280 réponses à ce sujet

[BeefoTheBold]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

BeefoTheBold wrote...

Touche! Though the male, beared avatar and the "Beefo" name are indeed hints.

Not necessarily.  Apparently, I come across as having a penis all the time.

Yeah, I'm a man. And yeah, I was giving you a hard time just to tweak you a bit.

No problem--I had fun with the comeback.

You're both right and wrong with your comment. No, Bioware is not my girlfriend. But you're also wrong that there's no personal connection you develop if you've been with the same company for closing in on a couple of decades. When a company has been your favorite game developer for the majority of your gaming life, and you see them basically saying that they don't value you anymore, then yes....it does feel like you're being dumped.

It's not a great analogy, but I also don't think it's completely off-base in terms of the emotional impact. There isn't a single company out there that I've been more loyal to and more supportive of than Bioware in my entire life.

I understand, intellectually, that Bioware's just a company like any other that exists solely to maximize profits.

But intellect doesn't necessarily mean that it isn't a shock when the most reliable developer of your entire career starts "cheating" on you.

I understand what you're arguing, but I can't say I know how you feel.  I used to be a hardcore Nintendo fantard back in the day.  When they started releasing a bunch of hyper-commercialized crap all the time, I just quit playing, occasionally snooping around the internet for word on when something good might come out.

Blizzard, same thing--StarCraft was one of the best games I ever played.  StarCraft 2... not what I'd hoped for (still good, though).  I felt a little sad that yet another dev was only in it for the money now, but there were other games to play.

So I've had two major developers let me down.  In neither case did I feel betrayed.

The Krogan avatar might lead folks to think "Dude". Haven't yet encountered a female Krogran.

And I understand the lack of ability to truly empathize. In fact, I think it's a key item of this forum in general. It goes beyond simply the intellectual arguments. Some people just plain feel it and some don't.

There are valid intellectual arguments either way. But I think only one group really has a strong emotional feeling about what's happening.

For my side, I worry about NOT having other games to play. The developer making the new Xcom game recently was asked about whether or not they are deceiving folks by making that game a shooter instead of a strategy game like every other Xcom to date.

Basically, the question was whether or not they were cashing in on the X-Com name while making something completely different than what people associate with X-Com.

The response, from the very developer who does the Civilization series of strategy games, was basically that nobody wants to play strategy games anymore.

Keep in mind that outside of Starcraft, the Civ games are probably the most popular ones in the entire freaking world. The developer who makes some of the best ones said, essentially, "Why the hell would we want to make strategy games anymore?"

Maybe there's a bit of that feeling with wondering whether the RPG genre is going away. Maybe I'm wondering if a few years from now, Bioware will be saying, "Why would we want to make RPGs?"

Essentially, what happens if NOBODY really makes the RPGs that Bioware used to make anymore?

[AdmiralCheez]

Ricinator wrote...

i think you should really go back and play ME2 two more times without skipping scenes... then see if your ready to claw your own eyes out like most RPG fans are ready to do.

I've done at least four completionists runs.  No eye-clawing required except for the Hammerhead segments.

But I was ready to claw my eyes out at a few Mako segments too, so...

[Ricinator]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Ricinator wrote...

i think you should really go back and play ME2 two more times without skipping scenes... then see if your ready to claw your own eyes out like most RPG fans are ready to do.

I've done at least four completionists runs.  No eye-clawing required except for the Hammerhead segments.

But I was ready to claw my eyes out at a few Mako segments too, so...

4 without skipping scenes and you had enough varity in the choices? bull... 4 ME1 playthroughs, even though it has a set direction, can feel completly different everytime.

[C9316]

Wow Ricinator I didn't know an RPG was defined as having an inventory system that more or less contained weapons and armor that looked exactly the same but with different colors. I also didn't know that RPGs by definition had to have crappy combat mechanics either.

[DaringMoosejaw]

Didn't Beef say he wasn't buying the game because Bioware has personally betrayed him and left? Can he not make a decision and stick with it for longer than half a day?

