244 réponses à ce sujet

[Tazzmission]

daqs wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Well cheats are one thing. But Bio specializes on story driven games, or at least games in which story plays a major role. So the story itself should also be challenging. Challenging to understand, hard to make decisions, etc. It should give you something to think about. I like it in any story if I can't predict a twist or path the story goes down. If it is just an old story in a new setting is mostly disappointing for me tbh.

...and you're comparing the stories we get in modern BioWare games on these criteria to the stories we got fifteen to twenty years ago?

you cant always depend on the past to continue into the future for gaming

look at hollywood for example and there crappy current remakes phase.........

Modifié par Tazzmission, 31 janvier 2012 - 12:05 .

[Biotic Sage]

lyssalu wrote...

Biotic Sage wrote...

It's impossible to have huge decisions carry over across numerous games. The branching possibilities would be exponential and result in WAY to many bases to cover for the devs; it would take them 10 years just to develop one game and cover all the bases. Gamers just need to learn to enjoy the choices within the confines of a single game, accept it for a stand alone affair, and then be happy about any carry-over choices that the developer IS able to implement into the future titles

don't blame gamers for expecting what was advertised

Very true, and gamers are definitely not at fault for expecting that.  I was just giving some advice on how to enjoy the series more by altering your schema of what Mass Effect actually is. 

I try to get as much enjoyment out of things as I can, and by that I mean I make a conscious effort to accept things for what they are and not be bogged down by my personal expectations or ideas I've built up in my head; I make this effort because I am an extremely picky person who always has opinions on the creative direction of video games/movies/books, so if I didn't make the effort I wouldn't enjoy anything haha.  My friends already say I'm way too pessimistic, but really I'm not I'm just extremely picky.  They say this because even with my conscious effort, a lot of times I still can't enjoy something because it fails both in terms of my expectations and for what it actually is. 

I'll use Zelda, Wind Waker as an example  I did not, and still do not, think that cel shading was the right direction to take that series, but I love that game for what it is, and I recognize that in and of itself the art style is beautiful.

Modifié par Biotic Sage, 31 janvier 2012 - 12:08 .

[Aimi]

Tazzmission wrote...

you cant always depend on the past to continue into the future for gaming

look at hollywood for example and there crappy current remakes phase.........

I didn't say that modern products are better because they're modern. That's Whig history and it's wrong. Just plain wrong.

That said, I'm having a hard time thinking of games that did do the things Alex is talking about.

[AlexXIV]

daqs wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Well cheats are one thing. But Bio specializes on story driven games, or at least games in which story plays a major role. So the story itself should also be challenging. Challenging to understand, hard to make decisions, etc. It should give you something to think about. I like it in any story if I can't predict a twist or path the story goes down. If it is just an old story in a new setting is mostly disappointing for me tbh.

...and you're comparing the stories we get in modern BioWare games on these criteria to the stories we got fifteen to twenty years ago?

Among others, yes. It's not a Bioware specific thing though.

[AlexXIV]

daqs wrote...

Tazzmission wrote...

you cant always depend on the past to continue into the future for gaming

look at hollywood for example and there crappy current remakes phase.........

I didn't say that modern products are better because they're modern. That's Whig history and it's wrong. Just plain wrong.

That said, I'm having a hard time thinking of games that did do the things Alex is talking about.

Planescape:Torment. For example.

[mjh417]

This was my original comment on IGN to their post...

Bioware has said many times their intention is not to punish players for making "wrong" decisions. There are no "wrong" choices, only various Paragon ones, Renegade ones, and a few in-betweens. Choices made especially in the first two games will most definitely not result in "bad" endings, just a different paths to a variety of different ends. I would suspect that you can make debatably "wrong" or "bad" decisions within the critical choices of Mass Effect 3, but thats only because its the finale and thats how it works, everything matters and needs to have a serious impact, but these would be independent of past choices fromt he first two games. Those past game choices will play HUGE roles in how the story of ME3 plays out and what choices will be available for your Shep, but they will not be there to damn him or her.

[Harley_Dude]

I've read the squad is smaller so I'm already asking myself what was the point of the recruitment in ME2 at the expense of the main quest.

[Selene Moonsong]

Tazzmission wrote...

do the mods like you or any other ( non dev mods) get to test out the games before release or am i jumping the gun here?

Jumping the gun, definately. We really don't get any more access to any info or the games themselves than any other community member.

