140 réponses à ce sujet

[Cainne Chapel]

One can love RPGs and COD and be an intelligent and patient gamer.

Really intelligence matters very little when it comes to MOST gaming honestly.
and what games you play has no bearing on IQ or patience.

[shepskisaac]

ItsFreakinJesus wrote...

What they shouldn't do is bloat the game budget

This is exactly the solution but how do you do that? The majority of gamers DO expect stellar HD graphics, no matter what the genre, that's just the reality. Games with avarage/bad graphics get overlooked 90% of the time. The majority of gamers DO expect lots of Michael Bay bonanza, no matter if it's an FPS, action-adventure, RPG, stealth, whatever. Basically every realistic game where you control a character is expected to give players summer blockbuster experience. Nobody figured it out yet how to achieve it without having 100+ dev teams working for 2/3+ years. That's the reason why these budgets skyrocketed so high in the past 2 generations. AAA games cost 25-50+ million nowadays to make. Add advertising to that, and you suddenly need to sell 3, 4, or 5 million to at least break even (since publishers get only $15-20 from every $60 box sold and these boxes drop in prices fast)

[Cainne Chapel]

Yuqi wrote...

The LEdgend of Zelda Ocarina of Time was streamlined and butchered. The problem is RPG's are more for IMO intelligent/patient gamers.Eventuallly COD will lose it's prominence, as there is only so much room for creativity in games like COD.

OT...but
 how was OoT streamlined and butchered?

That game, to this day, is still one of the best games ever made I feel, Same for Super Mario 64...etc.

[Biobleh]

Multiplayer and James Vega's look are clearly aimed at pulling in the cawadooty and geezawar crowd respective, and I think its going to succeed.

The inclusion of lesbian and gay romances will also make ME3 very popular among the ****** gamers.

They still need to work on getting rid of the "ME?! LOL its for basement lovesick nerds and sexless housewives" label though.

[tetrisblock4x1]

I think they're trying to promote that label... Romance options are going up, and gays, lesbians and bisexuals are getting more action in Bioware games lately. So I guess that Bioware have tapped a profitable market...

[someguy1231]

One more thing, Terror_K. You might want to watch this video:

www.youtube.com/watch

How much "brown mush" did you see in that video?

[Terror_K]

someguy1231 wrote...

One more thing, Terror_K. You might want to watch this video:

www.youtube.com/watch

How much "brown mush" did you see in that video?

A lot.

Darkness II: Not really, admittedly.
Syndicate Remake: Basically is the conversion of a deep strategy game from 1992/93 into a gritty brown shooter.
Spec Ops: Yes.
Max Payne 3 :Yes
Ghost Recon FS: Yes
Counterstrike: Yes
Borderlands 2: Yes
Farcry 3: Yes
Prey 2: Not really.
Halo 4: Yes
BioShock Infinite: Half and half.

[SirEtchwart]

Terror_K wrote...

someguy1231 wrote...

One more thing, Terror_K. You might want to watch this video:

www.youtube.com/watch

How much "brown mush" did you see in that video?

A lot.

Darkness II: Not really, admittedly.
Syndicate Remake: Basically is the conversion of a deep strategy game from 1992/93 into a gritty brown shooter.
Spec Ops: Yes.
Max Payne 3 :Yes
Ghost Recon FS: Yes
Counterstrike: Yes
Borderlands 2: Yes
Farcry 3: Yes
Prey 2: Not really.
Halo 4: Yes
BioShock Infinite: Half and half.

Wait, what? 


No, seriously, what?

Far Cry 3 is on a flipping tropical island, Max Payne 3 is in San Paulo, and Bioshock Infinite IS IN THE SKY. How do any of those scream "generic brown mush"? Are we watching the same video?

[Terror_K]

someguy1231 wrote...

No, what I was saying is that a game shouldn't solely concern itself with pandering to established fans. You're putting words in my mouth. And it's funny how you imply that "sci-fi geeks and RPG nerds" aren't part of the "masses". I suppose that the "masses" weren't responsible for making Skyrim the 3rd-best selling game of 2011, or making Star Wars and Avatar some of the highest-grossing films of all time. And don't bother trying to pull the "No True Scotsman" fallacy on those.

