1467 réponses à ce sujet

[SmokePants]

Idea sounds convoluted. Trying to make the game everything to everyone is probably going to wind up hurting more than helping.

Just make sure the game plays well, BioWare. I'm hearing that the stuff that has been demoed to the press doesn't even play as well as ME2. Three months to certification. Let's get a move on it.

[Alanosborn1991]

I hope we can import our Shephards into the single player beta, I want to see FEMSHEP already GAH!

[slimgrin]

SmokePants wrote...

Idea sounds convoluted. Trying to make the game everything to everyone is probably going to wind up hurting more than helping.

Just make sure the game plays well, BioWare. I'm hearing that the stuff that has been demoed to the press doesn't even play as well as ME2. Three months to certification. Let's get a move on it.

This.

[1136342t54_]

SmokePants wrote...
 I'm hearing that the stuff that has been demoed to the press doesn't even play as well as ME2. Three months to certification. Let's get a move on it.

From who?

[slimgrin]

1136342t54 wrote...

SmokePants wrote...
 I'm hearing that the stuff that has been demoed to the press doesn't even play as well as ME2. Three months to certification. Let's get a move on it.

From who?

They already released a demo to the press dude.

[1136342t54_]

slimgrin wrote...

1136342t54 wrote...

SmokePants wrote...
 I'm hearing that the stuff that has been demoed to the press doesn't even play as well as ME2. Three months to certification. Let's get a move on it.

From who?

They already released a demo to the press dude.

No from what I've been hearing from these demos is that the combat is great and overall better than ME2. I haven't heard that it was worse from any article I've read so far.

[Balek-Vriege]

slimgrin wrote...

1136342t54 wrote...

SmokePants wrote...
 I'm hearing that the stuff that has been demoed to the press doesn't even play as well as ME2. Three months to certification. Let's get a move on it.

From who?

They already released a demo to the press dude.

That demo is also a fairly old build.  Not sure which one is older though the leaked version or the press version.

[tfive24]

slimgrin wrote...

cindercatz wrote...

I can almost imagine Bioware using metrics (it's the IN thing to do) to figure out which mode most people are using. If enough people use action they're next game may have more automated dialogue.

That is exactly what I suggested 10 pages back or so. Why make an RPG when the data says everyone wants an action game?

You guys watch. When given the choice, most gamers will skip dialog and story, because they no longer have a fan base that's comprised of RPG fans.

And that's my fear about these different modes. Bioware's justifacation for only human in DA2 was that people mostly played only human. What if most people only play action mode or story mode. If i was bioware i would make games that fit that instead of rpg mode. 

[tfive24]

1136342t54 wrote...

tfive24 wrote...

i'm tired of reading rpg elitists, how about rpg standards. How about i go ask the people who make Forza and GT  to make a GTA mode for people like me. I mean i feel left out of the their games. 

RPG elitists are a specific group of RPG players who act as if they are superior and their gamer genre is superior to others. There are plenty of RPG elitists who dislike other genres and playstyles so much that by adding a mode in ME3 that allows you to basically have more linear, quick and action oriented experience is literally a insult to them and everything they stand for. Not all RPG players are like that but a minority is. 

Your comparison may not necessarily work because some actual RPG players would actually play Action mode since some of us like the ME3 combat and would like to see the default story. Hell aft I play it a dozen times I may just want a quick playthrough since I usually skip cutscenes after so many playthroughs.

No, the people who keep calling the peopel rpg elistist have it wrong. I want rpg to be rpgs, i want fps to be fps, and  etc.. I don't want a rpg to be a like a tps. I like different types of games and i don't want them to mix. 

[1136342t54_]

tfive24 wrote...

1136342t54 wrote...

tfive24 wrote...

i'm tired of reading rpg elitists, how about rpg standards. How about i go ask the people who make Forza and GT  to make a GTA mode for people like me. I mean i feel left out of the their games. 

RPG elitists are a specific group of RPG players who act as if they are superior and their gamer genre is superior to others. There are plenty of RPG elitists who dislike other genres and playstyles so much that by adding a mode in ME3 that allows you to basically have more linear, quick and action oriented experience is literally a insult to them and everything they stand for. Not all RPG players are like that but a minority is. 

Your comparison may not necessarily work because some actual RPG players would actually play Action mode since some of us like the ME3 combat and would like to see the default story. Hell aft I play it a dozen times I may just want a quick playthrough since I usually skip cutscenes after so many playthroughs.

No, the people who keep calling the peopel rpg elistist have it wrong. I want rpg to be rpgs, i want fps to be fps, and  etc.. I don't want a rpg to be a like a tps. I like different types of games and i don't want them to mix. 

Your playing the wrong game.

The ME series was constantly presented as a Action RPG.

[Alex_SM]

1136342t54 wrote...


Also regarding your scores 70 isn't a bad score and like I said before you like many others have been tricked into actually believing that. I've only seen on Meta critic two reviews that has given DA2 a score of 50 and that is just for the 360 version. I'm sorry but I really won't take your word for it.

In Videogame press a 70 is more or less the same as a 5/10 in every other kind of entertainment press (and if we talk about EA or Activion Games, everything below 80/100 means "bad game"). Also DA2 has extremely poor ratings in every webpage that  allows user voting. Most of the times below 5/10. 

And it matters, as it's their previously released game. And all the marketting of ME3 is being extremely similar to the one of DA2 . Which is indeed a bad game: Nonsensical story uninteresting 80% of time, internal logic contradictions everywhere, poorly written characters, dumbed down mechanics where doesn't matter at all how you developed your character, awful dungeon design, and at the end quite boring.