[BeefoTheBold]

C9316 wrote...

Wow Ricinator I didn't know an RPG was defined as having an inventory system that more or less contained weapons and armor that looked exactly the same but with different colors. I also didn't know that RPGs by definition had to have crappy combat mechanics either.

I'm seaching for where Ricinator said that and not seeing it.

[BeefoTheBold]

DaringMoosejaw wrote...

Didn't Beef say he wasn't buying the game because Bioware has personally betrayed him and left? Can he not make a decision and stick with it for longer than half a day?

Read up. See answer to other people presenting same strawman argument.

Try again.

[Ricinator]

C9316 wrote...

Wow Ricinator I didn't know an RPG was defined as having an inventory system that more or less contained weapons and armor that looked exactly the same but with different colors. I also didn't know that RPGs by definition had to have crappy combat mechanics either.

talking story..... if you want to talk inventory and me1 combat, i agree it wasn't very good. But me2 inventory wasn't better. sure combat was awesome but thats all they focused on..................................................... it had better improve from me1 with that kind of support from devs

[Terror_K]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

All I know is, if ME3 comes out and people end up asking things like, "Where is the exploration?" or "where are the vehicle sections?" or "why are all the levels linear as hell?" or "why are there so many emails instead of proper consequences?" and BioWare respond with something like, "Sorry, we didn't have the time or resources?" then I'm going to be pointing straight at Kinect support and multiplayer being added.

If the game actually sucks because they "didn't have the time or the resources," then yeah, you can all tell me you told me so.

But seriously, I don't think it's going to suck.

I don't think ME3 will "suck" per se. As much as I complain about it, ME2 didn't "suck" either, IMO. What it did do was feel lacking, schizophrenic, misguided, oversimplified, and overall like its true potential was wasted and squandered. And I don't want ME3 to feel the same way because time, money and resources went into factors like Kinect support, multiplayer, melee combat, etc. Especially when it's things like this that seem to be the only thing BioWare really go on about.

I get that these are the new features, but still... it just feels like their wasting their time and resources on what should be the the ultimate finale of the trilogy. Maybe I'd have more faith if it wasn't for things like Dragon Age 2 and my disappointments with ME2's overall mainstreamlined approach and the way it lacked in factors exploration and sidequests, import choices/consequences/variations, RPG elements as a whole and even some basic polish in certain areas.

Simply put, I don't want another game where I'm recieving emails to run around on-foot on a planet silently with my equally silent squaddies collecting datapads through small, overly-designed areas trying in vain to be real locations and failing at it while I tap my foot waiting until a vehicle comes in a DLC several months later.

[C9316]

Ricinator wrote...

C9316 wrote...

Wow Ricinator I didn't know an RPG was defined as having an inventory system that more or less contained weapons and armor that looked exactly the same but with different colors. I also didn't know that RPGs by definition had to have crappy combat mechanics either.

talking story..... if you want to talk inventory and me1 combat, i agree it wasn't very good. But me2 inventory wasn't better. sure combat was awesome but thats all they focused on..................................................... it had better improve from me1 with that kind of support from devs

Now we seem to be getting somewhere, and just what was wrong with ME2's story? *prepares flame shield*

[Gatt9]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

All I know is, if ME3 comes out and people end up asking things like, "Where is the exploration?" or "where are the vehicle sections?" or "why are all the levels linear as hell?" or "why are there so many emails instead of proper consequences?" and BioWare respond with something like, "Sorry, we didn't have the time or resources?" then I'm going to be pointing straight at Kinect support and multiplayer being added.

If the game actually sucks because they "didn't have the time or the resources," then yeah, you can all tell me you told me so.

But seriously, I don't think it's going to suck.

Actually,  historically speaking,  the odds are really high it's going to suck.

There's two methods of game development.

1.  The Project Lead and the team have a vision they bring to fruition,  comprimising only when some facet fails the "Fun" test.  Baldur's Gate 2,  KotOR,  anything from Blizzard,  The Sims,  are all good examples.

2.  The Project Lead and team have a vision,  the Suit has a checklist of "Features that must be in every game because having these bullet points will sell 100 million units!".  The vision is subverted by the Suit,  and the checklist gets implemented.  Since the checklist of buzzwords wasn't the team's intent,  no passion goes into it,  and other more desirable features don't get polished or implemented.  The game flops hard.  Dragon Age 2,  X-com Apocalypse,  Fallout 3*,  among many others.

Guess which one Bioware's doing. 

-We've got Kinect,  where you read the onscreen words to hear Shepherd say something completely different.  It doesn't take much to figure out how popular this will really be.

-Multiplayer forced into a narrative driven single player game,  and it's obviously forced in just to sell Online Passes as it is implemented in such a way as to be an impediment to achieving the best ending,  rather than a complimentary feature or an enhancement.  Doesn't take much to figure out that Shooter fans aren't going to come running to a narrative driven single player game because it has a handful of co-op missions in the middle.

At this point,  there's a very real chance this won't end well.  I honestly cannot think of a game that was designed by a Suit's checklist that sold well.  Ever.

*Yes,  yes.  I've seen the rumors about how well Fallout 3 supposed sold.  Add up the NPD numbers,  remembering that after they drop off the chart (In the second month) they sell less than the lowest game.  The numbers aren't remotely close to what is claimed.

[Someone With Mass]

Ricinator wrote...

4 without skipping scenes and you had enough varity in the choices? bull... 4 ME1 playthroughs, even though it has a set direction, can feel completly different everytime.

Even if there were a doen situations where the dialogue options where:

Paragon: I'll stop you.
Neutral: I'll stop you.
Renegade: I'll stop you.

?

I personally though that ME1 only felt longer because of those tedious Mako driving missions.

While ME2 kept bringing in surprises, even through DLCs.

[Ricinator]

Well said Terror_K

[BeefoTheBold]

C9316 wrote...

Ricinator wrote...

C9316 wrote...

Wow Ricinator I didn't know an RPG was defined as having an inventory system that more or less contained weapons and armor that looked exactly the same but with different colors. I also didn't know that RPGs by definition had to have crappy combat mechanics either.

talking story..... if you want to talk inventory and me1 combat, i agree it wasn't very good. But me2 inventory wasn't better. sure combat was awesome but thats all they focused on..................................................... it had better improve from me1 with that kind of support from devs

Now we seem to be getting somewhere, and just what was wrong with ME2's story? *prepares flame shield*

It went nowhere.

You were in exactly the same spot storyline wise after ME2 as you were after ME1.

The Reapers are coming. Nobody believes you. You have to stop them.

ME1 introduced EVERYTHING that was in the ME universe. You ACCOMPLISHED things. ME2 can be summarized by, "Fly around the galaxy, blow **** up, and recruit a team."

It was an entire game of filler content.

[BeefoTheBold]

Terror_K wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

All I know is, if ME3 comes out and people end up asking things like, "Where is the exploration?" or "where are the vehicle sections?" or "why are all the levels linear as hell?" or "why are there so many emails instead of proper consequences?" and BioWare respond with something like, "Sorry, we didn't have the time or resources?" then I'm going to be pointing straight at Kinect support and multiplayer being added.

If the game actually sucks because they "didn't have the time or the resources," then yeah, you can all tell me you told me so.

But seriously, I don't think it's going to suck.

I don't think ME3 will "suck" per se. As much as I complain about it, ME2 didn't "suck" either, IMO. What it did do was feel lacking, schizophrenic, misguided, oversimplified, and overall like its true potential was wasted and squandered. And I don't want ME3 to feel the same way because time, money and resources went into factors like Kinect support, multiplayer, melee combat, etc. Especially when it's things like this that seem to be the only thing BioWare really go on about.

I get that these are the new features, but still... it just feels like their wasting their time and resources on what should be the the ultimate finale of the trilogy. Maybe I'd have more faith if it wasn't for things like Dragon Age 2 and my disappointments with ME2's overall mainstreamlined approach and the way it lacked in factors exploration and sidequests, import choices/consequences/variations, RPG elements as a whole and even some basic polish in certain areas.

Simply put, I don't want another game where I'm recieving emails to run around on-foot on a planet silently with my equally silent squaddies collecting datapads through small, overly-designed areas trying in vain to be real locations and failing at it while I tap my foot waiting until a vehicle comes in a DLC several months later.

Beautiful. *golf claps*

[AdmiralCheez]

BeefoTheBold wrote...

The Krogan avatar might lead folks to think "Dude". Haven't yet encountered a female Krogran.

Meh, I have little desire to be overtly female.  Besides, Wrex is classy.

And I understand the lack of ability to truly empathize. In fact, I think it's a key item of this forum in general. It goes beyond simply the intellectual arguments. Some people just plain feel it and some don't.

No kidding.

There are valid intellectual arguments either way. But I think only one group really has a strong emotional feeling about what's happening.

For my side, I worry about NOT having other games to play. The developer making the new Xcom game recently was asked about whether or not they are deceiving folks by making that game a shooter instead of a strategy game like every other Xcom to date.

Basically, the question was whether or not they were cashing in on the X-Com name while making something completely different than what people associate with X-Com.

The response, from the very developer who does the Civilization series of strategy games, was basically that nobody wants to play strategy games anymore.

Keep in mind that outside of Starcraft, the Civ games are probably the most popular ones in the entire freaking world. The developer who makes some of the best ones said, essentially, "Why the hell would we want to make strategy games anymore?"

Maybe there's a bit of that feeling with wondering whether the RPG genre is going away. Maybe I'm wondering if a few years from now, Bioware will be saying, "Why would we want to make RPGs?"

Essentially, what happens if NOBODY really makes the RPGs that Bioware used to make anymore?

This unfortunately happens all the time.  Genres hit a high point, then start to fizzle out, then fade from existence completely until someone revives them.  It's not a phenomenon exclusive to videogames.

I do, however, have a problem with developers jumping the bandwagon and leaving all their well-established strengths and innovation by the wayside.  People will eventually get bored with whatever's all the rage at the moment, and when they go looking for something else, it's the innovators that will make the money, leaving the bandwagoners sh*t out of luck.

The reason I'm not getting worked up about ME3 is that this whole co-op thing might actually work, and the reason the series attracted me in the first place was because it WASN'T a classical RPG or a pure shooter.  If ME3 sucks, I'll be pissed I blew $80 and won't ever make the mistake of preordering a game again.  Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, and I've been played for a sap.

[Dark_Caduceus]

Anyone feel the game hes tended towards "more extreme!" design ideas? With tattoo-psycho-Jack, defy-gravity Kasumi, steroid freak James Vega and "we fight or we die, that's the plan!". What happened to the more believable characters? Mind you Wrex and Liara were pretty out there, but they seemed a little better fleshed out.

Compare some ME1 promotional material=>
compared to...
Okay, so there's more emphasis on action, and less on the characters, okay, not too big a deal. But there's definitely that trend present.
Now...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJvrN6JijuU

I don't really like it, I figured Mass Effect to be more sublime and subtle than most games out there. Now, I don't want to try an elevate it, it had it's flaws for sure and ME2 addressed some of them. But it also missed some opportunities, Mass Effect 1 FELT like a big game, alot of it was copy and paste missions or MAKO exploration but the universe at least had an (artificial) sense of scale.

I figured this was the first entry, and that it would improve with time. But instead Mass Effect 2 felt smaller, the N7 missions helped some, but they still felt a little cookie cutter and there were fewer of them, also they seemed to fit less with the story so again, things felt smaller. Why didn't they add to the ME1 foundation, why didn't they have as many armors and weapons and quests, but make them more diverse, why couldn't they use a Borderlands type system? Isn't that what we all expected, sure the new weapons were all more distinct, but there were also way fewer. The loss of the MAKO hurt, sure scaling mountains to investigate rubble was stupid, but it was a good opportunity to explore, to add a sense of scale to the game.

