337 réponses à ce sujet

[egervari]

BlahDog wrote...

Travie wrote...

BlahDog wrote...

CoD actually proves otherwise. Like it or not CoD displays excellent RPG elements in it's multiplayer. Sure, it has a short, terrible, and linear story but you can't say RPGs and FPSs don't go together.

Calling incremental changes 'RPG elements' was always a bit of a stretch to begin with. Its like calling shooting things an FPS element.

What would you call them? Because I have half a fanbase saying the loss of weapon upgrades set back ME2 in the RPG department.

Attachments are incremental stat changes that allow for customization and a form of leveling up. Not to mention the use of XP and a monetary system. That just screams RPG.

RPGs are more than just the stat-mechanics though. With RPGs, you generally need a strong story, theme, setting...  strong exploration and discovery, etc. COD doesn't really have this.

[DJBare]

BlahDog wrote...

DJBare wrote...

It's really nice to see some folk actually having an intelligent debate with egervari, I expected the OP to be hung, drawn and quartered for having an "opinion".

And it's wrong to think that the OP's opinion is incorrect?

Opinions are neither correct or incorrect, they are opinions.

[izmirtheastarach]

egervari wrote...

I enjoy multiple genres too, and I have liked some FPS's believe it or not. But if I were to rank my favourite genres, FPS would not be among them. From all the friends and family members I have, I see the level of like/dislike between genres all the time. Unless my world/community is just so different than the rest of the world, I think I am right to say that the overlap between FPS and RPG isn't that good.

Why then is a company like EA trying to cram them together? Do you think maybe it's because their market research shows a different picture then the one you are painting? Your own anecdotal experience may show one thing, but these companies are doing what the market wants, not what you and your own circle of friends want.

Modifié par izmirtheastarach, 17 février 2012 - 04:37 .

[egervari]

izmirtheastarach wrote...

egervari wrote...

I enjoy multiple genres too, and I have liked some FPS's believe it or not. But if I were to rank my favourite genres, FPS would not be among them. From all the friends and family members I have, I see the level of like/dislike between genres all the time. Unless my world/community is just so different than the rest of the world, I think I am right to say that the overlap between FPS and RPG isn't that good.

Why then is a company like EA trying to cram them together? Do you think maybe it's because their market research shows a different picture then the one you are painting? Your own anecdotal experience may show one thing, but these companies are doing what the market wants, not what you and your own circle of friends want.

I don't think their marketing research shows anything different. If it did, they would be marketing the game as an RPG/FPS hybrid... which they aren't. They are purposefully aiming this at FPS gamers specifically.

[LenaMarie]

izmirtheastarach wrote...

egervari wrote...

I enjoy multiple genres too, and I have liked some FPS's believe it or not. But if I were to rank my favourite genres, FPS would not be among them. From all the friends and family members I have, I see the level of like/dislike between genres all the time. Unless my world/community is just so different than the rest of the world, I think I am right to say that the overlap between FPS and RPG isn't that good.

Why then is a company like EA trying to cram them together? Do you think maybe it's because their market research shows a different picture then the one you are painting? Your own anecdotal experience may show one thing, but these companies are doing what the market wants, not what you and your own circle of friends want.

I'll tell you something about EA and other companies market research. Most of them have gone on record stating they use METACRITIC. I think that should speak volumes.

[Giantdeathrobot]

You do realize the point of marketing is to appeal to new audiences. As in, what's the use of vaunting a game's good points to a group that already loves it? Almost by definition, the so-called 'true fans'' are excluded from mainstream marketing because they're not the targets at all. And it means almost nothing to me; DA:O had awful marketing from my perspective (CGI trailers looking nothing like the actual game, Marilyn F****** Manson, ect) but I love the game so much I will probably have my copy buried with me or something.

[egervari]

Giantdeathrobot wrote...

You do realize the point of marketing is to appeal to new audiences. As in, what's the use of vaunting a game's good points to a group that already loves it? Almost by definition, the so-called 'true fans'' are excluded from mainstream marketing because they're not the targets at all. And it means almost nothing to me; DA:O had awful marketing from my perspective (CGI trailers looking nothing like the actual game, Marilyn F****** Manson, ect) but I love the game so much I will probably have my copy buried with me or something.

They should also not alienate the existing audiences. Do no harm.

I think they could do a little more to demonstrate the other aspects of the game, but even if they tried to do that at the last minute (which is what they did with dragon age 2), I would still be worried precisely because of what they did with dragon age 2.

