226 réponses à ce sujet

[Nashiktal]

Stephenc13 wrote...

Comparing Gears of War to Mass Effect again?
That's comparing two whole different games.
The only thing comparable is the survival modes and that's it.

If Mass Effect and Gears of War are the same, then I guess Army of Two is definitely the same as both of those.
Then that means all of those games copied Brute Force (2003 third person shooter)!

Then that means all of those games copied watching your friend play Duck Hunt because you used to watch him play over his shoulder!!!




seriously people. You can always find similarities between things if you look hard enough.
Fps were influenced and built on from doom and wolfenstein and all that.
Tps need to be influenced and built on by something too.
It's not like you can suddenly create something new and original.

As much as I hate the comparison, the two games actually are quite similar in broad strokes. They are both TPS, they both use similar combat mechanics that drive their gameplay.

They both have different target audiences though, and both seek to be something entirely different from each other while still being succesful. However there is much both games could learn about each other, ME especially when it comes to gameplay.

As improved as shep's mobility may seem now, from first looks it still seems behind in terms of "modern" TPS mechanics that have been around for some time.

[Fiery Phoenix]

Nashiktal wrote...

Fiery Phoenix wrote...

Nashiktal wrote...

Other than rolling my eyes at how hammy the story gets at times I found GOW3 to be the most polished TPS I have ever played. Don't expect much "new" from the game itself other than some weapons and enemies (I love that bayonet) but I did not encounter a single bug in the campaign, and I actually found myself applauding various idea's put in the story if not the execution.

In a sentence I would describe GOW improving the opposite of ME. Baby steps in regard to story, but a polished and refined gameplay. Had a blast with it.

Thanks for the reassurance. I actually liked the first game but hated the sequel for various reasons. I'll probably get to GOW3 at some point, but right now it'll have to wait.

I would recommend renting it sometime, or waiting until the price goes down significantly if you don't have any investment in multiplayer. (Which I don't.)

The campaign is longer than the other games, and as hammy as it gets it is improved in that regard as well (you even go through some GOW history by visiting cities first hit early in the war) , but its still a short game without much meat if you don't do multiplayer, which I hear is a blast but I have never played.

Yeah, I'm not a fan of the multiplayer in the game myself. Campaign and horde is about as much as it gets.

Modifié par Fiery Phoenix, 14 janvier 2012 - 08:58 .

[Doctalen]

I'd say Gears has more variety of enemy and if you play all the games you'd see that. ME is mostly the same gangs over and over and over except when you do collector missions. The locust and lambent have plenty of different types of units. Now maybe ME3 will add more, it seems that way. I'd say gears had more variety in the enviros at least in Gears 3. You go all over Sera and even underwater and in the air. I love both series very much so anyone who takes Criticism as "Hating" should think before they post.

[alex90c]

jreezy wrote...

alex90c wrote...

I found an article where BioWare was criticizing Gears of War for making the battlefields too obvious. I find that very funny...and ironic.

link?

http://beefjack.com/news/mass-effect-3-devs-have-a-pop-at-gears-of-war/

haha. because Bioware didn't put boxes or chest-high walls in ME1/2 at all did they? 

this is just like their criticising of the FF games for being too linear, and then they release DA2.

[Abraham_uk]

There is a lot of feedback regarding shooter versus role playing. People like Casy Hudson must get a headache from this discussion.

The answer is pretty simple. More role playing elements and improved shooting.

Still desperately trying not to further enflame the flame wars that take place here here are the role playing elements and shooting elements for improvement.

RPG:
Stop stripping squadmate powers.
More power evolutions
More stat tinkering especially regarding the powers.
Bring back weapons training.
More consequences for decisions.
More consequences for romances.
Make romances plot relevant.
Protections do not completly nerf powers.

Shooting:

Faster more fluid
better cover system.
More tactics to be used rather than hide behind something and occasionally pop up to fire.
More flanking enemies.
Higher difficulties means better AI not more hit points.

Gears of War is a great example of how to do a cinematic third person shooter from what I hear.

Anyway Bioware will address most of these in Mass Effect 3.

Modifié par Abraham_uk, 14 janvier 2012 - 09:08 .

[Nashiktal]

Abraham_uk wrote...

There is a lot of feedback regarding shooter versus role playing. People like Casy Hudson must get a headache from this discussion.