Why didn't they just improve the MAKO in ME2? We got the Firewalker, yeah, but that boiled down to outdistancing enemy weapons and firing the homing missiles, just as boring as the MAKO and with less exploration to boot.

[DaringMoosejaw]

BeefoTheBold wrote...

DaringMoosejaw wrote...

Didn't Beef say he wasn't buying the game because Bioware has personally betrayed him and left? Can he not make a decision and stick with it for longer than half a day?

Read up. See answer to other people presenting same strawman argument.

Try again.

Sarcastic remarks are not 'strawman arguments'. They are sarcastic remarks. You can easily ignore those and see the actual question which is, if you have decided not to buy the game why in the world are you still here writing essays about how terrible Bioware is?

Modifié par DaringMoosejaw, 28 octobre 2011 - 04:00 .

[BeefoTheBold]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

BeefoTheBold wrote...

The Krogan avatar might lead folks to think "Dude". Haven't yet encountered a female Krogran.

Meh, I have little desire to be overtly female.  Besides, Wrex is classy.

And I understand the lack of ability to truly empathize. In fact, I think it's a key item of this forum in general. It goes beyond simply the intellectual arguments. Some people just plain feel it and some don't.

No kidding.

There are valid intellectual arguments either way. But I think only one group really has a strong emotional feeling about what's happening.

For my side, I worry about NOT having other games to play. The developer making the new Xcom game recently was asked about whether or not they are deceiving folks by making that game a shooter instead of a strategy game like every other Xcom to date.

Basically, the question was whether or not they were cashing in on the X-Com name while making something completely different than what people associate with X-Com.

The response, from the very developer who does the Civilization series of strategy games, was basically that nobody wants to play strategy games anymore.

Keep in mind that outside of Starcraft, the Civ games are probably the most popular ones in the entire freaking world. The developer who makes some of the best ones said, essentially, "Why the hell would we want to make strategy games anymore?"

Maybe there's a bit of that feeling with wondering whether the RPG genre is going away. Maybe I'm wondering if a few years from now, Bioware will be saying, "Why would we want to make RPGs?"

Essentially, what happens if NOBODY really makes the RPGs that Bioware used to make anymore?

This unfortunately happens all the time.  Genres hit a high point, then start to fizzle out, then fade from existence completely until someone revives them.  It's not a phenomenon exclusive to videogames.

I do, however, have a problem with developers jumping the bandwagon and leaving all their well-established strengths and innovation by the wayside.  People will eventually get bored with whatever's all the rage at the moment, and when they go looking for something else, it's the innovators that will make the money, leaving the bandwagoners sh*t out of luck.

The reason I'm not getting worked up about ME3 is that this whole co-op thing might actually work, and the reason the series attracted me in the first place was because it WASN'T a classical RPG or a pure shooter.  If ME3 sucks, I'll be pissed I blew $80 and won't ever make the mistake of preordering a game again.  Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, and I've been played for a sap.

In related news, Nintendo just announced they lost close to a billion dollars. Might have something to do with their casual/motion control stuff that was initially a really big rage that everyone hopped on board with and now nobody gives a ****.

For me, the game that I made the mistake of preordering was DA2. I'm one step ahead of where you are I think.

(And, BTW, being married to a female gamer I can understand the desire to not broadcast the fact. Have seen the results.)

[BeefoTheBold]

DaringMoosejaw wrote...

BeefoTheBold wrote...

DaringMoosejaw wrote...

Didn't Beef say he wasn't buying the game because Bioware has personally betrayed him and left? Can he not make a decision and stick with it for longer than half a day?

Read up. See answer to other people presenting same strawman argument.

Try again.

Sarcastic remarks are not 'strawman arguments'. They are sarcastic remarks. You can easily ignore those and see the actual question which is, if you have decided not to buy the game why in the world are you still here writing essays about how terrible Bioware is?

