645 réponses à ce sujet

[Dariansarr]

Modifié par Dariansarr, 17 février 2012 - 07:14 .

[ratdogman]

hmm... I know I was one of the original "haters" posting on here, but looking towards the end of () Anderson's animations don't look so bad. Guess we'll know in a few weeks time anyways... fingers crossed!

[Wolf]

Fpriestly wrote...

Gaiden96 wrote...

How does it affect your enjoyment in any significant way though?

Unless you're playing the game for the mechanics alone I don't see how it would be a deterrent to something as broad and expansive as ME3.

As one poster above said, it's an immersion breaker.

Not just that though.  It just irks me knowing that I've paid for mediocrity from a game developer...

Ever played Batman Arkham City?  It's the best comic book hero game ever, and one of the best games of all time.  The metacritic score is insane.

Anyway, Rocksteady, an amateur developer with only one title under their belt managed to pull off something that Bioware has never been able to do, despite their much greater experience.

Rocksteady made a game (using UE3.5) that gave their fans/consumers high resolution textures, PhysX, 3D Vision, realistic looking hair and hair physics, smooth animations, awesome gameplay.....and the list goes on.

Now if Rocksteady can do it, why can't Bioware?  Bioware can do it I have no doubt, but they cut one too many corners, and thats mostly because their fanbase allows them to do so.

How many times have I heard on these forums,"You don't play Bioware games for the graphics, you play them for the story."

But who says we have to choose between a great story and great graphics?  The two have been merged successfully before many times, and since Bioware is supposedly a AAA developer, you'd think they'd have the capability to do it.

But they always fall short, due to laziness I think.

Arkham City is an action game that has one single direction the story can take. 

Mass Effect is an Action-RPG that includes mechanincs like leveling up, power and weapon customization, armor customization, not to mention the crazy amount of characters involved, the story can evolve in very different ways based on decisions previously made and you still need reasonably expansive areas to allow for exploration.

Now, I'm not sure if you know how game development works, but if you think getting all of that in the same space, and getting a performance that can equal that of Arkham City's is simple, you would be wrong.

They have to cut SOME corners, like any developer.

This does not necessarily signify lazyness, it just means they have a LOT more on their hands than Rocksteady.

Rocksteady works within an already established universe, which means all they have to do is have Paul Dini write the story and have their team work on mechanics (which are significantly less than Mass Effect's).

[Wolf]

wijse wrote...

Funny how the people defending the animations stopped doing it after the two pictures were posted. Batman Arkham City animations were awesome on all platforms. There no excuses. 

I stopped posting because I can't hang around here all day and night. School and whatnot.

And read my previous post for clarification on this.

Modifié par Gaiden96, 17 février 2012 - 11:29 .

[bullz3ye]

After playing Deus Ex Human Revolution this month the graphics in this demo were mostly a welcomed sight.

[Kakita Tatsumaru]

Mettyx wrote...
P.S.
Also you people who own 7 year old console hardware and buy games for it, there is a good reason to believe that ME3 deteriorated so much because they are trying to stuff so much stuff in it, there is no room for fluid detailed animations anymore.

I hope you are proud of yourselves for halting progress and actually degrading games for almost a decade now.

ME1 was a Xbox games to begins with, so it's normal that it remains that way until the end of the trilogy.
And actually, you should remember that "progress" you so much yell for has been reducing the content of games for years and made the games more costly yet less respectful of the customers.

[Oloos]

Folks, remember last year with the DA2 demo.

The running/walking animations in the demo where awful (for the female Hawke at least) but fixed in the released game.

We can assume it will be the same with ME3.

Hope so at least...

[SliPaladin]

VeR0se wrote...

SliPaladin wrote...

Inb4itsjustademoanimationswillbefixed

cancel preorder?

No I'm not that ****ed up. 

[Static Jak]

SliPaladin wrote...

VeR0se wrote...

SliPaladin wrote...

Inb4itsjustademoanimationswillbefixed

cancel preorder?

No I'm not that ****ed up. 

I can't really remember any noticable differences of the animation between the demo and DA2s full release.

[Freakiq]

What I don't understand is how they actually made the animations worse than the previous 2 games.

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

Freakiq wrote...

What I don't understand is how they actually made the animations worse than the previous 2 games.

One word: Rushed

[GreenSoda]

Freakiq wrote...

What I don't understand is how they actually made the animations worse than the previous 2 games.

They try to push more things through a bottleneck (console ram) of the same size ?

[Adanu]

gabe2gg wrote...

Zanallen wrote...

I can't even begin to care about the animations.

Isnt it embarrasing that games like Batman AA/AC has 10X better animations with half the budget?

Are you a game dev in both studios privy to all the workings of each game?

[Rickin10]

gabe2gg wrote...

Zanallen wrote...

I can't even begin to care about the animations.

Isnt it embarrasing that games like Batman AA/AC has 10X better animations with half the budget?

Ok, name me one, just one, of those so-called 'animations' that's better than Anderson's running.

[Capeo]

Gaiden96 wrote...

Fpriestly wrote...

Gaiden96 wrote...

How does it affect your enjoyment in any significant way though?

Unless you're playing the game for the mechanics alone I don't see how it would be a deterrent to something as broad and expansive as ME3.

As one poster above said, it's an immersion breaker.

Not just that though.  It just irks me knowing that I've paid for mediocrity from a game developer...

Ever played Batman Arkham City?  It's the best comic book hero game ever, and one of the best games of all time.  The metacritic score is insane.

