166 réponses à ce sujet

[Naughty Bear]

Toyou4you wrote...

I like that Shepard talks more. Sure, it's dissapointing compared to the last two games, but it gives Shepard more depth in my opinion.

I don't hate the fact that Shepard talks to much but i hate it because the Shepard i play is basically me. I don't talk much and i am quiet person but i do listen. I don't have to open my mouth every second.

[Elvis_Mazur]

The amount of auto-dialogue on Mass Effect 3 is the second game-breaker problem I have with the game, and the second reason I will never play Mass Effect 3.

[Eclipse merc]

If it keeps going like this they're just gonna remove the conversations O.o

[Alithinos]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

 That's what a friend of mine told me when I tried to get them into mass effect. They didn't like having to not only choose dialogue, but watch it. They wanted to just get in and shoot stuff, and get out. I'm going through a trilogy playthrough right now and just got promoted to spectre and received my ship. I'd have to say that the contrast in dialogue control of ME1 to ME3 is disturbing. I'm enjoying how each new time I play me1/2 I finder dialogue options that I've never seen before by taking a different route in a conversation and playing a different character. Quite honestly, I'd have to say that from the intro to the point where you get your ship in ME1 had more dialogue control than all of Me3, in the "RPG" mode. 

Im going to enjoy ME1/2 as I go through them again and craft an entirely unique Shepard, but I'm not looking forward to ME3 where my character that I've establish over two games is railroaded into a specific character with less player control, who breaks character throughout the game through things such as forced friendships, or saying things that contradict previous actions in previous games. The rest of the game was great. I could even forgive the endings, if only the "journey" towards it wasn't so linear in terms of roleplay and dialogue control. 

The point of this thread is that even though they dumbed down the dialogue in the third game, it still isn't going to be enough to pull in the shooter crowd. My friend that I referred to above is a huge Gears fan. I told him how ME3 is pretty much a shooter now and how he should check it out. He looked t a few videos of it on the internet and said hell give it a pass. I asked him why, he said because there's still too much conversations. You guys took out dialogue control, but you still left the dialogue in. Just because we can't branch it doesn't mean it's more appealing to the consumers who prefer action. All you did in the end was ****** off a lot of series fans who are angry over having a canon Shepard forced down their throats. 


Even with the improved combat, this GoW fan still wasn't interested in Mass 3. So why not gear your games towards the people who would be interested in it. I don't get why people think that RPGs can't be profitable. Have you guys seen skyrims sales records? Bioware should just stick to their guns rather than trying to change formula based on what's popular with a certain consumer group. Imagine how ME3 would have been without watered down dialogue. Could have made the journey more bearable.



 -Polite

You know what's wrong ?

I'm not an RPG or FPS fanatic,I play games of both genres,but mostly FPS.
While I like the quick action a game like Battlefield 3 or Quake Live offers,there are some times that I get a feeling like being stuffed of it,and want to take a break from frantically shooting anything that moves,because the repeatation actually tires my brain after a certain period of action-shooter gaming.
At times like that,I prefer to play slower-paced games,games that offer me something completely different.
Most action shooter gamers are like that of I know.
While each one of us have a main multiplayer game that we are focused on and usually play on a daily basis even for months,there are times that we make breaks from them to rest our brains so we can come back later fresh.

Those games that we will decide to play at those breaks are generally prefered to be very different from our 'main' game.And note that if a game isn't really that different but it is another shooter,we won't judge it as a 'break' game,but as a 'main' game,and that means that if it doesn't fullfils the very certain type of amusement we get from our 'main' game,we won't end up playing it as we will hold that position for our 'main' game.
But there is always room for 'break' games.

My current 'main' game is Battlefield 3,and I've been playing it since it came out,like 5 or 6 months ago.In these 6 months I played 2 'break' games,Skyrim for about 1 month,and Mass Effect 3 for about 5 days.
I saw Mass Effect 3 as a 'break' game,and I hoped that it would be an RPG that would offer me something rather different from BF3.And I would have enjoyed it more if it where more of an RPG and less of a shooter.
But Bioware promotes ME3 as a shooter,and done things to make it more of a shooter.
Shooter guys that will see ME3 as a shooter won't like it,because since it is introduced to them as a shooter,they will judge it by the 'main' multiplayer game standards,and not the 'break' game standards.
And thus they won't like it because it wouldn't be enough shooter of a game like CoD,GoW,or BF3.

But if ME3 was more of an RPG than a shooter,then shooter guys wouldn't judge it for the slot of the 'main multiplayer game' but could decide to play it and include it on the 'break' game slot.

Check that,Skyrim got succesfull and many shooter guys played it and liked it,and that game was as hardcore as RPGs can get in the recent days,without any shooter elements.
It's difference from shooters was what made shooter guys to try it and actually play it and like it.
Because they saw it as a nice break,something to relax their brain from continous fast thoughts and action,a chance to experience something different,before going to their shooter battle fresh.
If ME3 was more of a hardcore rpg and less of a shooter with interactive story hybrid,it would make more shooter guys to like it,because it would be more different than what they mostly playing,and thus it would feel fresh and new to them.



