Aller au contenu

Photo

Mass Effect 3 and Catering to "Original Fans"


236 réponses à ce sujet

#76
Mr. MannlyMan

Mr. MannlyMan
  • Members
  • 2 150 messages

Ghost-621 wrote...

Mr. MannlyMan wrote...

Seboist wrote...

Yeah, myself and others have been attacked for daring to speak out that ME is little more than a pretentious linear Gears clone with choices that are more fake than silicone by those zealots as well.


TBH, when you put it like that it's no wonder people attack you.

Mass Effect 2&3 are very derivative of other games in the shooter genre (GoW in particular), but they're definitely not clones. In relation to some other RPGs, then yeah, they're pretty linear.


Not even in relation. ME2 hardly provided any free-reign of exploration, the hub "worlds" were hub rooms and hallways. The shooter elements were in cooridors. Sounds extremely linear and shootery on its own to me.


Totally agree, but it's still not a clone. Compared to most shooters, ME2&3 don't come anywhere near the level of linearity that something like GoW3 possesses.

#77
onelifecrisis

onelifecrisis
  • Members
  • 2 829 messages

Bluko wrote...

Look it's fine if you don't like the Mako or whatever. But when you refuse even the idea of having just one throwback mission in the game with the Mako that's just incredibly selfish.


That's a strange opinion you have there. Let me get this right: you think I (or anyone) should support the inclusion of something that I don't actually want because you (or whoever) do want it, and if I don't then I'm being incredibly selfish?

And please keep in mind, when you answer, that we're not discussing government spending. We're talking about a consumer product that people choose to buy (or not) with their hard-earned.

Modifié par onelifecrisis, 05 décembre 2011 - 02:57 .


#78
Rockworm503

Rockworm503
  • Members
  • 7 519 messages
Its funny how many people just flat out missed the point of the OP and then drove that point home with more entitlement issues.
I Bought Neverwinter Nights when it was new my opinion means more than the guy who started playing Dragon Age but I sure as hell can't beat that dude who played Baldur's Gate (<<of course their egos are too big to accept anything else anyway)

#79
AwakenxBenihime

AwakenxBenihime
  • Members
  • 77 messages
I don't mind adding new combat elements, but they take away RPG elements when they do so. Why should some people feel more entitled? Because some people are bigger fans? Someone that plays it once and never plays it again shouldn't have more influence then someone who plays it multiple times? I don't see any FPS fan playing the single player by themselves over and over and I don't complain the story isn't better because I know that doesn't matter anyway. If I play COD MP for a couple of hours and never play it again should I have more say in it than the top ranked people who play it 8 hours a day and compete in tournaments? DA2 took away so many RPG elements and made the combat better. They saw how much that flopped compared to DAO. They essentially took RPG elements out of a game that is only an RPG, at least ME is a shooter too.

#80
Il Divo

Il Divo
  • Members
  • 9 775 messages

Rockworm503 wrote...

Its funny how many people just flat out missed the point of the OP and then drove that point home with more entitlement issues.

I Bought Neverwinter Nights when it was new my opinion means more than the guy who started playing Dragon Age but I sure as hell can't beat that dude who played Baldur's Gate (<<of course their egos are too big to accept anything else anyway)


Definitely a problem. You get people all over the spectrum who consider themselves "original fans". What happens if someone liked Red Steel, but nothing else? What if someone liked everything up until Dragon Age 2? What if someone hated Baldur's Gate 1, but loved the sequel + Throne of Bhaal? What if someone hates VA or loves it? It's really all over the place. I'd rather dispense with that kind of thinking.

I personally began with KotOR, made my way through each successive game up until ME2, before returning to play Baldur's Gate and Neverwinter Nights. They weren't terrible, but there were alot of designs that I would not want Bioware to ever consider returning to, original fan or not.

#81
Terror_K

Terror_K
  • Members
  • 4 362 messages
I see...

So what you're basically saying is, because BioWare actually started with an action game and not with an RPG like Baldur's Gate, etc. everybody is automatically wrong who is unhappy with BioWare's more action-oriented games lately and that EA has nothing to do with it?

Hear that everybody! because Shattered Steel was BioWare's first game, that automatically means that Dragon Age 2 was fantastic!

#82
Anacronian Stryx

Anacronian Stryx
  • Members
  • 3 133 messages

Cthulhu42 wrote...

