@gamer_girl, because they're interesting questions...
-Why is it that your opinion on quality is the only opinion on quality? I know many people who think the quality of BW's games has improved, so you can't say that the quality has decreased as if it is a fact.
But not only can I say that, I can also quantify it.
-First, we need only look at DA2's scores and user scores.
-Second, we can venture over to Gamespot and read the comments in response to ME3's MP, which mirror the comments here.
-Further, we can definitively show that they're just rehashing what they've done before. Talk to a person X times and they'll madly fall in love with you. Talk to them Y times and they'll give you a personal quest. Heck, Mass Effect 2 and Mass Effect 3 are essentially just the plotline of DAO with different graphics and dialogue.
-We could then compare and contrast ME2's AI to other modern shooters, until we find an equivalent, which to be honest is going to be somewhere around the year 2000 in terms of how advanced it is. Or to put it another way, it's braindead AI that doesn't actually make any effort to kill you.
So if anyone is making the claim that Bioware quality has improved, they're either very young and have played few games, or they're just blindly defending Bioware. If anything, the only viable case to be made is that they've remained static, because there's literally flow charts out there that demonstrate how they're games are all nearly identical in function.
-If you believe the quality of BW's games has decreased, why do you assume it is because of EA? Could it not merely be a coincidence?
That's an easy one.
EA's employees have sued them, and described the working environment as "An assembly line", mind you, that was a current employee at the time, not a bitter fired one. EA's driven many big named studios into the ground, consistently doing nothing other than churning out steadily worsening sequels to something that was once great. Origin, Bullfrog, Westwood, and many others.
This is how EA works.
So no, there's no coincedence here. EA bought Bioware, ME2 is suddenly full-on TPS, DA2 was drastically altered before DAO even released and EA could know how it was received. EA doesn't make games that Bioware used to make. EA makes games they think they can sell to the LCD, quality be damned.
Case-in-point, EA wants Online Passes so people who buy used games have to pay them, and they wanted to scan your computer for pirated software reserving the right to sue you for it. None of this is about making a better game, all of it is about EA trying to squeeze out money from the Used Game market.
-Explain how it takes away from single player by existing? You don't have to use it and an entirely different team separate from the single player team worked on it. Your logic seems to have some flaws there.
Actually, the logic flaws are yours. You're assuming that EA, out of the kindness of their hearts, gave Bioware extra money to implement the Online Pass they decreed all their games would have. I will guarantee you they did not.
EA Budgeted ME3 at X, some amount of that money was given to the other team to implement Online Pass. The rest was given to the ME3 team to build what they could.
If EA hadn't commanded Online Pass in everything, ME3 would've gotten all of X.
Plus, to make matters worse, having a whole other team is extremely inefficient. Because now, on top of everything else, you've duplicated administrative positions that also take money out of that budget. Two lead programmers, two lead designers, two project managers, etc.
So not only did the money come out of the SP game, more money came out through duplication of resources.
All to implement Used Game DRM.
-Sure the game doesn't need an alternate way, but then what are BioWare games all about? They give you choices. It's a choose your own adventure, not a take-away-the-alternatives-that-others-may-enjoy-just-because-Darkeus-had-a-minor-embolism adventure.
You keep talking like some massive amount of people are craving multiplayer in their narrative driven single player game. I'm pretty confident this is not the case, because otherwise they would've bought the dozen multiplayer games out there already.
Plus, Bioware games don't give you choices, they give you illusions today. Play ME2 as a Paragon and a Renegade, the entire game is the same, you just hear different sounds while you get the exact same outcomes.
-This is a major point I have here "that happens to be personal for every person who plays it". If it is personal for each different person, why should something many people (not necessarily you) will enjoy and that could ADD to THEIR personal experience be taken away?
Ok, first, we're right back to "How many people are craving a multiplayer component to a single player narrative driven game?". You really should avoid that whole "Many" people thing, because even Gamespot's comments are decidedly negative, and that place was the first on the Fallout 3 fanboat. If Gamespot's negative on it, you can be certain this is not going to end well.
Second, your arguement is flawed. Someone here was asking for non-sex related relationships where Shepherd "Cuddles", it would increase his enjoyment, but is there value in it? No. What about the Furries? No value there either.
So what value is in the MP in ME3?
Nothing. It doesn't add anything to the game. It just is EA's attempt at forcing Used Game purchasers to pay them.
-Explain how co-op takes anything at all away from single player. You sure like spamming that statement without any direct proof that it does so.
1. Where'd the money for it come from? ME3's budget.
2. EA's goal is to force people who buy used games to pay them for it, so the component will be invasive, it will require you to participate so that EA gets paid. You keep assuming this was done for a reason that improves the game, completely missing EA's Online Pass program. The fact that there's a "Galaxy Readiness" variable and a bar to show it demonstrates how shoehorned in, and out of place, the whole feature is. We're right back to "Things that should never appear in an RPG".
You're welcome to prove me wrong by linking to evidence that EA decided to spend extra money on a handful of cooperative missions out of the kindness of their hearts.
-Key word think. Yes you THINK the devs are spinning the effect it will have on single player. Do you KNOW that? Nope. Why should we assume that your judgement is accurate?
I do know that.
EA. Online Pass. Used Game DRM. Origins, scan your computer for pirated software. There's a pretty clear trend here. As such, it's clear what the motivation is, and from that motivation we can easily make a number of key inferences...
-EA wants Used Game buyers to pay them.
-Used game buyers won't pay them unless they're forced to.
-Easily bypassed restrictions won't make them pay.
-So the restrictions must be integral to completing the game.
-So the MP component must be invasive in order to achieve EA's goal of getting Used Game buyers to pay them.
Why do you think that the CE comes with a "Free Online Pass"? Heck, odds are good at this point that not only will it be invasive, but that regular edition purchasers will have to cough up extra money to get the optimal ending.
Because EA's not worried about quality, just cash flow.
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut
