145 réponses à ce sujet

[spiral trick]

Prince Zeel wrote...

Anyone who wanted multiplayer should be shot.

I thought Mass Effect wasn't a shooter? <_<

[MajesticJazz]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Because, f*ck it, genres are for sissies.

This is more than just genres, it is about the gameplay design philosphy.

I'll do another ME1 vs ME2 comarison.

In ME1 we had story world hubs such as Noveria and Feros. Both of these worlds featured a mission that was vital to the overall plot of the game, which was to investigate Saren's activities and how they tie in with the Geth and the Reapers. Each of these worlds had an immersive atmosphere and story that was told beyond just the whole Saren/Geth/Reapers ordeal. Lets take Noveria as an example. You learn about the planet's culture and purpose. You learn that it is sort of like the Area 51 in space where everything is secret.....and corrupt. You learn these by dialog and participating in the side missions such as the Anolaies(sp?) case. You partake in a shady business deal with an Asari. Furthermore as you go deep into Peak 15, you learn that the corruption doesn't end and that not all is always as it seems. By the time you leave the planet, you literally feel like you cannot trust anyone there because everyone has their own agenda and personal interest. I can go on but you get the idea.

Then compare that to say.....Horizon or Freedom's progress. There are no hub locations, nothing to learn more about the culture of the given location or any of that. It is just another pure shooter level with little to no dialog. Just a simple Point A to Point B and shoot everything you see experience. Now compare this to the Noveria Peak 15 adventure where you settle out on a Mako and battle your way through the hills to get to Peak 15. You talk to a VI that gives you a rundown of the situation there but even that conversation doesn't reveal the whole truth. You then battle your way to the entrance of a science lab where you meet up with a Security officer who sledges out some more details and the threat ahead. Upon reaching the lab, you meet up with a Asari scientist who seems shady and a nervious Salarian scientist who can't say too much because of his NDA. You then learn about an experiement that went wrong there and you have the option to help cure it. You then find out that the shady Asari scientist was infact working with Saren and tries to kill you. You make your way to Benezia and then learn more about Saren's objectives and the role the Rachni plays in it. By the time you leave the planet you feel dirty, having witnessed some of the galaxies most darkest acts which was a stark contrast to that of the Citadel where everything is ordely. While Noveria was essentially a level, it was multi-layered and had a substory to the story. There were even substories to the substories. Noveria/Feros/Illos/Virmire all felt expansive and huge because it was more than just ground assults. Some portions you were walking around talking, sometimes you were fighting in the mako, and some times you were fighting on foot. Hell, there were even times in Noveria/Feros where you did a lot of back tracking. However Horizon and Freedom's progress were linear in comparison, just start off here and finish there with NO vehicle exploration and VERY little dialog. 

The worlds in Mass Effect 1 felt like WORLDS. The worlds in ME2 felt like linear levels and closed corridors. Whereas ME1 felt like a huge place to explore, ME2 felt claustophobic with little to no room for exploration.

This is more than RPG vs Shooter. This is about the way Bioware went about doing level design. The designs in ME2 felt more like a Uncharted level whereas ME1 felt more expansive like an adventure game.

You give good reasons to why ME2 was different and how ME3 will try to be the best of both worlds. But how can you explain changing a game where exploration was the goal to something that is more linear in design? If I can remember correctly, during 2007, NOBODY complained about the exploration in ME1. Infact, people wanted more in ME2. So explain why Bioware instead took away the exploration for ME2 given the fact that it was something that most people enjoyed with ME1?

[GMagnum]

da mass effect series is now a FPS - sad day in history

[Landline]

You know what I'm expecting right now? Something like Dead Spaces 2 multiplayer.

As in a series of missions where you play a group of no named soldiers on missions that, while related to the main story, are ultimately irrelevant to the main story.

[111987]

Prince Zeel wrote...

111987 wrote...


Did you address a single point I made, or was that ALL baseless personal attacks?

1. This is an RPG game not a Shooter.
2. If you want a shooter, play a Shooter.
3. I don't see why a shooter features should be in an RPG game
4. Obviously you're a FPS gamer, why are you even here.

1. I guess i must have imagined all the things I was shooting in ME1 and ME2.
2. ME1 and ME2 are a hybrid RPG/TPS. So if I want to play a shooter, the Mass Effect series is a viable option.
3. Maybe because Mass Effect is a Third-Person-SHOOTER and an RPG?
4. I play FPS's, TPS's, FPA's, platforming games, racing games, puzzle games, and RPG games. People can like more than one genre of gaming, believe it or not.

[Prince Zeel]

@111987
Listen, multiplayer in this type of game makes no sense. An rpg focuses on character driven stories, customization and plots. A multiplayer feature is the exact opposite, it's about instant gratification, shooting the shtt with your friends and just having fun. There is a place for multiplayer, it's just not here. The me series should be using the money and resources on improving the single player experience, instead now they're going to waste time on multiplayer.

