597 réponses à ce sujet

[Balek-Vriege]

I don't know what the definition of core fanbase is really. Do you make a game for 100 people who religiously post on BSN and are completely addicted/obsessed with ME1 and have negative views of any additions or changes you make in sequels? Or do you make it for the hundreds of thousands to millions of casual gamers who have bought and enjoyed the franchise since ME1 and actually want additions to the game?

So far what we know about the Co-op and how it came to be shouldn't effect anyones reasoning for buying:

1. It's plot based, story driven co-op with non-shepard play and allows us to play other races. This isn't free for all PvP here (from what we know). ME3 MP sounds like it will feel a lot like PvM in an online game, Mass Effect style.

2. Is completely seperate and is not necessary for ME3 SP. You won't miss out on any content or endings.

3. It was developed by another group of devs entirely, being Bioware Montreal who are tuned to working on MP. It's not like they could have had them working on the SP part of the game. Instead they would be working on another project entirely with MP.

The only way I see this being a problem is one or more of the following:

1. Not knowing/understanding the above points.

2. Some RPG fans are secretly min/maxers and don't even know it. They dislike multiplayer but feel they now need to play it to get the maximum galactic readiness before playing ME3 singleplayer. In reality they don't, but their gut tells them they need to. I belong to this group except for the fact I love co-op. I will probably have to play each mission in co-op before starting my SP playthrough.

2. Elitism: People feel they're the biggest ME/Bioware/RPG fans and if you like multiplayer in any RPG you are a "lesser" fan then them. Bioware indroducing MP is a betrayal of their fandom because others get to enjoy MP in their RPG universe. No one should be able to have more fun than them or enjoy an aspect of the game they don't like. They will make sure you know about it too. This pretty much applies to any addition or change to the series.

[Strephon Gentry]

^ This is the best summary I have read on these forums and just might steal this post to point the naysayers to. Good job. +1 internets to you good sir.

[CAPSLOCK FURY]

Strephon Gentry wrote...

^ This is the best summary I have read on these forums and just might steal this post to point the naysayers to. Good job. +1 internets to you good sir.

How do you know it's a sir? Sexist.

[CAPSLOCK FURY]

luk4s3d wrote...

Just to clear things up, i love Co-Op modes, Horde et al: i just have no faith that BW can make there first attempt a good one, that wont detract from the SP.

I just simply believe it will be utter crap, and a waste of resources that would of been better spent on SP.
Like i said earlier, if ID cant make decent Co-Op(and they started the FPS genre) then BW havent got a chance!

It's not elitism, i just dont want it in my game. it's not optional once it's taking up disc space.

ID didn't make the first FPS games they just popularized it.

Just thought I'd put that out there.

[ODST 5723]

tez19 wrote...

shinobi602 wrote...

tez19 wrote...

Seriously mate? Dragon Age 2?

Yup, I enjoyed it. It's nowhere near perfect (a lot of reused environments and repetitive enemies), but I still had good fun with the game.

I enjoyed the game too, it was a good game. But DA:O, Mass Effect were not good games they were great games. Thus this is where my worry comes from, are they becoming another mediocre developer (according to my tastes) instead of being a great developer.

From an actual business perspective, you'd know that at the end of the day it's about profit and not a boost in fans.

You can gain fans and make less profit.  You can lose fans and make more profit.

Why?  Because it costs money to make money and there's a lot of factors that go into whether a venture is profitable.

So instead of focusing on the actual business end, you're not even scratching the surface.  Instead your focus has been on volume.  And instead of actually trying to discuss the business case you're throwing around subjective value about your perception of quality and your opinion and conjecture about the quality of certain games as if they support your OP.

If you can't define the actual volume of fans, can't estimate the percentage of the hardcore fanbase vs. actual consumer, can't identify the revenues and don't know the costs then you're really not in a position to talk about much.