If Dragon Age 2 wasn't the piece of trash that it was, I wouldn't have posted this topic. I would have had 100% faith in bioware still. But the marketing for DA2 was definitely not the core gamers that enjoyed the original game... and we got hosed in the end. I am sort of thinking the same thing is going to happen again.

Modifié par egervari, 17 février 2012 - 04:44 .

[izmirtheastarach]

egervari wrote...

I don't think their marketing research shows anything different. If it did, they would be marketing the game as an RPG/FPS hybrid... which they aren't. They are purposefully aiming this at FPS gamers specifically.

I suspect that is because they think they already have the RPG players they are going to, and are trying to interest FPS players. It's really pretty simple. I still maintain that gamers are gamers, but I know that won't fly here. People want to classify themselves, and paint themselves into little boxes. I just don't get it.

Modifié par izmirtheastarach, 17 février 2012 - 04:45 .

[R3DKL0UD]

egervari wrote...

izmirtheastarach wrote...

Why then is a company like EA trying to cram them together? Do you think maybe it's because their market research shows a different picture then the one you are painting? Your own anecdotal experience may show one thing, but these companies are doing what the market wants, not what you and your own circle of friends want.

Did you guys try the multiplayer component? It's... fun. Don't knock it if you haven't leveled a character up a bit. I think your missing the possibilities of combining powers and using teamwork with other humans. An adept pulls a shielded target up while a vanguard charges in. A soldier takes the brunt of fire while a infiltrator takes out the rear. It's fun to use teamwork and combine Mass Effect powers. I think that was the angle. Go read some of the comments about multiplayer in the forums. Of course it's not the storied, deep Mass Effect we know and love, but if you are a gamer and a fan of the series, chances are you'll enjoy.

Modifié par R3DKL0UD, 17 février 2012 - 04:57 .

[LenaMarie]

izmirtheastarach wrote...

egervari wrote...

I don't think their marketing research shows anything different. If it did, they would be marketing the game as an RPG/FPS hybrid... which they aren't. They are purposefully aiming this at FPS gamers specifically.

I suspect that is because they think they already have the RPG players they are going to, and are trying to interest FPS players. It's really pretty simple. I still maintain that gamers are gamers, but I know that won't fly here. People want to classify themselves, and paint themselves into little boxes. I just don't get it.

Some people only like certain types of games, thats why. If you focus your time and money on RPGs or Strategy games are you going to say you like all games when you hate Flight, Racing, FPS etc? Maybe you like every kind of game but that is not so for many.

Especially MMO players, you cant really call them gamers as most MMO players I 've ever heard of never play any other games but MMOs.

[Ihatebadgames]

I Love turn based strategy and turn based RPGs, have you seen one of those lately?Use to love Final Fantasy,can't stand JRPGs anymore.Twitch sells to a broader group.Faster movement catchs the eye,go really fast and the eye can't see all the detail so you don't have to put all the detail in,cheaper.So I've settled for a good story with tugs on the heart strings (a good soap opera)and hopefully lots of exploration.Wish I could be around in twenty to thirty years when the shooter crowd loses out to the newest twitch.
I've never bought a shooter brand new.I'll get it when it's in the bargain bin,if then.

Modifié par Ihatebadgames, 17 février 2012 - 04:50 .

[izmirtheastarach]

Yeah, I thought MP would be totally worthless, but I've put quite a few hours into it already.

[egervari]

izmirtheastarach wrote...

egervari wrote...

I don't think their marketing research shows anything different. If it did, they would be marketing the game as an RPG/FPS hybrid... which they aren't. They are purposefully aiming this at FPS gamers specifically.

I suspect that is because they think they already have the RPG players they are going to, and are trying to interest FPS players. It's really pretty simple. I still maintain that gamers are gamers, but I know that won't fly here. People want to classify themselves, and paint themselves into little boxes. I just don't get it.

I am a gamer, but I am not the kind of gamer that likes absolutely everything - and I think a lot of gamers are like that too. Of course, I'll probably enjoy a 9.5/10 or 10/10 in another genre - just because it's put together well... but I would not likely play the average games in that genre. With RPG's though, I will likely play many 7.5's and 8.5's just because I enjoy most of them. So my tastes as a gamer generally lean in only a few directions. I think most gamers are this way at the end of the day.