Avatar was trite. It was only really a bigh-grossing film because of its fancy CGI and the director attached to it. You can't point at Star Wars, it's been around too long. Skyrim actually proves that you can still make an RPG and it be popular. Most of the problem isn't the masses themselves, but the fallacy game developers believe that certain audiences aren't out there or that you need to target the CoD set to make a proft. I saw developers on the Dragon Age forums saying this all the time when people were complaining about how DA2 was looking and how it was basically being dumbed down compared to the original. That's BS. The audience is there, you're simply not choosing to tap it because you think that all gamers care about is CoD, Gears and Halo. It's the developers who are at fault for believing this nonsense more than anything.

All we've seen of the omni-blade is Shepherd on the game cover, a few clips in the trailers, and the crossover promo with Kingdoms of Amalur. You must very low tolerance for it if you think that constitutes "jerking it off like a holographic phallus". Granted, it has nowhere near the status of the chainsaw bayonet for GoW, but I've never gotten the impression they're trying to make it ME's equivalent of that. You're just projecting your own hatred of it onto Bioware and making false accusations.

There's more than that. It's at the end of every video, and in most videos at some point. Then there's things like the Omni-Blade edition releasing in Australia/NZ, the inflatable Omni-Blades given out at E3, the fact almost every piece of artwork with Shepard on it lately has him/her with it, the fact that the new Shepard T-shirts have Shepard with it on it. You say I'm projecting my own hatred of it onto BioWare, but the only reason I hate it is because of the way they keep going on about it and shoving it down my throat. If they'd just brought it up once or twice and otherwise left it in the background it'd be fine, but they just keep jerking it off in my face in the most immature and "dudebro" manner like it's "teh most badassss!!1 thing of all time0rz!!1one!!"

Here's that "No True Scotsman" fallacy I mentioned earlier. Like it or not, TK, Halo and GoW are sci-fi. Halo, in particular, has been described as the "new Star Wars" by many, and if you think it's something that "sci-fi geeks" don't enjoy, then you're even more out-of-touch with reality than I thought. Just because they aren't sci-fi to your liking doesn't change that. As for Gears, I remember you saying in another thread that you've only played the first game. I've played all three, and believe me, the second and third games have far more story than the first. The third game, in particular, has a revelation toward the end that completely changed my outlook on the whole depiction of the main antagonists. In addition, Gears and Halo both have a story thick enough to support numerous comics and novels, just like ME does.

You claim they merely have a "sci-fi backdrop"? What is that supposed to mean? Shooters can't be pure "sci-fi" to you? You mention Alien and Star Trek as things that are "sci-fi" to you. Well then, how do you feel about the "Star Trek: Elite Force" games , or the upcoming "Aliens: Colonial Marines" game? Are either of those not "sci-fi" to you solely because they're first-person shooters? And why do you say that "hard" sci-fi is the "proper" type, when Star Trek is in fact on of the softest varieties of sci-fi? Your arguments have more holes in them than swiss cheese. Spare me your philosophical claptrap about what is or isn't "proper" Sci-Fi. In the end, you're just saying trying to pass off your subjective opinions as objective facts. "Shooter with a sci-fi backdrop" is pretty much the same as saying "sci-fi shooter" anyway.

You seem to me missing my point. Not all sci-fi is automatically good for one thing. What I'm meaning is that Mass Effect started off as a homage to the great sci-fi movies and shows of the late 70's to early 90's, most notably the 1980's stuff in the middle. That's the feeling and style they were going for which has been mentioned by Casey Hudson, Mac Walters, Derek Watts and others behind the scenes. With ME2 and now ME3, they seem to be drifting away from that and heading more towards the more modern action sci-fi movies which don't really fit that style. Halo and Gears were never really trying to harken back to those classic-era, almost golden age of sci-fi stuff that Mass Effect was all about. They were also never really about being an experience in the same way, and the basic gameplay was the main focus, while Mass Effect was about the immersion and experience.

Your "brown" accusations are wildly exaggerated. Halo has had a colorful palette from the start, and Gears became progressively more colorful in each game. The third one is easily as colorful as Uncharted or Crysis. The modern military games, like CoD are Battlefield, are also far more colorful than you give them credit for (Rio levels in MW2, Paris levels in BF3, etc). And if you think that those games don't require thinking, remember that their primary appeal is in their multiplayer, where thinking is obviously required to perform well (except for the occassional cheater).