As for whether they're gaining for losing more fans, what are you going to base that on?  I don't have to be a fan of a series to buy the game.  You can't just assume that everyone that bought DA:O was a fan.  Could the lower sales volume be about something else other than the quality of DA2?  Could there be a lot of people who played DA:O and thought, hey... this game sucks so when it's time for a sequel they're spending their money somewhere else?

How do you factor those people into a churn rate? 

[armass]

Just curious, has anybody read this yet?

http://gamerant.com/...ble-dyce-99145/

Did David Silverman really say ME1 came out eight years ago? wow...

Modifié par armass, 14 octobre 2011 - 11:56 .

[Anacronian Stryx]

armass wrote...

Just curious, has anybody read this yet?

http://gamerant.com/...ble-dyce-99145/

Did David Silverman really say ME1 came out eight years ago? wow...

I'm more amazed that anybody actually listened to Silverman long enough to find that kind of flaw..

[armass]

“We’ve really struck a great balance. Obviously, if you’ve played the game before you’ll see things that apply to you… And even if you’ve played the games multiple times before – Mass Effect came out almost eight years ago – you’re not going to remember all the details from when you played that game, right? Even I can’t recall everything that happened to me when that came out in 2007. It’s human nature. We’re not Rain Man…

“I think this is definitely the best chance we have in the series to really break out and go truly blockbuster. It really is a natural entry point for people: giant alien race launches all-out war, you have to rally the forces of the universe to counter and see if you can take them down. That’s pretty clear. You don’t need to be like: ‘Well, what about when I had this love affair?’ It’s like, who cares? It’s all out war!"

-David Silverman

I hope this guy doesnt know what he's talking about and this is not the real attitude at Bioware concerning this game, and things you did in ME1. Cause i remember what i did in that game, clear as day.

Modifié par armass, 15 octobre 2011 - 12:15 .

[Bluko]

Il Divo wrote...

Well, excluding Neverwinter Nights and Baldur's Gate 1, I've enjoyed everything that Bioware's ever done. As an original fan since KotOR came out, I haven't noticed any decrease in quality. Actually, quite the contrary, since ME2 is one of my favorite games.

Okay I'll give you NWN as I have no interest for that series, but BG1 seriously...


I understand BG1 is extremely archaic even in comparison to just BG2, but I honestly don't know anyone personally who played BG1 and didn't like it. Shadows of Amn is better in many ways but the simplification of character models (Clerics and Warriors are the same...) and the fugly character dolls didn't endear well to me. Also was never keen on the Amish style gear, much preffered BG1's style. (Also missed BG1's free roaming environments.)

Also if you're KOTOR fan uh how do you like ME2 the most? ME1 is essentially a newer version of KOTOR right down to the fact that it shares a number of same abilities. KOTOR is not that great besides the storyline and characters. The gameplay is very meh and the environments are pretty dull. KOTOR's inventory is every bit as bad as ME1's. And the movement and targeting in KOTOR is just atrocious. Honestly moving anywhere in that game was like trying to push a crate on gravel.

To be frank I was starting to lose interest in anything Bioware did after the Baldur's Gate Saga. However ME1 sparked new hope in me that Bioware could deliver again.


*Ahem*
Anyways as for the subject at hand...

I think it's fair to say Bioware probably has been gaining more new fans then it has been losing old fans. Generally as long as you keep producing new games this is bound to happen. A few will stop playing for various reasons, but more will likely start playing. The thing that concerns me is Bioware seems to be taking a lot of disregard towards the existing fan base with some of its decisions. Look I have no problem with Bioware making entirely new series of game. I would not object to Bioware making an RTS or FPS. However many, inlcuding myself, will take issue if the series we're currently invested starts undergoing drastic revisions. If Bioware had decided to make ME3 for example a straight-up RTS that would not be acceptable. Sure a few fanboys will buy anything, but you gotta keep in mind what your average player wants.

That's sort of the problem right now. Bioware is really dancing on the edge of the genre cliff and it's making some a bit a nauseous (if not outright alarmed). While I do happen to like many genres of games I don't always care for them being mixed. Some sodas mix well and some don't.