Especially, since this has been historically a singleplayer game, trying to mesh multiplayer features with a single player campaign is going to be difficult. Either it will suck complete donkey. or it'll be average at best. I don't see how Bioware will pull out a good multiplayer experience in such a small allotted time

Let's not forget that Bioware is an RPG company, they specialize in RPG`s, how are they going to pull out a fps multiplayer out of their ass. It`s like switching genres mid development cycle. costly and most likely a big waste of time.

Modifié par Prince Zeel, 10 octobre 2011 - 07:59 .

[Ghost-621]

MajesticJazz wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Because, f*ck it, genres are for sissies.

This is more than just genres, it is about the gameplay design philosphy.

I'll do another ME1 vs ME2 comarison.

In ME1 we had story world hubs such as Noveria and Feros. Both of these worlds featured a mission that was vital to the overall plot of the game, which was to investigate Saren's activities and how they tie in with the Geth and the Reapers. Each of these worlds had an immersive atmosphere and story that was told beyond just the whole Saren/Geth/Reapers ordeal. Lets take Noveria as an example. You learn about the planet's culture and purpose. You learn that it is sort of like the Area 51 in space where everything is secret.....and corrupt. You learn these by dialog and participating in the side missions such as the Anolaies(sp?) case. You partake in a shady business deal with an Asari. Furthermore as you go deep into Peak 15, you learn that the corruption doesn't end and that not all is always as it seems. By the time you leave the planet, you literally feel like you cannot trust anyone there because everyone has their own agenda and personal interest. I can go on but you get the idea.

Then compare that to say.....Horizon or Freedom's progress. There are no hub locations, nothing to learn more about the culture of the given location or any of that. It is just another pure shooter level with little to no dialog. Just a simple Point A to Point B and shoot everything you see experience. Now compare this to the Noveria Peak 15 adventure where you settle out on a Mako and battle your way through the hills to get to Peak 15. You talk to a VI that gives you a rundown of the situation there but even that conversation doesn't reveal the whole truth. You then battle your way to the entrance of a science lab where you meet up with a Security officer who sledges out some more details and the threat ahead. Upon reaching the lab, you meet up with a Asari scientist who seems shady and a nervious Salarian scientist who can't say too much because of his NDA. You then learn about an experiement that went wrong there and you have the option to help cure it. You then find out that the shady Asari scientist was infact working with Saren and tries to kill you. You make your way to Benezia and then learn more about Saren's objectives and the role the Rachni plays in it. By the time you leave the planet you feel dirty, having witnessed some of the galaxies most darkest acts which was a stark contrast to that of the Citadel where everything is ordely. While Noveria was essentially a level, it was multi-layered and had a substory to the story. There were even substories to the substories. Noveria/Feros/Illos/Virmire all felt expansive and huge because it was more than just ground assults. Some portions you were walking around talking, sometimes you were fighting in the mako, and some times you were fighting on foot. Hell, there were even times in Noveria/Feros where you did a lot of back tracking. However Horizon and Freedom's progress were linear in comparison, just start off here and finish there with NO vehicle exploration and VERY little dialog. 

The worlds in Mass Effect 1 felt like WORLDS. The worlds in ME2 felt like linear levels and closed corridors. Whereas ME1 felt like a huge place to explore, ME2 felt claustophobic with little to no room for exploration.

This is more than RPG vs Shooter. This is about the way Bioware went about doing level design. The designs in ME2 felt more like a Uncharted level whereas ME1 felt more expansive like an adventure game.

You give good reasons to why ME2 was different and how ME3 will try to be the best of both worlds. But how can you explain changing a game where exploration was the goal to something that is more linear in design? If I can remember correctly, during 2007, NOBODY complained about the exploration in ME1. Infact, people wanted more in ME2. So explain why Bioware instead took away the exploration for ME2 given the fact that it was something that most people enjoyed with ME1?

I highlighted some important points.

Bioware- Hiding multiplayer for four months to lessen your time to reconsider cancelling that preorder.

[Arcadian Legend]

Part of me loves this thread, yet part of me hates it. Surely that ain't normal.

And please don't go into what genre it is. At the end of the day, that stuff don't matter.

Modifié par DarkRiku7, 10 octobre 2011 - 08:01 .

[Izhalezan]

DarkRiku7 wrote...

Part of me loves this thread, yet part of me hates it. Surely that ain't normal.

I'm starting to learn that partial Schizophrenia is a requirement for these boards.

[Prince Zeel]

DarkRiku7 wrote...

Part of me loves this thread, yet part of me hates it. Surely that ain't normal.

You never contribute to anything. you are like one of those fat cheerleaders who no one pays attention to. If you enjoy reading, keep quiet. If you have something to say other than the insignificant dribble you always post, then POST it.

Stop with the spam. Jesus.

Modifié par Prince Zeel, 10 octobre 2011 - 08:14 .

[Medhia Nox]

@Prince Zeel: I gotta ask what you mean when you say "this type of game".

PnP is always multiplayer.

[Prince Zeel]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@Prince Zeel: I gotta ask what you mean when you say "this type of game".

PnP is always multiplayer.

What's PnP?


I mean "rpg's" .


Though I guess the Mass Effect series is now a streamline blob of crap now.

Modifié par Prince Zeel, 10 octobre 2011 - 08:04 .

