have been leaving snarky comments towards everyone for more than an hour on this topic alone.

Well I admit I could be wrong, not that I am. And the snarky comments were directed at me first. But yeah, let's call it quits and get back on topic.

[SalsaDMA]

Phaedon wrote...

Anyway, back on-topic, we as a community definitely overreacted over Hudson.

Casey Hudson: People really want us to deepen the RPG aspect of the 
experience. We interpret that as being about the kind of intelligent 
decision making around how you progress. To us, the RPG experience isn't
necessarily about stats and loot. It's about exploration and combat and
making a good character-driven story and good progression.

Come on, now, who doesn't want better progression, decisions, a great story and exploration?

That's a stretched comment if I ever saw one, even from you Phaedon.

So people wanting rpg have to be in opposition to other positives? Surely you can do better than that.

the problem with Caseys comment is that I could take bioshock and claim all the things he just listed was present in that game, and it still wouldn't make Bioshock an rpg.

[Sarevok Synder]

Mister Mida wrote...

Phaedon wrote...

Come on, now, who doesn't want better progression, decisions, a great story and exploration?

Sure. It's only too bad that ME2 overall didn't really do that for me. Some factors were on par, some were disappointing. I hope ME3 will do those things better.

My feelings exactly. Get ready, you're about to be jumped on!

[The Elder King]

Phaedon wrote...


Anyway, back on-topic, we as a community definitely overreacted over Hudson.

Casey Hudson: People really want us to deepen the RPG aspect of the 
experience. We interpret that as being about the kind of intelligent 
decision making around how you progress. To us, the RPG experience isn't
necessarily about stats and loot. It's about exploration and combat and
making a good character-driven story and good progression.

Come on, now, who doesn't want better progression, decisions, a great story and exploration?

Everyone want this. But only because they said that, that doesn't mean that they're going to develop a product with a better progression, decisions, etc.
Not that I don't trust them. I loved both ME and ME2 and I like what I'm seeing about ME3. But there were in the past a lot of games that during the developing phase seemed great (from the news that the developers gave and from the demo/gameplay videos) but then at release were disappointing.

Modifié par hhh89, 14 juillet 2011 - 10:09 .

[Phaedon]

SalsaDMA wrote...
That's a stretched comment if I ever saw one, even from you Phaedon.

So people wanting rpg have to be in opposition to other positives? Surely you can do better than that.

the problem with Caseys comment is that I could take bioshock and claim all the things he just listed was present in that game, and it still wouldn't make Bioshock an rpg.

RPGs are about stats and loot? Not necessarily, as Hudson says.

Note the word "progression", though. And "intelligent decision making".

I think that there's definitely a sweet spot between ME1 and 2. They need to get there, but with new shortcuts, not all of the old ones worked.

Increase the amount of weapons and keep the diversity, make progression more meaningful, and well, add exploration. Much more of it.

Repeating the Mako all over again wouldn't really help though. As I said, they need to find a new way to repeat what the Mako did, and go even further than that.

Modifié par Phaedon, 14 juillet 2011 - 10:10 .

[Mister Mida]

Sarevok Synder wrote...

Mister Mida wrote...

Phaedon wrote...

Come on, now, who doesn't want better progression, decisions, a great story and exploration?

Sure. It's only too bad that ME2 overall didn't really do that for me. Some factors were on par, some were disappointing. I hope ME3 will do those things better.

My feelings exactly. Get ready, you're about to be jumped on!

Meh. My opinion is mine, and their opinion is theirs.

Bioware seems to be learning of the mistakes they made with ME2. ME3 will tell if those lessons have been put into practice. At least we'll probably get weapon customization back.

[Someone With Mass]

Phaedon wrote...
Repeating the Mako all over again wouldn't really help though. As I said, they need to find a new way to repeat what the Mako did, and go even further than that.

I think they should either redo it, or scrap it entirely, because driving the Mako over the mountains and the empty fields felt like nothing but a chore after the tenth time.

[EternalPink]

Sarevok Synder wrote...

RedCaesar97 wrote...

Sarevok Synder wrote...

So it's a fact it takes seven programmers to produce one weapon? I doubt it. Seriously this is becoming a joke. I think it's time to call it a day.

Assuming one person for each, you would need:
 coding
 modelling and textures
 sound design
 testing

That's at least four people, and I am assuming that modelling and texturing is the same person (it may not be). And if the gun requires a new graphic for the weapon's screen, that requiress a graphics artist. And the weapon requires a write-up (email for Normandy, description for weapons locker) so a writer would get involved. That brings the total to 6.

If that's true it's no wonder games development costs have gone through the roof. 

Sadly the days of one person making a labour of love at a PC somewhere are long gone and have been for quite a long time.

Someone mentioned a few pages back about the upgrades and how they were very linear which is true you upgraded from 10% to 20% etc with the few occasional "perk" upgrades such as increased AP or accuracy but you didn't have any choice,either you did the upgrade or you didn't

Adding in more of a research/production theme like you would get in games such as the UFO series (tactical squad based games) might be quite interesting and it would allow more of a tailoring to playstyle, although this would probably add complexity

Personnally in ME1 once i had a large enough collection to actually have a choice i always just stuck in the pollunium one (pretty sure that's spelt wrong, the one that caused damage of time and prevented regen) in the guns with heat sinks until the latter upgrades that basically combined two of the lower upgrades and that was it, no tailoring to the enemy or playstyle since it wasn't necessary. Cosmetically and in use other than damage and the number of shots till overheat it made no real difference.