I like this story. Although it could use less orange. Try purple instead, it's a much better colour.


Congratulations Holland has just declared war on you!

#83
Il Divo

Il Divo
  • Members
  • 9 775 messages

Terror_K wrote...

I see...

So what you're basically saying is, because BioWare actually started with an action game and not with an RPG like Baldur's Gate, etc. everybody is automatically wrong who is unhappy with BioWare's more action-oriented games lately and that EA has nothing to do with it?

Hear that everybody! because Shattered Steel was BioWare's first game, that automatically means that Dragon Age 2 was fantastic!


No, it means that original fan arguments are utterly trash. Argue for what makes a game good, that is all. If you want to play the original fan game, you wouldn't even have Baldur's Gate in the first place. We would be playing giant mech robot games.

Modifié par Il Divo, 05 décembre 2011 - 03:48 .


#84
Guest_Arcian_*

Guest_Arcian_*
  • Guests

Terror_K wrote...

I see...

So what you're basically saying is, because BioWare actually started with an action game and not with an RPG like Baldur's Gate, etc. everybody is automatically wrong who is unhappy with BioWare's more action-oriented games lately and that EA has nothing to do with it?

Hear that everybody! because Shattered Steel was BioWare's first game, that automatically means that Dragon Age 2 was fantastic!

Nope, it means BioWare aren't and shouldn't be classified as a "WE ONLY MAKE RPGS FOR RPG PEOPLE"-kind of developer company, which is what many people here on the BSN are driving at.

#85
AwakenxBenihime

AwakenxBenihime
  • Members
  • 77 messages

Arcian wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

I see...

So what you're basically saying is, because BioWare actually started with an action game and not with an RPG like Baldur's Gate, etc. everybody is automatically wrong who is unhappy with BioWare's more action-oriented games lately and that EA has nothing to do with it?

Hear that everybody! because Shattered Steel was BioWare's first game, that automatically means that Dragon Age 2 was fantastic!

Nope, it means BioWare aren't and shouldn't be classified as a "WE ONLY MAKE RPGS FOR RPG PEOPLE"-kind of developer company, which is what many people here on the BSN are driving at.


So when Gamefreak makes a new pokemon we should expect co-op multiplayer? What other game company makes a bunch of different types of games? Rockstar made a Ping Pong game and we know that went well.

#86
TheKillerAngel

TheKillerAngel
  • Members
  • 3 608 messages
Game companies still do have the right to try out new things and take risks.

#87
Il Divo

Il Divo
  • Members
  • 9 775 messages

AwakenxBenihime wrote...

So when Gamefreak makes a new pokemon we should expect co-op multiplayer? What other game company makes a bunch of different types of games? Rockstar made a Ping Pong game and we know that went well.


Well, that always leads to the fun question "Why do you play series x?" That question will always dictate what you consider critical to the game and what you consider allowable for developers to change. If I play Mass Effect primarily for the setting, will gameplay alterations affect my enjoyment? Probably not as much. The problem is that there isn't a 100% clear reason why any fan may enjoy a series, though developers may have some idea.

I (for example) like Baldur's Gate 2 for the dialogue/interactions, rather than the DnD system.

Consider also that between Shattered Steel, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, MDK2, Jade Empire, and Mass Effect, that Bioware has released games with an incredibly diverse set of gameplay elements.

Modifié par Il Divo, 05 décembre 2011 - 03:41 .


#88
AwakenxBenihime

AwakenxBenihime
  • Members
  • 77 messages

TheKillerAngel wrote...

Game companies still do have the right to try out new things and take risks.


They've already taken alot of risks, why risk things on the 3rd game? It's a guarantee sell for most fans. Completely changing a game isn't trying new things they are DOING new things.

#89
Guest_Arcian_*

Guest_Arcian_*
  • Guests

AwakenxBenihime wrote...

So when Gamefreak makes a new pokemon we should expect co-op multiplayer?

You should expect nothing. They companies make what they want to make. You either fall in line or leave - it's no simpler than that.

#90
C9316

C9316
  • Members
  • 5 638 messages

AwakenxBenihime wrote...

TheKillerAngel wrote...

Game companies still do have the right to try out new things and take risks.


They've already taken alot of risks, why risk things on the 3rd game? It's a guarantee sell for most fans. Completely changing a game isn't trying new things they are DOING new things.