Please. Even Gears 3 has that grey, washed-out look to it everywhere, even if the locales weren't as literally grey as the original. I think you're taking my "brown" comment a tad too literal. I generally mean when I use the term "the same brown mush" when referring to the simple fact that most AAA games these days are becoming largely the same. That's what most of it means and refers to: the samey genericism of today's big titles and how they're all essentially becoming the same story-driven, semi-cinemati action games with light RPG elements here and there. It doesn't necessarily mean they're all literally brown like Rage.

However, that said, a lot of them seem to want to either wash the colours out or put a yellowish brown filter over everything, which is just getting tiresome. It doesn't make things more realistic and gritty; it's just pretentious and annoying. You mention Uncharted and Crysis, which both suffered this. It befell Dragon Age 2 even. Mass Effect is hard to tell... mainly because Tuchanka, Rannoch, Mars and Sur'kesh all kind of have it, but the locales might warrant it. Earth didn't seem to thankfully. I suppose The Citadel will be the real test. Personally I preferred ME1's overall cleaner look.

As for "mindless, action-oriented Michael Bay'sploshuns", let's take a look at the trailers for some of those games.
www.youtube.com/watch
Gears of War 3 "Ashes to Ashes" - clearly this game just has "mindless" written all over it <_<
www.youtube.com/watch
Gears of War 3 "Dust to Dust" - No emotion or maturity whatsoever <_<
www.youtube.com/watch
Halo Reach "Deliver Hope" - Yup, nothing here but mindless action and explosions. Bay would be proud <_<

Perhaps you should do some more research before you make such blind accusations.

All your proving now is that these games are actually doing a better job at looking credible and deep than Mass Effect is lately. So, you're essentially just saying that BioWare's marketing lately sucks and that even games that don't have a terrible lot of depth and are made for the masses are doing a better job at looking more than they are than Mass Effect 3 is.

[Terror_K]

SirEtchwart wrote...

Wait, what? 

No, seriously, what?

Far Cry 3 is on a flipping tropical island, Max Payne 3 is in San Paulo, and Bioshock Infinite IS IN THE SKY. How do any of those scream "generic brown mush"? Are we watching the same video?

They all still have that stupid yellowish-brown filter over the lens of the camera 24/7. I've been to tropical islands before, and they only look even remotely like that in the late evening. I don't recall there being a yellowish-brown filter over my eyes like that.

[Chuvvy]

Terror_K wrote...

someguy1231 wrote...

One more thing, Terror_K. You might want to watch this video:

www.youtube.com/watch

How much "brown mush" did you see in that video?

A lot.

Darkness II: Not really, admittedly.
Syndicate Remake: Basically is the conversion of a deep strategy game from 1992/93 into a gritty brown shooter.
Spec Ops: Yes.
Max Payne 3 :Yes
Ghost Recon FS: Yes
Counterstrike: Yes
Borderlands 2: Yes
Farcry 3: Yes
Prey 2: Not really.
Halo 4: Yes
BioShock Infinite: Half and half.

Your bias is ****ing shocking. Syndicate is Cyberpunk, meaing bright colors and neon. Max Payne has always been dark and gritty, it's sort of a staple of the series. I agree with you on the next two, borderlands two is a cartoon world and we saw a snow and grassy field envioroment. Far Cry 3 is a tropical island, I saw none of the brown filter you mentioned. Prey 2 is also Cyberpunk, for Halo 4 all we saw was an exploding ship, which is indicative of the actual game. And it's safe to assume it will be colorful because all the previous entries except maybe two have been. BioShock Infinite is ****ing Steampunk, when's the last time you saw a steampunk game?

[Terror_K]

Slidell505 wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

someguy1231 wrote...

One more thing, Terror_K. You might want to watch this video:

www.youtube.com/watch

How much "brown mush" did you see in that video?

A lot.

Darkness II: Not really, admittedly.
Syndicate Remake: Basically is the conversion of a deep strategy game from 1992/93 into a gritty brown shooter.
Spec Ops: Yes.
Max Payne 3 :Yes
Ghost Recon FS: Yes
Counterstrike: Yes
Borderlands 2: Yes
Farcry 3: Yes
Prey 2: Not really.
Halo 4: Yes
BioShock Infinite: Half and half.