While I think they can get some FPS to cross over, I just ask... at what cost? They tried to get more action-oriented gamers to play Dragon Age 2... but by doing that, they removed so many of the great things that people loved about Origin right from the game simply because their "studies" showed that the casuals hated this and that about it. The end result? They made a game almost nobody really loved - action gamer or hard-core RPG fans alike. It's a completely forgettable game, except for maybe how bad it was.

[nitefyre410]

egervari wrote...

nitefyre410 wrote...

TheDarkShape wrote...

So who is your target market? The people that grew up with your rich,
deep RPGs, or the xbox fps gamers who don't give a rat's ass about
story, character development and character progression? Who is it
Bioware?

First, a question: why do fans always have to feel so 'special'?  That fan whose first BioWare game was Mass Effect is just as important as you are, Anonymous Baldur's Gate fan (and I say that as someone whose first BW game certainly pre-dated ME).

But to the question, think about this from a logical, business-oriented standpoint.  Do you target fans of a genre that usually sells 1-2m copies with a AAA title, or do you focus on fans that push genre titles closer to 10m copies sold?

  

^this  . 

I understand this in theory. But again, look at Dragon Age 2. This game was expected to out-perform the original DA: Origins by many millions - using the same logic as you stated above. They even made design decisions that they KNEW would off-put existing fans, in the hope of capturing that ever more expansive market. Now ask yourself, how well did that work out for them? Not very well. They would have been FAR better off sticking to a similar formula with general improvements all-across the board. DA2 was a trash game, and their sales suffered because of it. 

You could argue that ME3 will be different, and maybe so, but this risk they are playing doesn't always pan out like they think it will.

 


The answer to  question is  rather simple... first off in DA 2 case it was completely  and utterly rushed.  The only thing that may be worst than  not changing  is changing too fast.   
 
So what  makes DA both them stand out from say a Skyrim or  a  Dark Souls.    All three games  follow the CRPG formula what makes DA  jump out in a  line up against this too game ... Nothing really.   Darks Souls you have  known diffuculty. Skyrim wide expansive world. So we could say story but  what was great about DA;s story. Good yes but  could have call  Stock Fantasy Story  3 and still been just as good.      

Gameplay  - Skyrim has a wide open leveling system . Dark Souls is grueling but very rewarding.  What about Dragon Age?

A combat system were I'm stuck seeing "Moving to Positon"  more than anything else.

 

Modifié par nitefyre410, 17 février 2012 - 04:53 .

[RoboticWater]

LenaMarie wrote...

Story mode.. and? Its a RPG , it should have a story mode. Action mode is more glaring, as action mode makes the game play like Call of Duty.

No, it allows ME 3 to play out more like a movie. It doesn't just throw out all the cutscenes and make it all combat. It just takes the already existing choices and makes them flow even better. Personally, I won't use the action mode because I want to make decisions and see what happens but maybe after my 7th playthrouh I want to just watch a cinematic game without interruption. I bet that if this mode was called "movie mode" people wouldn't be complaining nearly as much.

In your opinion having a seperate co op is good, but the reality is most RPG players dont want a squad based shooter mode, if they MP they want to go through missions with their friends, not mindlessly frag COD style.

First I'd like to see that statistic and second ME 3 co-op isn't "mindless CoD style", it's essentially a more open ended SP mission. 

Maybe you dont like watching long cutscenes because your the FPS kid Bioware wants but they made a multiplayer game around long cutscenes and watching others make decisions, whats that game called? Oh right, Star Wars: The Old Republic. It works there apparently and its a MMO.

I love watching long cutscenes but not when I can have a good time with my friends. I don't know about the specifics but from what I know TOR doesn't have long cutscenes just a mildly short one with one decision attached to the end of it.

You seem like the target audience, so good for you, you love the boring MP mode, have fun but older fans who are RPG players have other opinions. I just hope the single player gives a fulfilling conclusion to Shepards story, then Im going to be hesitant about bioware's future products, its blatantly obvious who the target audience is. I dont feel entitled they made products for me, but that doesnt mean I have to buy their games if they go in a direction i dont like.

Thanks for calling me a child for having a differeing opinion, it's greatly appreciated. I too want a great conclusion but neither do I think that having marketing going towards a larger  audience is so bad nor do I think features that embrace that larger audience are inherrently bad and detract from the game. While these new features may hurt the SP I havent seen enough evidence to make assumptions.

Modifié par BlahDog, 17 février 2012 - 04:52 .

[izmirtheastarach]

egervari wrote...