So the conclusion is that if you want to have the shooter guys to play your game you have 2 options:

1.Make it a definitive,pure,hardcore shooter,with everything shooters have,and nothing more or less,so it will contest other games for the 'main game' slot in a shooter player's mind.
2.Make it drastically and essentially as much different from shooters as possible,so it will contest other games to get in the 'break' mind slot of shooter gamers.



What Mass Effect should be IMO ?
It should be a hardcore RPG,so I could have a refreshing and relaxing break from Battlefield 3.
:innocent:

[DeinonSlayer]

I thought it was interesting that in ME1, you got to justify your actions. After charming or intimidating, you were presented with another dialogue wheel which, while it didn't affect your paragon/renegade ranking, it let you explain why you did what you did - it really let you flesh out your character. Adding interrupts in ME2 was a good change, but they stripped out that element of it, which I found disappointing. ME3 stripped it down even more.

A while back, someone predicted what the two biggest fan questions would be. We're now seeing it borne out.

Mass Effect fan:
"How do I get the good ending? Did I do something wrong?"

Shooter fan:
"How do I skip all these cutscenes? I'm going back to COD."

[dreman9999]

Naughty Bear wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Naughty Bear wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Naughty Bear wrote...

My cousin literally rims CoD. FPS lover to the bone, but even he noticed the increase in action for Mass Effect and feels slightly disappointed because of this.

That Ironic because ME3 has less action in it then ME2.

Thats his opinion.

Then he skipped a lot of stuff. The first time on the citideal, I spent a good 30 min going through it. Their more socialisation in ME3 then in ME1 and ME2. Does he check on his crew after every mission?

Yes he does. He is a slow a gamer when it comes to RPG's. A completionist i guess.

Takes his time but does every side quest but he feels that CoD and other shooters are more enjoyable and have more worthwhile and enjoyable due to multiplayer while single player is over once you finished it.

But if he did, he would of done more socialization and exploring then shooting. Which is why the statement is ironic.

[dreman9999]

Alithinos wrote...

PoliteAssasin wrote...

 That's what a friend of mine told me when I tried to get them into mass effect. They didn't like having to not only choose dialogue, but watch it. They wanted to just get in and shoot stuff, and get out. I'm going through a trilogy playthrough right now and just got promoted to spectre and received my ship. I'd have to say that the contrast in dialogue control of ME1 to ME3 is disturbing. I'm enjoying how each new time I play me1/2 I finder dialogue options that I've never seen before by taking a different route in a conversation and playing a different character. Quite honestly, I'd have to say that from the intro to the point where you get your ship in ME1 had more dialogue control than all of Me3, in the "RPG" mode. 

Im going to enjoy ME1/2 as I go through them again and craft an entirely unique Shepard, but I'm not looking forward to ME3 where my character that I've establish over two games is railroaded into a specific character with less player control, who breaks character throughout the game through things such as forced friendships, or saying things that contradict previous actions in previous games. The rest of the game was great. I could even forgive the endings, if only the "journey" towards it wasn't so linear in terms of roleplay and dialogue control. 

The point of this thread is that even though they dumbed down the dialogue in the third game, it still isn't going to be enough to pull in the shooter crowd. My friend that I referred to above is a huge Gears fan. I told him how ME3 is pretty much a shooter now and how he should check it out. He looked t a few videos of it on the internet and said hell give it a pass. I asked him why, he said because there's still too much conversations. You guys took out dialogue control, but you still left the dialogue in. Just because we can't branch it doesn't mean it's more appealing to the consumers who prefer action. All you did in the end was ****** off a lot of series fans who are angry over having a canon Shepard forced down their throats. 


Even with the improved combat, this GoW fan still wasn't interested in Mass 3. So why not gear your games towards the people who would be interested in it. I don't get why people think that RPGs can't be profitable. Have you guys seen skyrims sales records? Bioware should just stick to their guns rather than trying to change formula based on what's popular with a certain consumer group. Imagine how ME3 would have been without watered down dialogue. Could have made the journey more bearable.



 -Polite

You know what's wrong ?

I'm not an RPG or FPS fanatic,I play games of both genres,but mostly FPS.
While I like the quick action a game like Battlefield 3 or Quake Live offers,there are some times that I get a feeling like being stuffed of it,and want to take a break from frantically shooting anything that moves,because the repeatation actually tires my brain after a certain period of action-shooter gaming.
At times like that,I prefer to play slower-paced games,games that offer me something completely different.
Most action shooter gamers are like that of I know.
While each one of us have a main multiplayer game that we are focused on and usually play on a daily basis even for months,there are times that we make breaks from them to rest our brains so we can come back later fresh.