Marksmen (Pistol) usage felt exactly like overkill (AR) usage you just had a different graphic in your hand.

ME2 the guns did feel different for me

[Phaedon]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Phaedon wrote...
Repeating the Mako all over again wouldn't really help though. As I said, they need to find a new way to repeat what the Mako did, and go even further than that.

I think they should either redo it, or scrap it entirely, because driving the Mako over the mountains and the empty fields felt like nothing but a chore after the tenth time.

I think that BioWare missed the point of exploration in both of their attempts. The Hammerhead missions are too linear, and the Mako levels are just a sandbox that isn't fun at all to play.

There must be some sort of discovery.
And I am not talking about getting to the objective, or discovering a matriarch writing. These are hardly rewarding, since they are marked on the map.

Have one sidemissions per world, but also have other stuff that the player can discover and the game keeps track of. Such as landmarks for example.

Just give the players the number of landmarks that exist on the world, and have the players find them, so that they can initiate a small cinematic that shows the landmark.

Or have multiple ways to get to the same point.
You should be able to choose between going through the cave or the hill to get from point A to B.

Modifié par Phaedon, 14 juillet 2011 - 10:31 .

[Mister Mida]

Phaedon wrote...
...add exploration. Much more of it.

Repeating the Mako all over again wouldn't really help though. As I said, they need to find a new way to repeat what the Mako did, and go even further than that.

Yes, exploration. So far I'm kinda on the fence whether that's gonna turn out well. Houston's short statement concerning exploration in the E3 demo was a big WTF moment for me. Apperently his interpretation of exploration doesn't compute with mine.

And I definitely think the Mako is salvagable, like other things in ME (1) were, like, you know, weapon customiztion. And they seem to be bringing that back. The Mako was good when used on planets like Feros and Ilos. On the uncharted worlds... not really.

Modifié par Mister Mida, 14 juillet 2011 - 10:35 .

[Sarevok Synder]

Mister Mida wrote...

Bioware seems to be learning of the mistakes they made with ME2. ME3 will tell if those lessons have been put into practice. At least we'll probably get weapon customization back.

Yeah, they are steps in the right direction in my opinion. Even if just baby ones!

[Phaedon]

I personally think that features like the Mako and the weapon customization in ME1 were attempting to get there, but they didn't.

And the thing is, their full potential was mostly explored in ME1. I think that it's the concepts that were flawed.

The Mako. Even if they fixed the controls, it still gives no incentive for exploration whatsoever. It attempts to, with the minerals and the various collectible items, but it fails. And there's not really much you can do without changing the concept. Maybe forget about barren worlds and move to other environments? Urban? Rural? Rainforests?

The weapon customization as well failed due to two things, The stats weren't significant enough, and in addition to the lack of visual customization, lacked incentive to get the player going.

Modifié par Phaedon, 14 juillet 2011 - 10:25 .

[Sarevok Synder]

EternalPink wrote...

Sadly the days of one person making a labour of love at a PC somewhere are long gone and have been for quite a long time.

Someone mentioned a few pages back about the upgrades and how they were very linear which is true you upgraded from 10% to 20% etc with the few occasional "perk" upgrades such as increased AP or accuracy but you didn't have any choice,either you did the upgrade or you didn't

Adding in more of a research/production theme like you would get in games such as the UFO series (tactical squad based games) might be quite interesting and it would allow more of a tailoring to playstyle, although this would probably add complexity

Personnally in ME1 once i had a large enough collection to actually have a choice i always just stuck in the pollunium one (pretty sure that's spelt wrong, the one that caused damage of time and prevented regen) in the guns with heat sinks until the latter upgrades that basically combined two of the lower upgrades and that was it, no tailoring to the enemy or playstyle since it wasn't necessary. Cosmetically and in use other than damage and the number of shots till overheat it made no real difference.

Marksmen (Pistol) usage felt exactly like overkill (AR) usage you just had a different graphic in your hand.

ME2 the guns did feel different for me

You're making me feel seriously nostalgic. Yeah, labours of love are few these days, far too few. The most recent I've seen was Witcher 2. Sure it has its problems, but you can tell the sheer effort that went into its creation. I just hope CD Projekt keep it up.

[tonnactus]

EternalPink wrote...


Someone mentioned a few pages back about the upgrades and how they were very linear which is true you upgraded from 10% to 20% etc with the few occasional "perk" upgrades such as increased AP or accuracy but you didn't have any choice,either you did the upgrade or you didn't

Even Deadspace had a better weapon upgrade system then Mass Effect 2 with the energy nodes and that was a third person shooter.

[Iakus]

Phaedon wrote...
I think that BioWare missed the point of exploration in both of their attempts. The Hammerhead missions are too linear, and the Mako levels are just a sandbox that isn't funny at all to play.

There must be some sort of discovery.
And I am not talking about getting to the objective, or discovering a matriarch writing. These are hardly rewarding, since they are marked on the map.

Have one sidemissions per world, but also have other stuff that the player can discover and the game keeps track of. Such as landmarks for example.

Just give the players the number of landmarks that exist on the world, and have the players find them, so that they can initiate a small cinematic that shows the landmark.

Or have multiple ways to get to the same point.
You should be able to choose between going through the cave or the hill to get from point A to B.

While I definitely preferred the Mako over the Hammerhead, I can definitely get behind this idea.

Exploration is all about finding extra stuff.  Interesting landmarks, Alternate routes.  Bonus missions.  Even extra loot or information.  Players should be rewarded for going off the beaten path.  A corridor, no matter how pretty it's dressed up, is still just a corridor.