While I think they can get some FPS to cross over, I just ask... at what cost? They tried to get more action-oriented gamers to play Dragon Age 2... but by doing that, they removed so many of the great things that people loved about Origin right from the game simply because their "studies" showed that the casuals hated this and that about it. The end result? They made a game almost nobody really loved - action gamer or hard-core RPG fans alike. It's a completely forgettable game, except for maybe how bad it was.

I sort of agree with that, because I still honestly don't know who DA2 was supposed to appeal to. But marketing Mass Effect to shooter fans makes sense. I think what Bioware is doing it really interesting, and I'll be curious to see if it works, and how many players they end up buying the game and playing through action mode. It's almost an effort to make multiple games in one. I think it will appeal to a lot of those people you are talking about who don't enjoy every genre, The kind who don't want to make decisions, but do enjoy a good story and fun gameplay.

Modifié par izmirtheastarach, 17 février 2012 - 04:59 .

[nitefyre410]

izmirtheastarach wrote...

egervari wrote...

While I think they can get some FPS to cross over, I just ask... at what cost? They tried to get more action-oriented gamers to play Dragon Age 2... but by doing that, they removed so many of the great things that people loved about Origin right from the game simply because their "studies" showed that the casuals hated this and that about it. The end result? They made a game almost nobody really loved - action gamer or hard-core RPG fans alike. It's a completely forgettable game, except for maybe how bad it was.

I sort of agree with that, because I still honestly don't know who DA2 was supposed to appeal to. But marketing mass effect to shooter fans makes sense. I think what Bioware is doing it really interesting, and I'll be curious to see if it works, and how many players they end up buying the game and playing through action mode. It's almost an effort to make multiple games in one. I think it will appeal to a lot of those people you are talking about who don't enjoy every genre, The kind who don't want to make decisions, but do enjoy a good story and fun gameplay.

 


The problem with DA as whole is they don't know what they want... the Franchise as a whole really lacks and indentity. 

[izmirtheastarach]

nitefyre410 wrote...

The problem with DA as whole is they don't know what they want... the Franchise as a whole really lacks and indentity. 

Ideally DAO would either be a one-off game, or would have had an actual sequal. I think the real problem is that they told a self-contained story. My experience in DAO was a complete one, I felt no need at all for it to continue (though I didn't mind Awakening so much). Anyone who claims they intended to make a trilogy from day one is a liar. What people are really trying to do with a new IP is put everything they've got into it, and just hope it resonates with gamers.

Modifié par izmirtheastarach, 17 février 2012 - 05:03 .

[LenaMarie]

BlahDog wrote...

LenaMarie wrote...

Story mode.. and? Its a RPG , it should have a story mode. Action mode is more glaring, as action mode makes the game play like Call of Duty.

No, it allows ME 3 to play out more like a movie. It doesn't just throw out all the cutscenes and make it all combat. It just takes the already existing choices and makes them flow even better. Personally, I won't use the action mode because I want to make decisions and see what happens but maybe after my 7th playthrouh I want to just watch a cinematic game without interruption. I bet that if this mode was called "movie mode" people wouldn't be complaining nearly as much.

In your opinion having a seperate co op is good, but the reality is most RPG players dont want a squad based shooter mode, if they MP they want to go through missions with their friends, not mindlessly frag COD style.

First I'd like to see that statistic and second ME 3 co-op isn't "mindless CoD style", it's essentially a more open ended SP mission. 

Maybe you dont like watching long cutscenes because your the FPS kid Bioware wants but they made a multiplayer game around long cutscenes and watching others make decisions, whats that game called? Oh right, Star Wars: The Old Republic. It works there apparently and its a MMO.

I love watching long cutscenes but not when I can have a good time with my friends. I don't know about the specifics but from what I know TOR doesn't have long cutscenes just a mildly short one with one decision attached to the end of it.

You seem like the target audience, so good for you, you love the boring MP mode, have fun but older fans who are RPG players have other opinions. I just hope the single player gives a fulfilling conclusion to Shepards story, then Im going to be hesitant about bioware's future products, its blatantly obvious who the target audience is. I dont feel entitled they made products for me, but that doesnt mean I have to buy their games if they go in a direction i dont like.

Thanks for calling me a child for having a differeing opinion, it's greatly appreciated. I too want a great conclusion but neither do I think that having marketing going towards a larger  audience is so bad nor do I think features that embrace that larger audience are inherrently bad and detract from the game. While these new features may hurt the SP I havent seen enough evidence to make assumptions.