[Alex_SM]

The point is not that Bioware wants to make money. The point is they are selling their soul to make blockbusters.

Some years ago Bioware was a special company which made special games. Now it's turning into a random piece of the money making machine that is EA.

[Darji]

jreezy wrote...

Alex_SM wrote...

The point is not that Bioware wants to make money. The point is they are selling their soul to make blockbusters.

Some years ago Bioware was a special company which made special games. Now it's turning into a random piece of the money making machine that is EA.

So...The point is that they want to make money then. Gotcha.

Yeah  we understand this. But then they should clearly say that they dont make RPGs anymore like they used to be becasue the other stuff sells more. Instead they are lieing about there games (DA2) and pretend to still make real RPGs.

[Alex_SM]

jreezy wrote...
So...The point is that they want to make money then. Gotcha.

No, the point is that they are willing to do anything to make money. That's not the same as just "making money". And that is making them release lower quality products in order to make them "standard". 

And like most studies to sell their souls just to follow the trends, they'll probably fail at the end and just dissapear. 

Modifié par Alex_SM, 06 novembre 2011 - 03:49 .

[1136342t54_]

Alex_SM wrote...

In Videogame press a 70 is more or less the same as a 5/10 in every other kind of entertainment press (and if we talk about EA or Activion Games, everything below 80/100 means "bad game"). Also DA2 has extremely poor ratings in every webpage that  allows user voting. Most of the times below 5/10. 

So when it comes to marketing it means bad but in actuality its a good game.

Sorry but Dragon Age 2 was never a truly bad game period. A 70 for any game is basically good or about average. Its only a bad game when it comes to marketing it as a truly epic one. Dragon Age 2 was being marketed as the most epic game out at that time. Obviously it failed to fully live up to the hype but isn't a bad game.

And it matters, as it's their previously released game. And all the marketting of ME3 is being extremely similar to the one of DA2 . Which is indeed a bad game: Nonsensical story uninteresting 80% of time, internal logic contradictions everywhere, poorly written characters, dumbed down mechanics where doesn't matter at all how you developed your character, awful dungeon design, and at the end quite boring.

So because the marketing is a bit similar to DA2 (not entirely) you believe the gameplay and design is exactly the same? Yeah that is quite intelligent.

This is the reason why attempt to not discuss DA2 with other people on a separate forum that isn't related to it. People clearly have different opinions on it. Me and my friends (long time RPG players) like the game. It could have been great and there are some obvious problems with it but all in all it was enjoyable and it succeeded with that to us.

If you truly are unable to accept the fact that I can actually like that game while you hate it then there is no point in attempting to convince me it is such a disaster of a game since I think it isn't.

[Darji]

I am sorry that we have standards and honestly even a 80% game is not really good anymore because like 90% of all released games are getting a 80 or close to 80 score nowdays.

[Darji]

jreezy wrote...

Darji wrote...

I am sorry that we have standards and honestly even a 80% game is not really good anymore because like 90% of all released games are getting a 80 or close to 80 score nowdays.

Or maybe game companies are actually putting out consistently good games nowadays which is why you keep seeing 80s?

Yes they also do and DA2 was definetly not one of these good games.  Thats why it also was such a huge dissapointment and disaster for many RPG fans.

[1136342t54_]

Darji wrote...

I am sorry that we have standards and honestly even a 80% game is not really good anymore because like 90% of all released games are getting a 80 or close to 80 score nowdays.

Screw it.

Look you have standards like every single other person that is understandable. Am I attacking? No I'm not but you are making assumptions that because you dislike a game every single other person who has played it hated it. Hell if that was then DA2 must have been a ****ing flop that was panned by every single damn reviewer that has ever ****ing existed. 

If you really do not understand my original point of DA2 not being the best game and you can dislike it then I don't know what to say other than oh well then but it is dishonest to say that DA2 failed big time and people (like me) actually like the game for what it is.

Now if I have to say that DA2 isn't a great game one more time to get it through your head that I am not in love with it or somehow ignoring you opinion then there is no point in discussing this constantly since this is just a simple DA2 debate in at ME3 thread.

[T1l]

So... what is it, Bioware? A Third Person Shooter? A Role Playing Game? A Movie? What do you what this game to be? This idea is cancerous. Make the game with some clarity instead of alienating your core audience. You'll never pander to the Call of Duty crowd with your "Action" mode, because they'll all be playing Call of Duty. You'll not appease the people looking for an RPG, because you've bastardised and watered down the whole experience; and those people who wanted to watch a movie will just watch a movie, or God forbid, read a book.

All of the time and effort of putting in three different modes to cater to people who won't even bother with the game and a tacked on multi-player - Dragon Age 2 should have given me enough warning, I suppose.

Modifié par T1l, 06 novembre 2011 - 03:59 .

[1136342t54_]

jreezy wrote...

Darji wrote...

I am sorry that we have standards and honestly even a 80% game is not really good anymore because like 90% of all released games are getting a 80 or close to 80 score nowdays.

Or maybe game companies are actually putting out consistently good games nowadays which is why you keep seeing 80s?

Most people don't truly understand the ratings system now a days. With so many good games and even great games that come out if a game isn't great then its good which means it is a failure. Hell there are some great games that come out but most people don't really came much anymore since it just looks like another AAA title that they may or may not buy.