If Bioware isn't careful they could easily end up with enough disgruntled fans to start putting a dent in sales. Word of Mouth is very much what sells video games and if there's too many grumps created you will also see less new players. Create all the high production trailers and ads you want to counter it, but eventually people can and will lose faith in anything they no longer believe is up to snuff.

Modifié par Bluko, 15 octobre 2011 - 12:23 .

[onelifecrisis]

armass wrote...

“We’ve really struck a great balance. Obviously, if you’ve played the game before you’ll see things that apply to you… And even if you’ve played the games multiple times before – Mass Effect came out almost eight years ago – you’re not going to remember all the details from when you played that game, right? Even I can’t recall everything that happened to me when that came out in 2007. It’s human nature. We’re not Rain Man…

“I think this is definitely the best chance we have in the series to really break out and go truly blockbuster. It really is a natural entry point for people: giant alien race launches all-out war, you have to rally the forces of the universe to counter and see if you can take them down. That’s pretty clear. You don’t need to be like: ‘Well, what about when I had this love affair?’ It’s like, who cares? It’s all out war!"

-David Silverman

God I ****ing hate that guy.

[Thompson family]

Silverman can't even pronounce "Quarian" right. I'd be surprised if he's even played the game.

[onelifecrisis]

I'm going to make a videogame of my own one of these days. It'll have one button, labelled AWESOME, and when you press it David Silverman's head will explode.

[Killjoy Cutter]

onelifecrisis wrote...

armass wrote...

“We’ve really struck a great balance. Obviously, if you’ve played the game before you’ll see things that apply to you… And even if you’ve played the games multiple times before – Mass Effect came out almost eight years ago – you’re not going to remember all the details from when you played that game, right? Even I can’t recall everything that happened to me when that came out in 2007. It’s human nature. We’re not Rain Man…

“I think this is definitely the best chance we have in the series to really break out and go truly blockbuster. It really is a natural entry point for people: giant alien race launches all-out war, you have to rally the forces of the universe to counter and see if you can take them down. That’s pretty clear. You don’t need to be like: ‘Well, what about when I had this love affair?’ It’s like, who cares? It’s all out war!"

-David Silverman

God I ****ing hate that guy.

He's such a tool. 

And yeah, Silverman, I remember everything from playing through ME1 and ME2.  So bite me.

And the phrase "go blockbuster" just makes me wince, and want to walk away from ME3.  It's like "awesome button", only even more pathetic.

Modifié par Killjoy Cutter, 15 octobre 2011 - 12:48 .

[Killjoy Cutter]

Thompson family wrote...

Silverman can't even pronounce "Quarian" right. I'd be surprised if he's even played the game.

I would not be surprised at all.   He's a moron.

[Killjoy Cutter]

luk4s3d wrote...

 it's not optional once it's taking up disc space.

BINGO, even if you never touch it, it's still wasted disk space. 

[tez19]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

luk4s3d wrote...

 it's not optional once it's taking up disc space.

BINGO, even if you never touch it, it's still wasted disk space. 

and resources.

[FataliTensei]

LiveLoveThaneKrios wrote...

IsaacShep wrote...

LiveLoveThaneKrios wrote...

I dont think they are loosing fans.
Like DadeLeviathan said, the only fans they are loosing are the ones who don't like the idea of Co-Op.

They won't lose fans with ME3 (neither they did with ME2) but they DID lose fans with DA2, it's simply a fact.

Eh.. never botherd to play those Dragon Age games, Mass Effect was the first time I played a game by BW. 
I am going to try that series after the mass effect series of Shepard is done. 
But  back on topic ( ) , look at all those multi-player threads, all those people dispise the idea of the Co-Op. Even after this has been confirmed. Ah..some people are going to miss out on the awesomeness I swear. 

Keep telling yourself that

[Lukertin]

Why are people so butt hurt about this? Find something thats actually meaningful to **** about.

[emanziboy]

If ME3's American pre-orders are anything to go by, I would say so.