If you'd ACTUALLY read up, you'd see me answering that very question. Exactly the same question in fact.

Once more, try again.

[DiebytheSword]

BeefoTheBold wrote...

DiebytheSword wrote...

BeefoTheBold wrote...

DiebytheSword wrote...
  Nothing stops you, or any other playing from RPing during the event other than you won't have a dialogue wheel, you'll need to use your mouth.

I never realized that games like Gears of War, Uncharted, Call of Duty, Rainbow Six, Halo, etc. were all RPGs in disguise given that nothing was stopping the 14 year old screaming the N word on the phone from RPing during the session!

Yes, you're right. Simply saying that people CAN RP if they want TOGETHER obviously means that ALL MP is RP based at heart.

*sips tea*

Yes, it all becomes so clear in the light of your patronizing wisdom.

Your rebuttal is logically flawed - even setting aside your condescension - because you are trying to say that nothing is PREVENTING a group of people from deciding to have an impromptu D&D session over the lan line while they gun down hordes of spawning enemies ala Dragon Age 2.

By that logic, ANY game with an online coop is an RPG.

Otherwise, no, you're essentially an identity lacking Master Chief shooting an identity lacking alien.

It was a condoscending as it needed to be, you made blanket moronic statments concerning multiplayer games that were blatantly false. Also, I've never, not once, disagreed with your assertion that it isn't RPG enough, I agreed there.  I only pointed out a possible way for you to have meaningful conversations with your squadmates.

Sadly, I'm too COD for that, apparently.

Actually I'm from the camp of people that says that you can RP anytime, anywhere, game be damned.  I can RP on a bus, a train.  On a dock floating on a lake.  By your immense, bloated straw man, the D&D game held at my dining room table cannot be an RPG, because it has multiple people!  It cannot be co-op because it has combat!

Glad you sorted that out for me.  I thought I was having a deep RPG experience.  But the moment one of those wiley PC's wanders off and does something else, they aren't part of my single player story experience anymore.  Boohoo!  I hate this game.

Now lets break this laughable shclock down:

I also take issue with your argument that it fits within the story. Once again, it all boils down to whether you are making an incredibly tenuous connection that any fifth grader can see through or whether or not you are TRULY INCORPORATING WHAT IS HAPPENING into the storyline.

Sure you can toss out a one-liner, "BTW, you're fighting a horde of bad guys that Shepard's too busy to personally gun down. After all, there are millions of bad guys and only one Shepard." Technically, yes, that is tying the MP into the story.

It's also complete crap.

Tying the MP into the story necessitates WRITING MORE STORY. In other words, it requires more than, "Here's a different group of gun toting idiots. Shoot them." It actually needs to say what the tie is, how this is effecting Shepard, the motivations of whomever your character is shooting them down, etc.

Did you get and advance copy of ME3 that I don't know about?  Does it load with "Call of Mass Effect: No Company" at the start screen and proceed to throw you at things without any context?  I believe you know the context good sir, you're actually to smart not too.

Based only on what is said and shown, the story is simple but present.  Admiral Hackett (oh dear, a character, stories must be about!) orders these groups into battle to secure objectives.  It may not be fun playing the grunt on the fetch quest for you, but that does not make it storyless.  It has wooden actors who don't want to speak, and it has no discernable character development, but it does have a protagonist, a plot, an antagonist, and presumably a climax, and a resolution.  That makes it a story, whether you hate that story or not is irrelevant.  This is not a stretch, it is a stretch to say there is no story.

Now, back to your flawed understanding of what co-op means?  Did you have a rebuttal to that, or are you still wrong?

As a final comment, I will apologize for being a bit too rough on the sarcasm and condoscendence.  I was in a bad mood and did take it out on you a bit.  My point is this, you grossly misunderstand what the MP experience is about, and mischaracterized co-op play.  I will reiterate that I do think more RPG elements in co-op would have gone a long way to making people happy, myself one of them.