[HTTP 404]

The Harley Dude wrote...

I've read the squad is smaller so I'm already asking myself what was the point of the recruitment in ME2 at the expense of the main quest.

the point is that you have allies.  a character's purpose doesn't have to equal "they are a part of shepard's squad."  Besides if we had all the squadmates back from Me1 and Me2, they would be more useless benched on the Normandy since my shepard would only use 3 or 4 of them.

[CannonO]

HTTP 404 wrote...

The Harley Dude wrote...

I've read the squad is smaller so I'm already asking myself what was the point of the recruitment in ME2 at the expense of the main quest.

the point is that you have allies.  a character's purpose doesn't have to equal "they are a part of shepard's squad."  Besides if we had all the squadmates back from Me1 and Me2, they would be more useless benched on the Normandy since my shepard would only use 3 or 4 of them.

Hudson said it doesn't matter as much who is a permanent squadmate now because there are several points in the story where some favorites will be guest squad mates, like Anderson.

[HTTP 404]

CannonLars wrote...

HTTP 404 wrote...

The Harley Dude wrote...

I've read the squad is smaller so I'm already asking myself what was the point of the recruitment in ME2 at the expense of the main quest.

the point is that you have allies.  a character's purpose doesn't have to equal "they are a part of shepard's squad."  Besides if we had all the squadmates back from Me1 and Me2, they would be more useless benched on the Normandy since my shepard would only use 3 or 4 of them.

Hudson said it doesn't matter as much who is a permanent squadmate now because there are several points in the story where some favorites will be guest squad mates, like Anderson.

I think that's a great idea

[MasterMegatron]

BioWare lost a ton of ground with me for including multiplayer that boils down to Horde with fancy objectives, which seems to be a disturbing trend with devs nowadays. "Oooh, it's gotta have multiplayer to attract fans!" No it ****ing doesn't. Case in point: ME 1 and 2. People loved those games, and here we are, with some unnecessary clone of a clone, and then say "We've wanted to do this forever!"

This, coupled with many of the spoilers I've seen and how they've handled things in TOR, have brought me very close to cancelling my preorder for ME3 and just watching the game be played on YouTube.

[CannonO]

MasterMegatron wrote...

BioWare lost a ton of ground with me for including multiplayer that boils down to Horde with fancy objectives, which seems to be a disturbing trend with devs nowadays. "Oooh, it's gotta have multiplayer to attract fans!" No it ****ing doesn't. Case in point: ME 1 and 2. People loved those games, and here we are, with some unnecessary clone of a clone, and then say "We've wanted to do this forever!"

This, coupled with many of the spoilers I've seen and how they've handled things in TOR, have brought me very close to cancelling my preorder for ME3 and just watching the game be played on YouTube.

Elder Scrolls, Batman: Arkham City, LA Noire

There is definitely a lot to be done with single player games.

[G3rman]

I'm an "old school" fan as you call it and I'm not really worried. Its just a game that I have expressed interest in, having gotten into it from its previous installments. If you aren't excited about the series anymore then why are you here and why do you still plan to play it?

If you plan to play it and still express all your moaning and groaning at this late stage you will get nothing from it.

[Terror_K]

CannonLars wrote...

MasterMegatron wrote...

BioWare lost a ton of ground with me for including multiplayer that boils down to Horde with fancy objectives, which seems to be a disturbing trend with devs nowadays. "Oooh, it's gotta have multiplayer to attract fans!" No it ****ing doesn't. Case in point: ME 1 and 2. People loved those games, and here we are, with some unnecessary clone of a clone, and then say "We've wanted to do this forever!"

This, coupled with many of the spoilers I've seen and how they've handled things in TOR, have brought me very close to cancelling my preorder for ME3 and just watching the game be played on YouTube.

Elder Scrolls, Batman: Arkham City, LA Noire

There is definitely a lot to be done with single player games.

Agreed. Especially in the third part of a trilogy when they should be putting all their focus and resources into making the single player as good as possible, because that's what really matters.

If the new MP stuff had been an expansion or DLC made a month or two later, then I wouldn't have had any real issues with it. As it stands it seems like it's more there to bring in new gamers who love MP than to actually add to the game in any really meaningful way.

[Tazzmission]

The Harley Dude wrote...