Your bias is ****ing shocking. Syndicate is Cyberpunk, meaing bright colors and neon. Max Payne has always been dark and gritty, it's sort of a staple of the series. I agree with you on the next two, borderlands two is a cartoon world and we saw a snow and grassy field envioroment. Far Cry 3 is a tropical island, I saw none of the brown filter you mentioned. Prey 2 is also Cyberpunk, for Halo 4 all we saw was an exploding ship, which is indicative of the actual game. And it's safe to assume it will be colorful because all the previous entries except maybe two have been. BioShock Infinite is ****ing Steampunk, when's the last time you saw a steampunk game?

Actually, to be fair, the original Syndicate had a highly yellow and brown pallette as well, but the gameplay wasn't generic. In fact, rather innovative at the time. It's the gameplay in the remake that comes across as brown and generic in that case.

Max Payne was a film noir style affair, and while admittedly dark more visually themed around high contrast darker colours (blacks, greys, dark blues, etc.). MP3 has a much more brownish-yellow look to it from what I've seen.

I actually enjoyed Borderlands, despite its brownness. Not sure what Borderlands 2 will bring to the fore.

Farcry 3. Well, let me just ask this: what does it really bring that I haven't done, got or seen playing the original or Crysis?

Halo 4 is Microsoft and 343 milking a game series that should have ended with Halo 3 (at least as far as story goes, because Reach was probably the best of the Halo titles, truth be told. At least it was before 343 patched it just prior to Anniversary (which was ass, btw) late last year).

My main point is, the whole lot seem awfully generic from what I've seen, whether they are literally brown or not. BioShock Infinite may be an exception, but I thought even the original BioShock was overrated (good, no question... but overrated) and that BioShock 2 was, quite frankly, rubbish.

[Xewaka]

There is a logical fallacy in this argument, and it is to catalogue Roleplaying games as niche markets. The sheer amount of RPGs published in a regular stream across the last twenty years ought to discredit such claims.
The explosive sales success of Modern Warfare and WoW is an aberration, not the rule for "mainstream".

[Sarcastic]

Xewaka wrote...

There is a logical fallacy in this argument, and it is to catalogue Roleplaying games as niche markets. The sheer amount of RPGs published in a regular stream across the last twenty years ought to discredit such claims.
The explosive sales success of Modern Warfare and WoW is an aberration, not the rule for "mainstream".

I agree with this and I will take it a step futher and say that the adoption of ME3 is due to several things...

1. Widespread marketing, far beyond that of ME1 or ME2. (Get more people to notice it.)
2. The completion of the trilogy. (See how it ends.)
3. The meshing of genre's and gameply mechanics. (Get more people to find something about it they like.)

[Hillbillyshep]

I think that BW is actually horribly unbalancing the game, by adding too much single things catering to only the sub-factions of those fanbases/users.
For the fanbase, they´we have added stuff like gay/bi-romances, more rpg-elements. Those are good things.
But then they´we done things like completely sidelining the entire ME2-cast and bringing back the whole other ME1-squad, except for the coolest and probably most used squaddie-ME1-wise, Wrex. And also multiple completely new squaddies practically nobody wanted.
But for the general user, they´we given Snooki and James, multiplayer and a separate shooter mode,

[Had-to-say]

Men lie, women lie, but numbers don't lie.

[someguy1231]

Terror_K wrote...

someguy1231 wrote...

One more thing, Terror_K. You might want to watch this video:

www.youtube.com/watch

How much "brown mush" did you see in that video?

A lot.

Darkness II: Not really, admittedly.
Syndicate Remake: Basically is the conversion of a deep strategy game from 1992/93 into a gritty brown shooter.
Spec Ops: Yes.
Max Payne 3 :Yes
Ghost Recon FS: Yes
Counterstrike: Yes
Borderlands 2: Yes
Farcry 3: Yes
Prey 2: Not really.
Halo 4: Yes
BioShock Infinite: Half and half.

You think all of those are "brown mush"? Really? I'm starting to think an FPS needs to resemble Candyland for you to not think it's "brown mush"...

[someguy1231]

Terror_K wrote...

Avatar was trite. It was only really a bigh-grossing film because of its fancy CGI and the director attached to it. You can't point at Star Wars, it's been around too long. Skyrim actually proves that you can still make an RPG and it be popular. Most of the problem isn't the masses themselves, but the fallacy game developers believe that certain audiences aren't out there or that you need to target the CoD set to make a proft. I saw developers on the Dragon Age forums saying this all the time when people were complaining about how DA2 was looking and how it was basically being dumbed down compared to the original. That's BS. The audience is there, you're simply not choosing to tap it because you think that all gamers care about is CoD, Gears and Halo. It's the developers who are at fault for believing this nonsense more than anything.