So making combat not suck == completely changing a game?

#91
Terror_K

Terror_K
  • Members
  • 4 362 messages

Il Divo wrote...

Rockworm503 wrote...

Its funny how many people just flat out missed the point of the OP and then drove that point home with more entitlement issues.

I Bought Neverwinter Nights when it was new my opinion means more than the guy who started playing Dragon Age but I sure as hell can't beat that dude who played Baldur's Gate (<<of course their egos are too big to accept anything else anyway)


Definitely a problem. You get people all over the spectrum who consider themselves "original fans". What happens if someone liked Red Steel, but nothing else? What if someone liked everything up until Dragon Age 2? What if someone hated Baldur's Gate 1, but loved the sequel + Throne of Bhaal? What if someone hates VA or loves it? It's really all over the place. I'd rather dispense with that kind of thinking.

I personally began with KotOR, made my way through each successive game up until ME2, before returning to play Baldur's Gate and Neverwinter Nights. They weren't terrible, but there were alot of designs that I would not want Bioware to ever consider returning to, original fan or not.


For me, personally, as much as I rag on BioWare for their more action-oriented approach lately and that since EA took over their games seem to be heading more towards the mainstream CoD audience than the RPG nerds, it's not so much about the fact that they're doing this as much as the way they're going about it.

My main issue isn't so much that their RPGs are getting more watered down, but that they're doing it to their existing IPs that started off as being a little deeper and stronger in their RPG elements and turning them more into action games bu dumbing them down and oversimplifying. That's why I'm fine with Jade Empire and can enjoy it despite it being technically BioWare's shallowest and "least RPG" title in recent years, but Dragon Age 2 feels like a betrayal and massive FUBAR because of what the original was. Had DA2 been a spin-off in the vein of Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance rather than a direct follow-up then it wouldn't have been as much an issue, but it wasn't. That was clearly where BioWare wanted to take the series now, and it seemed like a massive middle-finger to the original fans who got into Dragon Age: Origins largely because it was supposed to be the "spritual successor to Baldur's Gate", a proper PC RPG and proper fantasy RPG, et al.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, if BioWare wants to start making story-driven action games then fine... all power to them. They can go ahead and do that, I have no major issues with the basic notion and priciple of that. But they should do so via independent IPs designed to be that way from the beginning, and not go alienating a good portion of their established RPG fanbase ("original" or not) by futzing with their current IPs that are designed to be RPGs and turning them into something else and warping them for the sake of mass appeal. I'd rather BioWare actually make a CoD or Uncharted clone or some other action game as their next major IP if it means they start making proper RPGs again as well. They have enough studios and resources these days that they should be able to make multiple types of games for different people.

The problem is at the moment their watering down their RPG titles so spread them as far as they can across as many gamers as they can, and its resulting in a very weaksauce RPG experience, as well as many RPG fans being annoyed by more mainstream, action-game mechanics and factors that they don't want in their RPGs as well. Rather than try and keep making these hybrid, in-between games that marry genres, they should just make RPGs for RPG fans and action games for action game fans, and then perhaps something that also has a bit of both for good measure. Mass Effect was always kind of like this and that's fine, but Dragon Age was never intended to be a half-assed, inbetween Action-RPG: it was supposed to be a proper RPG.

I remember a BioWare employee a few years back responding to criticism against ME2's more action-oriented approach and basically saying, "we're expanding our audience to get people who normally wouldn't play RPGs, and perhaps ME2 can help wean them onto something more hardcore like Dragon Age." Now all I can think is, "that's all very well, but you're no longer even making hardcore RPGs anymore. You're just drifting towards making story-driven action games like everybody else."

And overall that's kind of my issue: stagnation. Most AAA titles these days are basically the same thing: a story-driven, semi-cinematic action game with light RPG elements. That's not automatically a bad thing, but it's leading to few few games that are actually well-defined and have their own genres anymore. BioWare seem to just be approaching the same target as everybody else, merely from the other side. While the likes of Uncharted, Assassin's Creed, Batman AA and AC, etc. come from the evolution of action games that over the years have become more complex and added more customisation and RPG-esque skill progression, etc. along with a stronger focus on story and cutscenes, BioWare's games are cutting back on the RPG and going more for the action aspects.