[111987]

Prince Zeel wrote...

@111987
Listen, multiplayer in this type of game makes no sense. An rpg focuses on character driven stories, customization and plots. A multiplayer feature is the exact opposite, it's about instant gratification, shooting the shtt with your friends and just having fun. There is a place for multiplayer, it's just not here. The me series should be using the money and resources on improving the single player experience, instead now they're going to waste time on multiplayer.

Especially, since this has been historically a singleplayer game, trying to mesh multiplayer features with a single player campaign is going to be difficult. Either it will suck complete donkey. or it'll be average at best. I don't see how Bioware will pull out a good multiplayer experience in such a small allotted time

Let's not forget that Bioware is an RPG company, they specialize in RPG`s, how are they going to pull out a fps multiplayer out of their ass. It`s like switching genres mid development cycle. costly and most likely a big waste of time.

They aren't switching genres though; Mass Effect has always been a hybrid RPG-TPS. They aren't pulling out an FPS multiplayer out of their ass. All the foundation for the combat is there.

The multiplayer could very well suck, I grant that. It might even make the singleplayer a horrible, disappointing experience. But shouldn't you at least wait until we find out more about it?

[Izhalezan]

Modifié par Izhalezan, 10 octobre 2011 - 08:07 .

[Medhia Nox]

Pen and Paper - think Dungeons and Dragons.

Roleplaying games started out multiplayer. Technology made them singleplayer.

[Ghost-621]

111987 wrote...

They aren't switching genres though; Mass Effect has always been a hybrid RPG-TPS. They aren't pulling out an FPS multiplayer out of their ass. All the foundation for the combat is there.

The multiplayer could very well suck, I grant that. It might even make the singleplayer a horrible, disappointing experience. But shouldn't you at least wait until we find out more about it?

Exactly what they want you to do. They want you to buy it first, then do the considering. That way, they have your money regardless!

[Morty Smith]

Maybe we give someone too much credit ... and money.

[Arcadian Legend]

Prince Zeel wrote...

DarkRiku7 wrote...

Part of me loves this thread, yet part of me hates it. Surely that ain't normal.

You never contribute to anything. you are like one of those fat cheerleaders who know one pays attention to. If you enjoy reading, keep quiet. If you have something to say other than the insignificant dribble you always post, then POST it.

Stop with the spam. Jesus.

I'm not spamming, I contributed to this thread in an earlier post at the bottom of the picture. Check it out if you wish.

I am done for now.

[111987]

Ghost-621 wrote...

111987 wrote...

They aren't switching genres though; Mass Effect has always been a hybrid RPG-TPS. They aren't pulling out an FPS multiplayer out of their ass. All the foundation for the combat is there.

The multiplayer could very well suck, I grant that. It might even make the singleplayer a horrible, disappointing experience. But shouldn't you at least wait until we find out more about it?

Exactly what they want you to do. They want you to buy it first, then do the considering. That way, they have your money regardless!

Well that would certainly be a foolish course of action. Are you suggesting the only way to find out about what the multiplayer features are/how good the campaign is is by buying the game?

Wait until the reviews pop up, or if you don't trust reviews, wait for the people on BSN to talk about it. Hell, watch playthroughs on YouTube. There are so many ways to know what a game will be like without actually buying it first.

[CptBomBom00]

Most of the time when read all the posts I think a true war is here on forums, just my opinion no need to spread it around and to diss me.

[Prince Zeel]

111987 wrote...



They aren't switching genres though; Mass Effect has always been a hybrid RPG-TPS.

I'm guessing you're one of those people who started at Mass Effect 2. If you played 1, the combat used guns, but thats where the whole "shooter" aspect ended. and TPS 's are different from FPS.

They aren't pulling out an FPS multiplayer out of their ass. All the foundation for the combat is there.

yes, now they are. After the game has squeezed the last reminents of RPG elements out of it.  Still though, the game still has a long way to go to have an "enjoyable" fps multiplayer experience.

The multiplayer could very well suck, I grant that. It might even make the singleplayer a horrible, disappointing experience. But shouldn't you at least wait until we find out more about it?

Hell no. I don't see the point of taking this risk. who exactly is it satisfying? Hmm? I played the game since the beginning, I only wanted a single player experience. Most of us who bought ME expect only a single player experience. Please tell me, why should they take the gamble. They are essientially ignoring one market that supported them from the beginning, for another, that wouldn't have touched Mass Effect otherwise.

[Kakita Tatsumaru]

Blooddrunk1004 wrote...

Until i complete ME3's story i will reserve my judgement, yes i don't care if has multiplayer or not... shocking.

Unless you find something your care about in the game has been rushed.

[Prince Zeel]

Kakita Tatsumaru wrote...

Blooddrunk1004 wrote...

Until i complete ME3's story i will reserve my judgement, yes i don't care if has multiplayer or not... shocking.

Unless you find something your care about in the game has been rushed.

Which has to happen, since now we are paying for single player experience and Multiplayer experience.

yay Bioware, yay.

[Medhia Nox]

You've never played actual roleplaying games at a table with friends have you Zeel.