All I was saying is that your claims that "sci-fi nerds and RPG geeks" are a "niche"  or aren't the "masses"is utterly wrong. I provided three counter-examples, and you reply once again by downplaying them or dismissing them for inane, illogical reasons ("around too long"? "fancy CGI"?). And do you know why Skyrim was so popular? It removed the things people hated in Oblivion! (overhauled leveling system, removing worthless stats, etc) And spare me yet another one of your rants against CoD (I actually dislike CoD too, but I don't bring it up every other post).

There's more than that. It's at the end of every video, and in most videos at some point. Then there's things like the Omni-Blade edition releasing in Australia/NZ, the inflatable Omni-Blades given out at E3, the fact almost every piece of artwork with Shepard on it lately has him/her with it, the fact that the new Shepard T-shirts have Shepard with it on it. You say I'm projecting my own hatred of it onto BioWare, but the only reason I hate it is because of the way they keep going on about it and shoving it down my throat. If they'd just brought it up once or twice and otherwise left it in the background it'd be fine, but they just keep jerking it off in my face in the most immature and "dudebro" manner like it's "teh most badassss!!1 thing of all time0rz!!1one!!"

Uh huh, and Bioware "shoved" the Avenger Rifle and similar weapons "down our throat" in promos for ME1 and 2, but I never heard anyone complain about that. Christ, it's just a friggin melee weapon added due to popular request for a CQC weapon. I still don't see how any of that constitutes "shoving down our throat". I know you don't like it, but that doesn't give you license to whine everytime it appears in promos. Oh, and I still don't buy the "dudebro" assocation either. Weapons based on energy/lasers are a staple of sci-fi (SW's lightsabers, Halo's energy sword, etc). You just using "dudebro" as a catch-all term for "gamer I don't like". Actually, it seems almost every use of "dudebro" here falls under that.

You seem to me missing my point. Not all sci-fi is automatically good for one thing. What I'm meaning is that Mass Effect started off as a homage to the great sci-fi movies and shows of the late 70's to early 90's, most notably the 1980's stuff in the middle. That's the feeling and style they were going for which has been mentioned by Casey Hudson, Mac Walters, Derek Watts and others behind the scenes. With ME2 and now ME3, they seem to be drifting away from that and heading more towards the more modern action sci-fi movies which don't really fit that style. Halo and Gears were never really trying to harken back to those classic-era, almost golden age of sci-fi stuff that Mass Effect was all about. They were also never really about being an experience in the same way, and the basic gameplay was the main focus, while Mass Effect was about the immersion and experience.

In other words, "Sci-fi is only Sci-fi if I like it." Yea, sure, whatever you say. <_<

Of course, not everything is automatically good if it's in a certain genre. But you've continuously treated sci-fi you don't like as if it weren't really "sci-fi". It's the "No True Scotsman" fallacy I've brought up again and again. And as someone who's watched alot of Sci-Fi from the 70s to 90s, I've never really seen ME1's supposed "homage" to that. As for action, I actually found the *SPOILERS* Citadetl ending sequence in ME1 far more "Michael Bay-ish" than anything in ME2.

Please. Even Gears 3 has that grey, washed-out look to it everywhere, even if the locales weren't as literally grey as the original. I think you're taking my "brown" comment a tad too literal. I generally mean when I use the term "the same brown mush" when referring to the simple fact that most AAA games these days are becoming largely the same. That's what most of it means and refers to: the samey genericism of today's big titles and how they're all essentially becoming the same story-driven, semi-cinemati action games with light RPG elements here and there. It doesn't necessarily mean they're all literally brown like Rage.

Oh, trying to backtrack now, eh? "No, what meant was..." Please, you know what you said and you can't try to retcon yourself. And try actually playing Gears of War 3 before passing judgement on its color. I went into it already knowing it would be colorful, and I was still astonished by how colorful it really was.