I personally played BioWare games and got into them because they were great experiences I could lose myself in and were a lot different than other games. They seemed to put story, character, presentation and customisation ahead of raw gameplay, and the raw gameplay made you at least have to think about more than just "who do I kill next?" Nowadays BioWare games just feel like other games, and are less an experience and more just one of the crowd. I remember Christina Norman said while making ME2 they thought less about concerning theirselves with labels such as "RPG" and "Shooter" and just concentrated on making a great game. Unfortunately, that's exactly what Mass Effect 2 became to me that the original didn't feel like: a game.

And that's my overall issue: BioWare games used to be an experience. Now they're just games. Just like the products of UbiSoft, Activision and the rest of EA, and almost everybody else.

#92
AwakenxBenihime

AwakenxBenihime
  • Members
  • 77 messages

C9316 wrote...

AwakenxBenihime wrote...

TheKillerAngel wrote...

Game companies still do have the right to try out new things and take risks.


They've already taken alot of risks, why risk things on the 3rd game? It's a guarantee sell for most fans. Completely changing a game isn't trying new things they are DOING new things.

So making combat not suck == completely changing a game?


Taking away RPG elements to make combat better and try to attract MP players is. I am not against improved combat at all. I would love better combat, but don't take away things that made the game what it is. Enemies dropping from the sky is the worst spawn point ever.

#93
sbvera13

sbvera13
  • Members
  • 432 messages
I have played Shattered Steet. I believe I was 14 or so at the time. It came on the monthly demo CD from that month's copy of PC Gamer. I rather enjoyed it, although ended up spending my money on Mechwarrior II and later Looking Glass's Terra Nova because they were better. (also note, any time somebody says they're playing MW3 or "the new MW" I freak out a little).

Of the little I remember, was the great sound effects for the lasers, the obnoxiousness of trying to shoot airborne targets when you could only aim upwards by about 30 degrees, and the mortar that left craters. It wasn't much good for killing things, but led to some interesting tactics such as getting your escort convoy stuck in hole, then moving ahead and killing everything without worry.

I never knew until now that it was BioWare.

Oh, and ME1 was a blockbuster movie. ME2 was a high-school fanservice comic book. ME3=?

#94
Guest_Arcian_*

Guest_Arcian_*
  • Guests

Terror_K wrote...

 I remember Christina Norman said while making ME2 they thought less about concerning theirselves with labels such as "RPG" and "Shooter" and just concentrated on making a great game. Unfortunately, that's exactly what Mass Effect 2 became to me that the original didn't feel like: a game.

And that's my overall issue: BioWare games used to be an experience. Now they're just games. Just like the products of UbiSoft, Activision and the rest of EA, and almost everybody else.

That's just your opinion, though. I'm not the only one who thinks ME2 was quite the experience. It wasn't the same experience as ME1, I'll give you that, but it wasn't better or worse. Just different.

#95
Guest_Catch This Fade_*

Guest_Catch This Fade_*
  • Guests

AwakenxBenihime wrote...

Arcian wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

I see...

So what you're basically saying is, because BioWare actually started with an action game and not with an RPG like Baldur's Gate, etc. everybody is automatically wrong who is unhappy with BioWare's more action-oriented games lately and that EA has nothing to do with it?

Hear that everybody! because Shattered Steel was BioWare's first game, that automatically means that Dragon Age 2 was fantastic!

Nope, it means BioWare aren't and shouldn't be classified as a "WE ONLY MAKE RPGS FOR RPG PEOPLE"-kind of developer company, which is what many people here on the BSN are driving at.


So when Gamefreak makes a new pokemon we should expect co-op multiplayer? What other game company makes a bunch of different types of games? Rockstar made a Ping Pong game and we know that went well.

It did actually

#96
AwakenxBenihime

AwakenxBenihime
  • Members
  • 77 messages

Arcian wrote...

AwakenxBenihime wrote...

So when Gamefreak makes a new pokemon we should expect co-op multiplayer?

You should expect nothing. They companies make what they want to make. You either fall in line or leave - it's no simpler than that.


So when a lot of fans disagree we just let it go? I think most of the people here will disagree about that.
When FOX canceled Family Guy people didn't just let it go and  look where it's at now.

#97
Terror_K

Terror_K
  • Members
  • 4 362 messages

Arcian wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

I see...