The answer is pretty simple. More role playing elements and improved shooting.

Still desperately trying not to further enflame the flame wars that take place here here are the role playing elements and shooting elements for improvement.

RPG:
Stop stripping squadmate powers.
More power evolutions
More stat tinkering especially regarding the powers.
Bring back weapons training.
More consequences for decisions.
More consequences for romances.
Make romances plot relevant.
Protections do not completly nerf powers.

Shooting:

Faster more fluid
better cover system.
More tactics to be used rather than hide behind something and occasionally pop up to fire.
More flanking enemies.
Higher difficulties means better AI not more hit points.

Gears of War is a great example of how to do a cinematic third person shooter from what I hear.

Anyway Bioware will address most of these in Mass Effect 3.

How many of those are actually RPG elements? 

[alex90c]

inb4 "what is an RPG" arguments

[nitefyre410]

jreezy wrote...

alex90c wrote...

I found an article where BioWare was criticizing Gears of War for making the battlefields too obvious. I find that very funny...and ironic.

link?

http://beefjack.com/news/mass-effect-3-devs-have-a-pop-at-gears-of-war/

 


So let me guess those boxes in the hallways of the Collector Base  were for some asthetic value that the Collectors found in them   REALLY?   They need to get off of   it .

Modifié par nitefyre410, 14 janvier 2012 - 09:28 .

[Nashiktal]

alex90c wrote...

inb4 "what is an RPG" arguments

You're late, and fired!

[Seboist]

Gears apparently isn't a good enough influence as ME is more of a linear popamole shooter and is only now adding features that were standard in the first gears.

[alex90c]

D3MON-SOVER3IGN wrote...

Doctalen wrote...

I'd say Gears has more variety of enemy and if you play all the games you'd see that. ME is mostly the same gangs over and over and over except when you do collector missions. The locust and lambent have plenty of different types of units. Now maybe ME3 will add more, it seems that way. I'd say gears had more variety in the enviros at least in Gears 3. You go all over Sera and even underwater and in the air. I love both series very much so anyone who takes Criticism as "Hating" should think before they post.

I agree with these parts. Except in ME3 you're going to multiple planets. I am liking the enemy variety too thus far

Oh, hey there. Looks like you "forgot" to answer my post on the previous page.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Luc0s wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Izhalezan wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Gears of War?
Meh...honestly, I found Duke Nukem Forever better.

You're a funny guy.

I'm dead serious.

Epic fail on your part Lotion. I expected better from my fellow "smart Paragon who keeps the Collector base"-buddy.

And you dissapoint me.What was so bad about DNF? What? Nothing. It's in now ay worse than any other FPS out there.
I hear people complain about only 2 weapons. So what?Crysis had only 2 weapons limit. 2 weapon limits are not intrinsicly bad.
I hear people complain about levels. What? They are varried enough. The Duke Burger one was grand.
Linear? Like 99.9% of other FPS'es out there, so how is it worse?
Regenerating health/ego? Yeah, I'd prefer healthpacks too, but I'll live.

There isn't anything really bad about it, it's just that people expected something else and then - typical for hte internet - overreacted like spoiled brats. Instead of rating the game for what it was, they took not being exactly how they wanted as the greatest crime in the universe.
Kinda like what happened with Dragon Age 2 and how people were giving it 1 and 0's.

Bottom point - DNF is an average game with good humor.
Anyone who gives it a 1 or 0 is a retard. Such scores have no place in any sensible rating anyway.

[Kaiser Shepard]

alex90c wrote...

...And Justice For All wrote...

GoW3 was no where near as good as GoW2, and i personally think ME1 was better than 2. but gears is a linear 3rd person shooter, it has NO rpg elements what so ever, so implementing aspects from GoW3 in mass effect, would just make the game a horrible mess.

DECISION MAKING

Gears style:

"Okay, i'll take the right, you take the left"

Marcus move up from the right, Dom takes the left.

Mass effect style:

"Okay, I'll make this massive decision that affects the entire galaxy, species X, you will be destroyed, species Y, you will live"

Decision has zero or minimal effect until the final game of the trilogy.

It's quite funny how Gears bashers fail to realise that, funnily enough it's the shooter (rather than their beautiful ARRRR PEEEE GEEEE) that handles choice and consequence miles better than a freaking role-playing game which advertises tough decisions and the like.