However, that said, a lot of them seem to want to either wash the colours out or put a yellowish brown filter over everything, which is just getting tiresome. It doesn't make things more realistic and gritty; it's just pretentious and annoying. You mention Uncharted and Crysis, which both suffered this. It befell Dragon Age 2 even. Mass Effect is hard to tell... mainly because Tuchanka, Rannoch, Mars and Sur'kesh all kind of have it, but the locales might warrant it. Earth didn't seem to thankfully. I suppose The Citadel will be the real test. Personally I preferred ME1's overall cleaner look.

Really? You took two game franchises which have been heralded for their revolutionary graphic design and color palette and claim they still had a "yellowish brown filter" over everything? Okay, you've just lost every last bit of your credibility regarding complaints that a game looks "too brown".

All your proving now is that these games are actually doing a better job at looking credible and deep than Mass Effect is lately. So, you're essentially just saying that BioWare's marketing lately sucks and that even games that don't have a terrible lot of depth and are made for the masses are doing a better job at looking more than they are than Mass Effect 3 is.

*facepalm*

-Gears of War expanded universe: 5 novels, ongoing monthly comics published since December 2008
-Halo expanded universe: 10 novels, 6 comic series of varying length, 5 supplemental books, an anthology film (Halo Legends)
-Mass Effect expanded universe: 4 novels (3 if you exclude Deception), 7 comic books

# of pages at Halo wiki: 7,292
# of pages at Mass Effect wiki: 1,940

Sources:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Gears_of_War_media
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Halo_media
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Mass_Effect_media
halo.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page
masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Mass_Effect_Wiki

Explain to me again how Halo and Gears are "lacking in depth", especially compared to Mass Effect?

Oh, and you claim these games are doing a better job at "looking more than they are" than ME3. How do you know that if you havent, you know....actually played them???? <_<

[SnakeStrike8]

I feel that Bioware's hedging their bets a little too much. This was most notable in Mass Effect; it was an action RPG, the likes of which I had never seen before from Bioware (Jade Empire is the closest they'd ever come to such a thing). It was clearly a shooter-based system; players had to rely on their own mouse or joystick control skills to succeed, rather than a plethora of numbers that a traditional RPG has. Yet at the same time there was still character progression, long dialogues, a beefy codex full of somewhat-well-researched intel that no-one was required to read and the whole buying and selling mechanic. As I played the game, I had to wonder who exactly Bioware was trying to please: The old-school RPG crowd who have traditionally formed the majority of Bioware's consumer base? Or the new age of gamers who don't find cover machanics out of place?
ME 2 was a comparatively good step: Bioware set out with the clear goal of making a shooter rather than a Shooter-RPG thing, and it did quite well. The RPG mechanics crowd (myself included) felt quite miffed at the change in direction, but at least it seemed as if Bioware had decided to go after one specific demographic of gamers.
It remains to be seen how ME 3 will turn out: will there be just the right mix of shooter mechanics and RPG features to please both crowds? Hopefully.

[Terror_K]

someguy1231 wrote...

All I was saying is that your claims that "sci-fi nerds and RPG geeks" are a "niche"  or aren't the "masses"is utterly wrong. I provided three counter-examples, and you reply once again by downplaying them or dismissing them for inane, illogical reasons ("around too long"? "fancy CGI"?). And do you know why Skyrim was so popular? It removed the things people hated in Oblivion! (overhauled leveling system, removing worthless stats, etc) And spare me yet another one of your rants against CoD (I actually dislike CoD too, but I don't bring it up every other post).

If sci-fi isn't niche these days, how come there aren't any strong sci-fi shows on television any more? Gone are the times of Star Trek, Stargate, Firefly, Farscape, etc. there's pretty much nothing now but the new Dr. Who series.

In other words, "Sci-fi is only Sci-fi if I like it." Yea, sure, whatever you say. <_<

Of course, not everything is automatically good if it's in a certain genre. But you've continuously treated sci-fi you don't like as if it weren't really "sci-fi". It's the "No True Scotsman" fallacy I've brought up again and again.

No, you're just putting words in my mouth because I wasn't specific enough for you and didn't explain every intricate detail about what I was talking about. Let me put it this way: Halo and Gears are sci-fi, yes,, but they're a completely different style than the type of thing Mass Effect was originally going for. If Mass Effect was Blade Runner, Dune, Star Trek II, etc. then Halo and Gears are more akin to Michael Bay's Transformers, J.J. Abrams Star Trek and Stargate Universe.