Pre-orders for ME2 (360) 14 weeks (oct. 24 2009) from launch: 36,001
Pre-orders for ME3 (360) 22 weeks (oct. 8 2011) from launch: 255,011

Got the numbers from VGChartz: www.vgchartz.com/preorders.php

[Lukertin]

xbox live sucks anyway, i will never pay money for something that should be free

[Il Divo]

whywhywhywhy wrote...

Il Divo wrote...
I have never denied that some games' learning curves can be steeper than others. I am arguing that, if anything, the RPG or rather, the in-depth RPG, presents more difficulty on this front with respect to its rules system, since that is more time necessarily to explain the rules.

Yes you have the very thing your describing right here is a learning curve.  And your wrong, that's not what keeps casuals from playing, gameplay does. 

If the gameplay isn't something that along with the storyline draws them in they won't be interested.  Not to mention most systems have a auto level up aspect and for the more advance a manual one.  Your just completely wrong and tried to appear to disagree while in a round about way your saying the same thing, it ain't cute.

Il Divo wrote... ..... it's critical that your player has access to the most critical information at the start of the adventure.

Completely wrong.  If your looking for an optimal build sure that could be true, but otherwise it's all on a learning curve. 

Il Divo wrote...
Even just compare the difficult in learning the rule system for Mass Effect or Jade Empire vs. BG and you'll see my point.

First we have to get you to admit your talking about a learning curve.  We can't recklessly go dragging in other worthless points when your pretending to be talking about something else.  "Learning the rule system" lol, you crack me up.

Il Divo wrote...Every casual has preferences, this is true. But what's easier to jump into? Halo or Baldur's Gate?

That depends on the background, likes and dislikes of the casual gamer.  It's not set in stone.  I thought you got that when you agreed that all casuals have their preferences, we don't know what that is.

Il Divo wrote...
In the case of BG, the game doesn't really lay out any of the most critical rules, outside of attributes. When do attributes max out? How many spells do I receive per level? What does THACO represent? From what I recall, most of these were questions not available in the game itself. Some of these questions are critical to the basis of the game and are even less intuitive than figuring out what button performs what function.

You must hang around really dumb gamers. They won't know what button does what ?  Did they try pressing it ?  If it's that hard maybe they shouldn't play games, madden might confuse them too if they're at that level.  

And refer to the manual.  That's what a 5/10min read ?  Granted most games don't require this, manuals were common and standard before the industry gutted them from games as a price cutting measure in game development.   

Il Divo wrote...
The casual gamer.

That's a inaccurate blanket statement.  While I'm not denying some people may not care for manuals.  That isn't what dictated the removal of manuals.  The industry gutted manuals to save money, it had nothing to do with gamer preference.  As a matter of fact most complained 

Il Divo wrote...
I'm not arguing why the industry did or did not ditch manuals, but consider BG as an example where some more than critical rules were contained only in the manual. Casuals have less time and (by extension) less effort with which to expend on learning the rule-base of any given game. As a hardcore gamer, I might sit down and tear through the manual. A casual has less of an opportunity to do so.

Casuals didn't really exist in a great number before gaming went mainstream.  And I'd venture to say that today's casual gamer isn't the same as yesterdays casual gamer, though today both would fit the label.  As Gatt posted earlier, every genre had it's set amount of fans and word of mouth got those normally outside the genre to try it.

Il Divo wrote...
As your learning curve example admits, some games are more "jump in and play" than others. It is this distinction which more easily allows players to engage in some medium than others. If a game has a steeper learning curve, it's going to be less enjoyable if I don't have either the time/effort to put in and "figure it out".

I didn't say steeper as in to imply difficulty.  I said steeper to imply a longer period of play before the player gets acclimated.  This was/is balanced out by the fact that RPG's typically provide much longer gameplay experience then other genre's.