I've read the squad is smaller so I'm already asking myself what was the point of the recruitment in ME2 at the expense of the main quest.

people have demanded the me1 squad back and they got it and people still complain....

this is my thought on the whole choices and consequenses statement

ever stop to realize maybe that if wrex died in me1 and the krogan replacing him in 2 wont do a thing for the reaper battle in 3 despite what the mission is for that particular role in me3?

or like the latest game informer stated regarding the cure. what happens if you let malon live in me2? ( i already know do to leak but wont reveal here)

and maybe the li from both me1 and me2 may lead to a epic tragedy in me3? ( wich means did you stay loyal or did you cheat)

and it couldnt hurt to suggest that maybe me2 was a game centered around temp squadmates wich in fact are similar in me3?


keep in mind theres no direct set squad in me2 like there was in me1.

this franchise is well pulled together and i believe what im saying is pretty much accurate

Modifié par Tazzmission, 31 janvier 2012 - 05:12 .

[Fiery Phoenix]

Terror_K wrote...

(...)

If the new MP stuff had been an expansion or DLC made a month or two later, then I wouldn't have had any real issues with it. As it stands it seems like it's more there to bring in new gamers who love MP than to actually add to the game in any really meaningful way.

The sad thing is those players will never, and I mean never, look at ME3 and its multiplayer as anything other than a brief stop to the next COD or Halo game.

I seriously hope BioWare realizes that.

[CannonO]

Fiery Phoenix wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

(...)

If the new MP stuff had been an expansion or DLC made a month or two later, then I wouldn't have had any real issues with it. As it stands it seems like it's more there to bring in new gamers who love MP than to actually add to the game in any really meaningful way.

The sad thing is those players will never, and I mean never, look at ME3 and its multiplayer as anything other than a brief stop to the next COD or Halo game.

I seriously hope BioWare realizes that.

They do. The money means more to EA than the project.

[Killjoy Cutter]

MP cram-on to draw in the dudebro crowd, combat clown moves (the rolling around), mandatory Origin, no-win ending choice... yeah, not really that interested in ME3 any more.

Thanks for pissing on something I liked, EA.

Modifié par Killjoy Cutter, 31 janvier 2012 - 05:38 .

[CerberusSoldier]

CannonLars wrote...

HTTP 404 wrote...

The Harley Dude wrote...

I've read the squad is smaller so I'm already asking myself what was the point of the recruitment in ME2 at the expense of the main quest.

the point is that you have allies.  a character's purpose doesn't have to equal "they are a part of shepard's squad."  Besides if we had all the squadmates back from Me1 and Me2, they would be more useless benched on the Normandy since my shepard would only use 3 or 4 of them.

Hudson said it doesn't matter as much who is a permanent squadmate now because there are several points in the story where some favorites will be guest squad mates, like Anderson.

   



If it does not matter then why is the ME 1 squad outside of wrex on the SR 2 in ME 3 the whole time . also how can Garrus and Tali escape the ME 2 cameo treatement . he may say those thing but its real clear that the ME 1 squad was always planned to be the squad in 3 . ME 2 is a compete waste of our time as gamers and as a game . They talk about us building relationships with the characters in 2 but yet in 3 they are not even part of the squad .

[CerberusSoldier]

old school fans need to get with the times and accept that EA owns Bioware

[LadyDrusilla]

I too am an old school fan and I'm not worried in the slightest. People just like to whine and moan

[CerberusSoldier]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

MP cram-on to draw in the dudebro crowd, combat clown moves (the rolling around), mandatory Origin, no-win ending choice... yeah, not really that interested in ME3 any more.

Thanks for pissing on something I liked, EA.

   


EA owns Bioware and they are in this to make money .  MP sells games simple as that now days .

[StephanieBengal]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

MP cram-on to draw in the dudebro crowd, combat clown moves (the rolling around), mandatory Origin, no-win ending choice... yeah, not really that interested in ME3 any more.

Thanks for pissing on something I liked, EA.

Tell us how you really feel

[nitefyre410]

StephanieBengal wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

MP cram-on to draw in the dudebro crowd, combat clown moves (the rolling around), mandatory Origin, no-win ending choice... yeah, not really that interested in ME3 any more.

Thanks for pissing on something I liked, EA.

Tell us how you really feel

 


I swear if Had a dime for every time  I heard that lame ass  "Dudebro" Multiplayer ruined "my" game line.... I would be rich now.