310 réponses à ce sujet

[Varen Spectre]

Lumikki wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

Aside from comments BioWare made prior to ME1's release about what Mass Effect was intended to be, along with the fact that if it originally intended to have non-stat-based TPS combat ala ME2 it clearly would have, because it's much easier to put in a simple point'n'shoot standard TPS combat mechanic than create a statistical system for it. You're essentially saying, "BioWare intended to make a mole hill in the first place!" despite the fact that they build a mountain to do it when building mole hills is simple.

- snip -

Yes, you can look it that way too, if you want.

Maybe they did not market shooter side much, can you blame them, because TPS side was never good in ME1. But ME1 had TPS inbuild inside the games main design from start. It was there from start, even the game engine was choosen based need of TPS. They have sayed this. You can't say, they never ment to have TPS combat, when it was even inside ME1. You can't deny it and pretend it doesn't exist. It's right there everyone to see. 

- snip -

Hmm, I can't help but think that now you are doing exactly what Javierabegazo jokingly pointed out that people tend to do i.e. - speculating what developers were thinking, when they were creating Mass Effect 1 or when they were presenting it to public, despite the fact that you have a chance to read the interviews with them and thus have a chance to get to know their ideas yourself.

I mean, we may try to speculate, look for "hidden meanings behind their words" or even fabricate what their thought process might have been, but the fact is, that a) it will get us nowhere... and we will never find out until they tell us themselves.

The best thing we have, are the interviews and from those few I have read (and I have posted snippets from 2 on page 5), it seems that developers from Bioware wanted to find a perfect balance between TPS and RPG elements in combat, in order to a) not alienate RPG fans and because they (genuinely) believed that addition of RPG elements to third person shooter mechanic would make game more tactical and more fun.

This is a close as I got to their original opinions and thought process about Mass Effect's combat prior to players' and reviewers' feedback. But, I encourage you to dig deeper and provide further or better information. I love Mass Effect and would love to find out more about it's history. 

Without any evidence to back your opinion up however, your guesses aboout Bioware's original intentions with Mass Effect are as good as mine or anyone else's and have very little factual value. 

[Il Divo]

Quite simply, I don't care what Bioware's original intentions with the game may have been. They designed an rpg/tps hybrid which had sub-par shooting mechanics and controls. Assuming the game was only intended to be an rpg, then they should not have bothered putting real time shooting mechanics in the first place. If they had kept that up, improving only the RPG aspects, there is a strong possibility that I would not be playing the series today.

Modifié par Il Divo, 25 juillet 2011 - 02:28 .

[Bocks]

Let's analyze the comparison pictures, shall we?

1 - The Turret

It's probable that Bioware did add the on-rails turret segment so that the game would be more attractive to the CoD kiddies.

2 - The Blade

I don't think this is a fair comparison. Energy swords aren't an original concept. From the psionic blades of the Protoss Zealots, to the lighsabers of the Jedi, this is more of a Sci-Fi trope than a copy.

3 - The Riot Shield

Games didn't invent riot shields. Plus they are an addition to gameplay. It doesn't matter if Bioware copied from other games in this regard, because at least they added something that adds depth to the gameplay.

4 - The Exoskeleton

Again, exoskeletons aren't an original concept. Star Wars had the AT-ST.

5 - The Sliding

This is just a cinematic of the game. Does jumping now qualify as "ripping off"?

6 - The Soldier

Honestly, this is more Bioware being unimaginative and unoriginal than anything. No one seems to like Vega's look.

[jmood88]

I love how people on here endlessly complain about spoilers but want to see conversations and choices.

[stewie1974]

@ .O.P you need to include the Dead Space "Bench" and the ME3 "Bench"

[stewie1974]

Well, they are similar , cept it seems improved as you'll actually -see- the improvements made to the gun model.

I don't mind developers looking at other games and seeing what works. All the games are very different and taking inspiration from another source and blending it into your own games can work very well. So long as they don't change the over all storyline or lore of the ME universe to accomadate the gameplay changes, that's fine.

[AlanC9]

SalsaDMA wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

Games like Deus Ex and Fallout: New Vegas would beg to differ. Again, proper integration and gelling of RPG and Shooter elements does not necessarily mean in the fashion ME1 went about things. And, again, even if one considers ME1 to have as you put it directly "mediocre combat system and bad TPS system" ME2 has a mediore and bad RPG system." And yet it's okay in that case. TPS elements aren't allowed to suffer, but RPG ones can.

To be perfectly honest, ME2's combat system is mediocre and bad as well, really.

And here we get into that nasty personal taste problem. I found ME2's combat to be not only superior to ME1's but obviously so. Not even close. So we simply don't agree on what makes good combat, full stop.

(Unless your position is that ME1 sucked even harder than ME2, but I don't think that's the case.)

Edit: which is not to say that some other kind of combat system couldn't have worked in ME2. But most of the proposals for putting in more "RPG" combat have the unfortunate side-effect of making Shepard not know how to use his weapons properly at the start of the game.

Modifié par AlanC9, 25 juillet 2011 - 03:25 .

[JayhartRIC]

stewie1974 wrote...

@ .O.P you need to include the Dead Space "Bench" and the ME3 "Bench"

KotoR had a bench, so Dead Space copied them.

[JayhartRIC]

Varen Spectre wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

Aside from comments BioWare made prior to ME1's release about what Mass Effect was intended to be, along with the fact that if it originally intended to have non-stat-based TPS combat ala ME2 it clearly would have, because it's much easier to put in a simple point'n'shoot standard TPS combat mechanic than create a statistical system for it. You're essentially saying, "BioWare intended to make a mole hill in the first place!" despite the fact that they build a mountain to do it when building mole hills is simple.