You seem to think that shorter longer curves = fun.  I disagree completely.  Your trying to argue player preference something that can't be done.  Even if you based your opinion off of current gamer buying trends by targeting popular games or genres.  FPS's for instance.  Pick any popular shooter and all of them share this truth multiplayer is part of the core experience.  As such the learning curve for a game like this is no different then a rpg for first time players.  Success is not something immediate you take your knocks and learn the game and develop the (twitch) reflexes needed for success.   On the RPG side you wander around propelled mostly by the story, you have a few moves available as you develop more.  Eventually the gamer will realize something that they missed along the way that causes them to understand the game better. 

To a beginner both games have layers of difficulty.  To the rest it's all about their gaming history, we don't decide that for them.


And on that note I'm done.  You've disagreed with something obvious, something your entire argument is based on but then go on to admit that it's the basis of your argument.  That's a good indicator that I'm wasting my time.  Thanks for the memories.

Is this supposed to impress me? If you truly were done, you wouldn't have bothered typing up this dribble in the first place and dropped the discussion. I assume this was some fragile attempt at getting the last argument in. But if everyone relied on the "it's so obvious" argument, then we wouldn't have anyone wasting their time on the BSN, now would we?

But by all means, leave. Have a nice day.

Modifié par Il Divo, 15 octobre 2011 - 03:03 .

[Il Divo]

Bluko wrote...


Okay I'll give you NWN as I have no interest for that series, but BG1 seriously...


I understand BG1 is extremely archaic even in comparison to just BG2, but I honestly don't know anyone personally who played BG1 and didn't like it. Shadows of Amn is better in many ways but the simplification of character models (Clerics and Warriors are the same...) and the fugly character dolls didn't endear well to me. Also was never keen on the Amish style gear, much preffered BG1's style. (Also missed BG1's free roaming environments.)

Baldur's Gate 1 had one selling point to it: DnD 2.0. If you're not a fan of 2.0, your interest in BG1 is probably going to be limited, especially since the game also had much less emphasis on story/characters,  compared to any other Bioware game. The presentation of the main quest was essentially a scavenger hunt across the map, finding letters on dead bodies. As someone who's not a huge fan of 2.0 and absolutely condemns the Vancian Casting system for a number of reasons, that doesn't leave much content for me to enjoy.

Compare that to its successor or Planescape, and there is much more for the player to experience outside of DnD gameplay. Especially Planescape.  At its core, Baldur's Gate 1 was simply Neverwinter Nights but with greater emphasis on exploration and a party of six. Neither game really struck me as high quality.

Also if you're KOTOR fan uh how do you like ME2 the most? ME1 is essentially a newer version of KOTOR right down to the fact that it shares a number of same abilities. KOTOR is not that great besides the storyline and characters. The gameplay is very meh and the environments are pretty dull. KOTOR's inventory is every bit as bad as ME1's. And the movement and targeting in KOTOR is just atrocious. Honestly moving anywhere in that game was like trying to push a crate on gravel.

Because what I thought worked in KotOR I also thought failed spectacularly in ME. KotOR was a turn-based RPG. Mass Effect was a fragile attempt at blending the shooter/RPG genres. As a result, the inventory system in ME proved much more problematic. KotOR was actually the only Bioware game, outside of Origins, where I can honestly say that I enjoyed the gameplay almost as much as I did the story.

I also enjoyed the characters/setting/presentation much more in ME2 than its predecessor and found the episodic story-telling very refreshing. To elaborate briefly, what I loved about KotOR is not necessarily what I loved about ME2, I simply thought that each game was good enough to list as amongst my favorites, for various reasons.

But if you're looking for a similar example: Origins was the "spiritual successor" to BG, but that does not necessitate that a BG fan must consider Origins their next favorite game. It's even possible to hate it DA:O, it all depends on the person and his experiences.

To be frank I was starting to lose interest in anything Bioware did after the Baldur's Gate Saga. However ME1 sparked new hope in me that Bioware could deliver again.

I always love how different all the perspectives of Bioware fans are. For myself, KotOR and beyond were essentially what kept me going on Bioware. I've played KotOR 18 times and it's one of (if not) my favorite game.

Modifié par Il Divo, 15 octobre 2011 - 04:21 .