And as someone who's watched alot of Sci-Fi from the 70s to 90s, I've never really seen ME1's supposed "homage" to that. As for action, I actually found the *SPOILERS* Citadetl ending sequence in ME1 far more "Michael Bay-ish" than anything in ME2.

See it or not, that's what they were going for. Casey Hudson, Mac Walters, Derek Watts and others have all said this in the past at some point. If it's not obvious to you from the visual design and heavily sythed score though, I don't know what else I can do to make it obvious to you. It's not exactly subtle.

And as for the last poist, nothing to say here except that I disagree completely. Not every action-packed, epic battle is "Michael Bay-ish" it's all to do with the context, style and execution. If you're putting style ahead of substance with the likes of having squaddies non-sensically running around in spandex in dangerous environments just to make them look badass then you're doing it wrong. It's hard to explain because it's very much a "feel" thing, but ME2 reminded me too much of the likes of today's modern action movies and felt too willing to throw sense out the window in favour of being "teh badassorz!!1"

Really? You took two game franchises which have been heralded for their revolutionary graphic design and color palette and claim they still had a "yellowish brown filter" over everything? Okay, you've just lost every last bit of your credibility regarding complaints that a game looks "too brown".

BioWare said the same thing about their Dragon Age 2 visual retcon, but I personally found it far more generic by today's standards. Uncharted seems to have a permanent yellow-ish brown filter over the lens, and you're quite frankly blind if you can't see it.

*facepalm*

-Gears of War expanded universe: 5 novels, ongoing monthly comics published since December 2008
-Halo expanded universe: 10 novels, 6 comic series of varying length, 5 supplemental books, an anthology film (Halo Legends)
-Mass Effect expanded universe: 4 novels (3 if you exclude Deception), 7 comic books

# of pages at Halo wiki: 7,292
# of pages at Mass Effect wiki: 1,940

Sources:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Gears_of_War_media
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Halo_media
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Mass_Effect_media
halo.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page
masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Mass_Effect_Wiki

Explain to me again how Halo and Gears are "lacking in depth", especially compared to Mass Effect?

Oh, and you claim these games are doing a better job at "looking more than they are" than ME3. How do you know that if you havent, you know....actually played them???? <_<

For starters, I have played most of the Halo games, and the only Gears game I haven't played is the third one. So... yeah.

Secondly: What, so just because these things have supplementary material it's automatically good, deep stuff? I have a close friend who has read all the Halo novels and he says the damn things are always contradicting the game lore and each other and retconning things all over the show. I've actually seen Halo Legends, and that was pretentious ass.

As for Gears, it doesn't deserve to be given that much supplementary material. It's a fun game series and all, but it really is overhyped and doesn't warrant getting a bunch of novels and comics considering what it is. I quite frankly find it an insult that it gets so much given other games that deserve it more. I remember back on the old BioWare boards shortly after ME1 had come out expressing my frustration that I could buy generic Locust Soldier #7 and Random Red Spartan #3, but there wasn't even a Wrex, Tali, Garrus, Liara or Saren figure.

And here's the thing: both these IPs are getting so much stuff not because they're fantastic and deep, but because they're popular, and they're popular because they pander to the mainstream so much. Gears of War in particular which pretty much just is, "you play a thick-necked muscle guy with a gun, there are Locust, kill them!" in the end. It's the opposite of rocket science, and that's why it became popular: it requires no thought and players can just jump in and go hard without having to engage the grey-matter at all.

Modifié par Terror_K, 08 février 2012 - 04:10 .

[Cainne Chapel]

TK... I dont think Sci Fi is Niche at all these days.

heck I dont even think Fantasy is Niche anymore.

Of course they're not gameshow/reality tv/cop drama popular right now, but TV shows are cyclical and they'll be in fashion again in due time.

[Foxtrot 212]

The sad part is I agree with all of TKs posts.......

[WizenSlinky0]

Terror_K wrote...
they keep going on about it and shoving it down my throat.

they just keep jerking it off in my face

*snicker*

Oh come on, you're making me feel like a little kid now.

Which depresses me, because I know you're doing this on purpose!

[CerberusSoldier]

I find it really funny you people do not understand but EA has to make money on this game and I will say this if shareholders and investors do not see this game making money catering to a nich group then they will find a way to change it . it better sell the 10 million BF 3 sold or else I bet we will see changes to it

[incinerator950]

There is a difference in understanding something, and accepting it.