So what you're basically saying is, because BioWare actually started with an action game and not with an RPG like Baldur's Gate, etc. everybody is automatically wrong who is unhappy with BioWare's more action-oriented games lately and that EA has nothing to do with it?

Hear that everybody! because Shattered Steel was BioWare's first game, that automatically means that Dragon Age 2 was fantastic!


Nope, it means BioWare aren't and shouldn't be classified as a "WE ONLY MAKE RPGS FOR RPG PEOPLE"-kind of developer company, which is what many people here on the BSN are driving at.


No, they shouldn't. But nor should they be sabotaging their own IPs part the way through and twisting them to appeal to the mainstream and thus alienating a good portion of their original fans in the process. When I get the sequel to a game I am a massive fan of, I expect the game to satisfy me, appeal to me and above all be made more for me than for somebody who has never played it before. BioWare's issue lately is that they seemed more concerned with branching out and making their sequels more for potential fans than for existing ones, to the point of completely twisting and warping them to do so.

Again, if BioWare want to make a CoD, Uncharted, Assassin's Creed or whatever clone and start making action games with heavy narrative and light RPG elements then they can go ahead and do so. I might even get the game myself and enjoy it. But turning Mass Effect and Dragon Age into a CoD, Uncharted, Assassin's Creed or whatever clone is not something I want. I got into these games and their universes for what they were and how they started... not for what other games are.

#98
AwakenxBenihime

AwakenxBenihime
  • Members
  • 77 messages

jreezy wrote...

AwakenxBenihime wrote...


So when Gamefreak makes a new pokemon we should expect co-op multiplayer? What other game company makes a bunch of different types of games? Rockstar made a Ping Pong game and we know that went well.

It did actually


I'm sure not all the rockstar fans were happy with it, Also put Rockstar on any game and it will sell well.

#99
Il Divo

Il Divo
  • Members
  • 9 775 messages

Terror_K wrote...

>snip<

I personally played BioWare games and got into them because they were great experiences I could lose myself in and were a lot different than other games. They seemed to put story, character, presentation and customisation ahead of raw gameplay, and the raw gameplay made you at least have to think about more than just "who do I kill next?" Nowadays BioWare games just feel like other games, and are less an experience and more just one of the crowd. I remember Christina Norman said while making ME2 they thought less about concerning theirselves with labels such as "RPG" and "Shooter" and just concentrated on making a great game. Unfortunately, that's exactly what Mass Effect 2 became to me that the original didn't feel like: a game.

And that's my overall issue: BioWare games used to be an experience. Now they're just games. Just like the products of UbiSoft, Activision and the rest of EA, and almost everybody else.


And that's all perfectly fine. I have no ill will for anyone who likes older Bioware games and think ME2 represents the "decline". But here's the problem with the "existing IPs" argument, which I point out above: there isn't a single, uniform reason why someone may enjoy an IP.

Consider (for example) how alot of fans are so attached to the character of the Warden that they hate on DA2 merely because it wasn't an opportunity for them to continue (what they claim to be) an "unfinished" storyline. I've seen your own criticisms of DA2, so I'm aware that this is not one of them, but it remains an issue for a substantial portion of people even now. In my case, I loved ME for the setting/characters and despised the inventory, so many of the changes did not offend me as much as other players.

Consider also that with the myriad of changes Bioware made in DA2, some fans take more issue with some changes than others. Some people think it's the art style that sucks, others the story-line, and yet more the gameplay. Some think it was all crap, and others that it was all good. We don't have a clear 100% understanding of when an IP has undergone enough changes to cease being that IP. Or in other cases, since DA:O and ME1, represented completely new IPs, it's not clear how well Bioware thought of the actual features in the game to bring them into the next installment. Games like WoW undergone constant revision through patches because the developers are not always sure of the game design, how they want to balance a game, what role they want classes to fill, etc.

Modifié par Il Divo, 05 décembre 2011 - 04:03 .


#100
sbvera13

sbvera13
  • Members
  • 432 messages

AwakenxBenihime wrote...

So when a lot of fans disagree we just let it go? I think most of the people here will disagree about that.
When FOX canceled Family Guy people didn't just let it go and  look where it's at now.


Or a more recent and relevant example, CCP games and EVE online.

After 18 months of pursuing their own strategy, a mass walkout prompted them to redesign their entire company strategy and cater to the desires of their player base.  Now, 1 week after their latest expansion, the number of players online at any given time has almost doubled.