- snip -

Yes, you can look it that way too, if you want.

Maybe they did not market shooter side much, can you blame them, because TPS side was never good in ME1. But ME1 had TPS inbuild inside the games main design from start. It was there from start, even the game engine was choosen based need of TPS. They have sayed this. You can't say, they never ment to have TPS combat, when it was even inside ME1. You can't deny it and pretend it doesn't exist. It's right there everyone to see. 

- snip -

Hmm, I can't help but think that now you are doing exactly what Javierabegazo jokingly pointed out that people tend to do i.e. - speculating what developers were thinking, when they were creating Mass Effect 1 or when they were presenting it to public, despite the fact that you have a chance to read the interviews with them and thus have a chance to get to know their ideas yourself.

I mean, we may try to speculate, look for "hidden meanings behind their words" or even fabricate what their thought process might have been, but the fact is, that a) it will get us nowhere... and we will never find out until they tell us themselves.

The best thing we have, are the interviews and from those few I have read (and I have posted snippets from 2 on page 5), it seems that developers from Bioware wanted to find a perfect balance between TPS and RPG elements in combat, in order to a) not alienate RPG fans and because they (genuinely) believed that addition of RPG elements to third person shooter mechanic would make game more tactical and more fun.

This is a close as I got to their original opinions and thought process about Mass Effect's combat prior to players' and reviewers' feedback. But, I encourage you to dig deeper and provide further or better information. I love Mass Effect and would love to find out more about it's history. 

Without any evidence to back your opinion up however, your guesses aboout Bioware's original intentions with Mass Effect are as good as mine or anyone else's and have very little factual value. 

I remember Christina Norman had made a lengthy slideshow talking about why they made the changes they did for ME2.  It talked about things they felt they did poorly in ME1.  The slideshow also said they shoehorned in RPG elements where they didn't fit well.

[AlanC9]

 You mean this slideshow?

[Varen Spectre]

JayhartRIC wrote...

I remember Christina Norman had made a lengthy slideshow talking about why they made the changes they did for ME2.  It talked about things they felt they did poorly in ME1.  The slideshow also said they shoehorned in RPG elements where they didn't fit well.

I believe you. I also posted a video interview with her as a potential source of information about the changes in Mass Effect 2 and their reasons few pages ago.

Based on interviews like that one (and some others, usually after the release of Mass Effect 1 or after receiving feedback from players / reviewers), I think that it is very possible that, in retrospect, developers from Bioware might not have been that happy with Mass Effect 1's direction.

However... that is a different story.

 

[AlanC9]

It'd be kind of a bad thing if developers didn't look at their games and think about what they might have done better, wouldn't it?

[Il Divo]

AlanC9 wrote...

It'd be kind of a bad thing if developers didn't look at their games and think about what they might have done better, wouldn't it?

Agreed.

[Xivai]

AlanC9 wrote...

 You mean this slideshow?

That's demeaning and hypocritcal at several points. INnventory leads to naked squad mates? Who the hell do they think theyare? They have the gall to think they can police how we play the game. We bought it, let us play it. Who cares if some people have alternative definitions of fun.

God just sickening. Makes it sound like they think we're all slobbering retards who wouldn't know how to wipe our ass.

Modifié par Xivai, 25 juillet 2011 - 04:24 .

[AlanC9]

The point about naked companions is that the game is giving silly incentives.

You're allowed to like the silliness, of course.

Anyway, that's hardly the reason for the changes, as you well know since you saw the presentation.

Modifié par AlanC9, 25 juillet 2011 - 04:32 .

[Il Divo]

makalathbonagin wrote...

I wish ME2 sticked to me1 combat and not try to pretend its a shooter, if i want a ****ing shooter i wouldn't be playing this game!!!!!!!!! fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu the amount of rage, you have no idea. I mean who the **** is responsable for all those **** ideas >. Great game, great story ... why do you have to retouch the damn combat system!?!?
RAGEEEE i swear people here, this damn game company are making me go insaneeee xDD i'm starting to think my friends have a point ... bw is ****. And now the retards from FB have choosen our new femshep!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! dear god i'm just gonna.... go away .... slowly ...
Let me give you a little advice, oh dear great BW, dont' ****ing listen to your dumb fans! You have great writers and designers and CH!!! When i return with my new moded PC i want this game to be PERFECT, i want to play it like it's for the first time. ME1 was masterpiece in every aspect, it made me cry .. the music the story everything was great! Don't disappoint me, bw! I'll go now ...forever or not, for the fall or complete success .. it may sound strange but i'm someone completely strange haha i'll leave it in that.

Yeah. We're lucky that Bioware isn't listening to the dumb fans...

[littlezack]

Xivai wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

 You mean this slideshow?

That's demeaning and hypocritcal at several points. INnventory leads to naked squad mates? Who the hell do they think theyare? They have the gall to think they can police how we play the game.

Well, they made it, so yeah.

[Roberdots1]

yes it becoming a cliche shooter
and i DISAPPROVE
i hate it when developers think their making the most imersive satisfying gunplay
but every single developer out there is adopting the shoot first think later approach

[didymos1120]

AlanC9 wrote...

The point about naked companions is that the game is giving silly incentives.

That and it's a, well, joke.  Besides, it's not like ME ever gave us the ability to completely remove armor from squadmates in the first place, which is why she had to use a DAO screencap there.