Excellent, it seems my presence in the Gears threads is no longer a necessity.

[Doctalen]

D3MON-SOVER3IGN wrote...

Doctalen wrote...

I'd say Gears has more variety of enemy and if you play all the games you'd see that. ME is mostly the same gangs over and over and over except when you do collector missions. The locust and lambent have plenty of different types of units. Now maybe ME3 will add more, it seems that way. I'd say gears had more variety in the enviros at least in Gears 3. You go all over Sera and even underwater and in the air. I love both series very much so anyone who takes Criticism as "Hating" should think before they post.

I agree with these parts. Except in ME3 you're going to multiple planets. I am liking the enemy variety too thus far

That is true! They are very cool planets but I wish you could see more of them. I have my hopes for ME3 showing more sides to a planet since the reapers are attacking them as a whole 

[Doctalen]

D3MON-SOVER3IGN wrote...

Doctalen wrote...

D3MON-SOVER3IGN wrote...

Doctalen wrote...

I'd say Gears has more variety of enemy and if you play all the games you'd see that. ME is mostly the same gangs over and over and over except when you do collector missions. The locust and lambent have plenty of different types of units. Now maybe ME3 will add more, it seems that way. I'd say gears had more variety in the enviros at least in Gears 3. You go all over Sera and even underwater and in the air. I love both series very much so anyone who takes Criticism as "Hating" should think before they post.

I agree with these parts. Except in ME3 you're going to multiple planets. I am liking the enemy variety too thus far

That is true! They are very cool planets but I wish you could see more of them. I have my hopes for ME3 showing more sides to a planet since the reapers are attacking them as a whole 

You'll definitely be satisfued

[Gatt9]

Abraham_uk wrote...

There is a lot of feedback regarding shooter versus role playing. People like Casy Hudson must get a headache from this discussion.

The answer is pretty simple. More role playing elements and improved shooting.

Still desperately trying not to further enflame the flame wars that take place here here are the role playing elements and shooting elements for improvement.

RPG:
Stop stripping squadmate powers.
More power evolutions
More stat tinkering especially regarding the powers.
Bring back weapons training.
More consequences for decisions.
More consequences for romances.
Make romances plot relevant.
Protections do not completly nerf powers.

Shooting:

Faster more fluid
better cover system.
More tactics to be used rather than hide behind something and occasionally pop up to fire.
More flanking enemies.
Higher difficulties means better AI not more hit points.

Gears of War is a great example of how to do a cinematic third person shooter from what I hear.

Anyway Bioware will address most of these in Mass Effect 3.

A Cinematic shooter?  It's the same thing as Half Life 2's boss fights,  it's argueably the same thing as Doom 2's boss fights.  This is nothing new.  Only difference is the camera is behind you now.

I'm also really confused why people keep using the word Cinematic as if it's a good thing,  making games more like movies,  and hence less interactive isn't a positive.  We already went down this road with the Full Motion Video debacle in the mid 90's,  and it was boring as heck.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Abraham_uk wrote...
RPG:
Stop stripping squadmate powers.
More power evolutions
More stat tinkering especially regarding the powers.
Bring back weapons training.
More consequences for decisions.
More consequences for romances.
Make romances plot relevant.
Protections do not completly nerf powers.

why?

[Abraham_uk]

I personally loved the idea of making them relevant. Seeing consequences for having a romance in the middle of the turmoil.

An example of it being done well is the Alistair romance in Dragon Age Origins. It was impacted by events of the story. Without going into spoiler territory, It made me connect more.

[someguy1231]

Stephenc13 wrote...

Comparing Gears of War to Mass Effect again?
That's comparing two whole different games.
The only thing comparable is the survival modes and that's it.

If Mass Effect and Gears of War are the same, then I guess Army of Two is definitely the same as both of those.
Then that means all of those games copied Brute Force (2003 third person shooter)!

Then that means all of those games copied watching your friend play Duck Hunt because you used to watch him play over his shoulder!!!




seriously people. You can always find similarities between things if you look hard enough.
Fps were influenced and built on from doom and wolfenstein and all that.
Tps need to be influenced and built on by something too.
It's not like you can suddenly create something new and original.

As I said before, it doesn't matter who does it first. What matters is who does it best.