Anyway, Rocksteady, an amateur developer with only one title under their belt managed to pull off something that Bioware has never been able to do, despite their much greater experience.

Rocksteady made a game (using UE3.5) that gave their fans/consumers high resolution textures, PhysX, 3D Vision, realistic looking hair and hair physics, smooth animations, awesome gameplay.....and the list goes on.

Now if Rocksteady can do it, why can't Bioware?  Bioware can do it I have no doubt, but they cut one too many corners, and thats mostly because their fanbase allows them to do so.

How many times have I heard on these forums,"You don't play Bioware games for the graphics, you play them for the story."

But who says we have to choose between a great story and great graphics?  The two have been merged successfully before many times, and since Bioware is supposedly a AAA developer, you'd think they'd have the capability to do it.

But they always fall short, due to laziness I think.

Arkham City is an action game that has one single direction the story can take. 

Mass Effect is an Action-RPG that includes mechanincs like leveling up, power and weapon customization, armor customization, not to mention the crazy amount of characters involved, the story can evolve in very different ways based on decisions previously made and you still need reasonably expansive areas to allow for exploration.

Now, I'm not sure if you know how game development works, but if you think getting all of that in the same space, and getting a performance that can equal that of Arkham City's is simple, you would be wrong.

They have to cut SOME corners, like any developer.

This does not necessarily signify lazyness, it just means they have a LOT more on their hands than Rocksteady.

Rocksteady works within an already established universe, which means all they have to do is have Paul Dini write the story and have their team work on mechanics (which are significantly less than Mass Effect's).

I wouldn't say the mechanics are significantly less than ME's.  In AC Batman has a ton of upgradable tech, all with their own animations, a ton of upgradable moves and the fighting is stunning is it's amazing ability to seemlessly link moves together, all with individual animations.

ME's story isn't all that complex either.  You're choices barely effect anything at all.  They're just markers that change dialog or what cutscene has to run.  It's not the Witcher 2 or FOP where the storyline is massively different depending on what you do.

[andy6915]

Rickin10 wrote...

gabe2gg wrote...

Zanallen wrote...

I can't even begin to care about the animations.

Isnt it embarrasing that games like Batman AA/AC has 10X better animations with half the budget?

Ok, name me one, just one, of those so-called 'animations' that's better than Anderson's running.

Um... All of them. Literally every single animation in the game.

[zoompooky]

andy69156915 wrote...

Um... All of them. Literally every single animation in the game.

Why even compare ME3 to games in different genres anyway?  The ME3 animations are worse than ME2, which in turn was worse than ME1.

But hey, we've got Kinect support and Shepard lets her pistol do her talkin' now.

(Literally - she can't put that thing away so if she's talking to you it's in your face!)

Modifié par zoompooky, 17 février 2012 - 02:04 .

[Valkyre4]

zoompooky wrote...

andy69156915 wrote...

Um... All of them. Literally every single animation in the game.

Why even compare ME3 to games in different genres anyway?  The ME3 animations are worse than ME2, which in turn was worse than ME1.

But hey, we've got Kinect support and Shepard lets her pistol do her talkin' now.

(Literally - she can't put that thing away so if she's talking to you it's in your face!)

Because both games are created using the same tools, ie Unreal engine 3.

And batman Arkham City has bigger environments and a huge number of  quality animations. Hence the excuses used by Bioware for insufficient RAM to put a few more animations in ME3 sound ridiculous to a lot of people that live in 2012.

Modifié par Valkyre4, 17 février 2012 - 02:09 .

[zoompooky]

Valkyre4 wrote...

zoompooky wrote...

andy69156915 wrote...

Um... All of them. Literally every single animation in the game.

Why even compare ME3 to games in different genres anyway?  The ME3 animations are worse than ME2, which in turn was worse than ME1.

But hey, we've got Kinect support and Shepard lets her pistol do her talkin' now.

(Literally - she can't put that thing away so if she's talking to you it's in your face!)

Because both games are created using the same tools, ie Unreal engine 3.

And batman Arkham City has bigger environments and a huge number of  quality animations. Hence the excuses used by Bioware for insufficient RAM to put a few more animations in ME3 sound ridiculous to a lot of people that live in 2012.

You can compare it to AC if you want, but fans will always say "it's not the same type of game".

I'm saying you don't even have to go that far.  You can compare ME3 to it's direct predecessors and it still fails.

[Almostfaceman]

zoompooky wrote...

I'm saying you don't even have to go that far.  You can compare ME3 to it's direct predecessors and it still fails.

Nope.

[andy6915]

Almostfaceman wrote...
Yep.

Fixed it for you.

Modifié par andy69156915, 17 février 2012 - 02:29 .

[Almostfaceman]

andy69156915 wrote...

Almostfaceman wrote...
Nope.

You're right Almostfaceman. I'll name my first child after you.

Fixed it for you.

[Alex_SM]

Rickin10 wrote...

gabe2gg wrote...

Zanallen wrote...

I can't even begin to care about the animations.

Isnt it embarrasing that games like Batman AA/AC has 10X better animations with half the budget?

Ok, name me one, just one, of those so-called 'animations' that's better than Anderson's running.

Better in the funny way? or better in the "actually better" way?

[andy6915]

Almostfaceman wrote...

andy69156915 wrote...

Almostfaceman wrote...
Nope.

You're right Almostfaceman. I'll name my first child after you.

Fixed it for you.

Yes, I will name my first child after you. I don't know why though. Maybe you leveled your Force persuasion up.