No, I respect your opinion, I just think anyone who likes mindless fragging CoD style must but one of your insanely twitchy FPS kids that us 'old people' cant keep up with. I dont begrudge you or anyone at all for enjoying multiplayer and the the concessions made to the SP to let FPS players enjoy the game more. This goes beyond marketing though as the actual gameplay is geared less for RPGers and more for FPS players. I wouldnt mind at all if Shepards story catered to the RPG player then future games tapered off into Call of Duty in space, its just when it starts off designed for RP then goes off in another direction before the arc is finished that is my main issue.

I dont have any opinion yet if the CoD Multiplayer mode will hurt the SP either, Im hoping they still put in alot of effort in a solid sp experience, but that doesnt mean I like the MP mode itself, as I said it doesnt match the game. Co Op campaign missions would have been more appropriate but fortunately I can enjoy sp and never have to touch the mp functions, I am very grateful to Bioware for at least not trying to force people into playing their mp mode.

Modifié par LenaMarie, 17 février 2012 - 05:06 .

[izmirtheastarach]

I enjoy a shooter if it has a good story. I'm souring quickly on CoD-type games because what little story they have becomes more ridiculous every year. But it's not the gameplay that I have a problem with, it's how inane they are.

[R3DKL0UD]

What I find so hilarious is that most of the people complaining haven't tried it. If you are a fan of the series why wouldn't you. The only element you like about Mass Effect is the story? You don't enjoy using powers? Now the generalizations are flying with Dragon Age 2 this and CoD that. Shallow. Get off your high horse. Most gamers aren't so narrow in their enjoyment of games. It's a little bonus game with your storied rpg. Its about strategy, teamwork, about combat but in the Mass Effect universe. "But it's taking away from the..." Is it really? Go level a character to level 6, then we'll talk.

Modifié par R3DKL0UD, 17 février 2012 - 05:10 .

[izmirtheastarach]

LenaMarie wrote...

No, I respect your opinion, I just think anyone who likes mindless fragging CoD style must but one of your insanely twitchy FPS kids that us 'old people' cant keep up with.

What does "old" mean in this context? How old are you? Am I not allowed to enjoy some mindless fragging now and then?

Modifié par izmirtheastarach, 17 février 2012 - 05:09 .

[nitefyre410]

izmirtheastarach wrote...

nitefyre410 wrote...

The problem with DA as whole is they don't know what they want... the Franchise as a whole really lacks and indentity. 

Ideally DAO would either be a one-off game, or would have had an actual sequal. I think the real problem is that they told a self-contained story. My experience in DAO was a complete one, I felt no need at all for it to continue (though I didn't mind Awakening so much). Anyone who claims they intended to make a trilogy from day one is a liar. What people are really trying to do with a new IP is put everything they've got into it, and just hope it resonates with gamers.

 

Can't Argue with  that..  it was rather complete and self contained  with in itself.  Though  I remember them saying the DA:O was merely ment the be the introduction into this world they created and thats pretty much it.    Really in the end what killed DA:O  from was  Bioware  falling to the same mistake they have made before.. "Telling and  not showing."   

izmirtheastarach wrote...

I enjoy a shooter if it has a good story. I'm souring quickly on CoD-type games because what little story they have becomes more ridiculous every year. But it's not the gameplay that I have a problem with, it's how inane they are.

    


Same  -   I did not even finish BF 3 story I did not care enough about it... I just went to the MP which is why I play it. 

Through it would be nice to see a FPS that handle  War well .. I'll see what Tom Clancy has cooking with  Ghost Recon  and  I was doing reading Rainbow Six : Patroits... now that looks gooood.

Modifié par nitefyre410, 17 février 2012 - 05:13 .

[zoompooky]

Why would they spend any marketing dollars at all targeting long time fans?  Those fans would buy the game no matter what, and don't need to be marketed to.

[izmirtheastarach]

nitefyre410 wrote...

Can't Argue with  that..  it was rather complete and self contained  with in itself.  Though  I remember them saying the DA:O was merely ment the be the introduction into this world they created and thats pretty much it.    Really in the end what killed DA:O  from was  Bioware  falling to the same mistake they have made before.. "Telling and  not showing."   

Same things holds true for that statement as does for what I just said about trilogies. It became in intro into a world they created only when it did well in the marketplace.

They knew it was self-contained, as well. That's why DA2 has almost nothing to do with DAO.