So...to apologize for your sarcasm and condescenion you write a post laced with both and say, "Oh and I didn't mean it" at the end and I apologize?"

You've spent a lot of time talking about definitions. You may want to spend a few minutes looking up how an apology works. Generally... it flows a little different than this:

1. You're an idiot
2. And an ****
3. But I'm sorry that you're an idiot and an ****. I only pointed it out because I'm in a bad mood.

Now, I'm just an assholish idiot, but I'm seeing something wrong with your logic there. Must be me.

To your points:

Basically you're saying that if it isn't IMPOSSIBLE to RP, then the game is an RPG. This is a weak argument to me because while, yes, it is technically possible to have a great, story driven and immersive RP under any circumstances, the actual likelihood gets increasingly remote and lower quality under certain circumstances.

I went to a college football game with my wife on Saturday. Technically, she and I could have slipped into our table-top RPG characters and had an impromptu roleplay. Realistically, that was impossible with 33K screaming fans all around us.

Games like Gears of War aren't called RPGs for a reason: They ARE NOT RPGs. Making a Mass Effect game MORE LIKE Gears of War makes it LESS OF an RPG.

DiebytheSword
It may not be fun playing the grunt on the fetch quest for you, but that
does not make it storyless.  It has wooden actors who don't want to
speak, and it has no discernable character development, but it does have
a protagonist, a plot, an antagonist, and presumably a climax, and a
resolution.  That makes it a story, whether you hate that story or not
is irrelevant.  This is not a stretch, it is a stretch to say there is
no story.

Forgive me if I was unclear. I didn't mean to be confusing.

I wanted a GOOD RPG. Not a crap one. Everything you say describes a crap one. And hence, my original argument about how adding in MP and Kinect elements leads to crap RPG.

Stop me if I'm going too fast for you. Sorry if I'm condescending. I'm in a bad mood because you have treated me like an idiot who's too dumb to realize what you're doing in your previous post. If you weren't doing that, I'd be responding to you like I did Jeff and Isaac.

Alright, I deserved the flogging over writing another mean post and then putting an apology at the end, but I do have an explanation for that.

I am at work, I wrote that leviathan post and didn't neccesarily want to throw it all away because I wouldn't really have time to write another at that length.

So here again, Apology.  Bad mood, no nasty involved this time, and no retorts.  Truce?

To your last point I will say that we were discussing story, not RPG.  Both are not the same thing.  I can pick up a book, watch a movie both have good stories and neither are RPGs.

Is the story good, no, I will agree, it is not.  Is it a story?  Yes.

[Someone With Mass]

The end of a war story that's more focused on the action?

Nah. That'd just be stupid.

[Dark_Caduceus]

Someone With Mass wrote...

The end of a war story that's more focused on the action?

Nah. That'd just be stupid.

Who were you replying to?

[Ricinator]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Ricinator wrote...

4 without skipping scenes and you had enough varity in the choices? bull... 4 ME1 playthroughs, even though it has a set direction, can feel completly different everytime.

Even if there were a doen situations where the dialogue options where:

Paragon: I'll stop you.
Neutral: I'll stop you.
Renegade: I'll stop you.

?

I personally though that ME1 only felt longer because of those tedious Mako driving missions.

While ME2 kept bringing in surprises, even through DLCs.

you quote me and no where i say "mako" in my post...
*cracks neck*

there were a lot of those examples in ME2 of those types of dialogue, Plus YOUR ENTIRE TEAM FEELS EXACTLY THE SAME FOR EITHER DECSION OF THE BASE.

Ok you didn't like the mako, personally i didn't find it bad after i figured out driving 88 degrees diagnal will get you somewhere, over 89 straight up. DLC for ME2 didn't even bring back any squadmembers for voice acting. your lucky if they said a word the whole time even if it was a copy paste moving to cover.

honestly im having a hard time argueing with you because your quoting me with absolutely no base for my arguement.

Modifié par Ricinator, 28 octobre 2011 - 04:12 .