Those games that we will decide to play at those breaks are generally prefered to be very different from our 'main' game.And note that if a game isn't really that different but it is another shooter,we won't judge it as a 'break' game,but as a 'main' game,and that means that if it doesn't fullfils the very certain type of amusement we get from our 'main' game,we won't end up playing it as we will hold that position for our 'main' game.
But there is always room for 'break' games.

My current 'main' game is Battlefield 3,and I've been playing it since it came out,like 5 or 6 months ago.In these 6 months I played 2 'break' games,Skyrim for about 1 month,and Mass Effect 3 for about 5 days.
I saw Mass Effect 3 as a 'break' game,and I hoped that it would be an RPG that would offer me something rather different from BF3.And I would have enjoyed it more if it where more of an RPG and less of a shooter.
But Bioware promotes ME3 as a shooter,and done things to make it more of a shooter.
Shooter guys that will see ME3 as a shooter won't like it,because since it is introduced to them as a shooter,they will judge it by the 'main' multiplayer game standards,and not the 'break' game standards.
And thus they won't like it because it wouldn't be enough shooter of a game like CoD,GoW,or BF3.

But if ME3 was more of an RPG than a shooter,then shooter guys wouldn't judge it for the slot of the 'main multiplayer game' but could decide to play it and include it on the 'break' game slot.

Check that,Skyrim got succesfull and many shooter guys played it and liked it,and that game was as hardcore as RPGs can get in the recent days,without any shooter elements.
It's difference from shooters was what made shooter guys to try it and actually play it and like it.
Because they saw it as a nice break,something to relax their brain from continous fast thoughts and action,a chance to experience something different,before going to their shooter battle fresh.
If ME3 was more of a hardcore rpg and less of a shooter with interactive story hybrid,it would make more shooter guys to like it,because it would be more different than what they mostly playing,and thus it would feel fresh and new to them.



So the conclusion is that if you want to have the shooter guys to play your game you have 2 options:

1.Make it a definitive,pure,hardcore shooter,with everything shooters have,and nothing more or less,so it will contest other games for the 'main game' slot in a shooter player's mind.
2.Make it drastically and essentially as much different from shooters as possible,so it will contest other games to get in the 'break' mind slot of shooter gamers.



What Mass Effect should be IMO ?
It should be a hardcore RPG,so I could have a refreshing and relaxing break from Battlefield 3.
:innocent:

Unfortunately , the concept of ACTION RPGS is not considered in this assestmant.

[dreman9999]

PetrySilva wrote...

The amount of auto-dialogue on Mass Effect 3 is the second game-breaker problem I have with the game, and the second reason I will never play Mass Effect 3.

Then you'll never know that it's no where near as bad a syou think.

[Jaron Oberyn]

Lots of good comments in this guys. And yes I do realize my friend is somewhat to blame for the decline in gaming lol. I've told him that's my times. thing is, while many people are angry about this, not enough of them are vocal. If we aren't vocal about it bioware will assume its doing what it's fans want and take it another step further, aka removal. Look at the transition from me2 to LoTSB to arrival, then to me3.

-Polite

[AlienSpaceBats]

You should not have said this, you'll give BioWare ideas! lol.

[oblivionenss]

Balbaroy wrote...

I love the "no replayability" thing.

A) The ending wasn't that bad. Can't say much more because No-Spoiler Forum.
How many endings do you guys on this forum expect that the END of a trilogy would have. Keep in mind, this is the last Mass Effect for Shepard (or so we've been led to believe). The replayability should not be hindered because the end of the trilogy ended in a similar fashion to the end of any series.

The means is what Mass Effect what it is. The End is just that, the End of Mass Effect as it was known, there aren't going to be 5,000,000 ways to end the trilogy, there aren't any cliffhangers, the series ends. As it should.

*Dons flame suit*

Actually at the END of a story especially a supposed RPG, Could have Multiple endings and not one where the clours are different...... Just look at the Witcher 2 16 different endings.....

[KingDan97]

I've had people tell me that, I didn't really care. Different people use different mediums to scratch different itches, some people don't feel the need to scratch some itches at all.

It says nothing about them as people, and if you really judge people on a fundamental level based on what genres of video games they like, then I'm very much glad that I don't know you in person.

[Jaron Oberyn]

Where did I say that I judged my friend based on this? Last I checked we were still friends.

-Polite

[alikilar]

BatmanPWNS wrote...

My COD friends said it was too much talking and felt boring. So Bioware and attracting shooter fans was a failed idea.

shooter fans can keep COD and COD replicas to themselves dnt infect Bioware.

[RocketManSR2]

I like the way dialog was handled in ME3. It made the conversations more natural imo.

[oblivionenss]

RocketManSR2 wrote...

I like the way dialog was handled in ME3. It made the conversations more natural imo.

I am assuming direct control 

[Overule]

Long story short: you can't replace us with a more slackjawed and easily appeased fanbase.

Also James Vega was a bad idea. If we hated Kaiden Alenko and Jacob Taylor on the grounds that they were generic and boring, what made you guys think a meathead with the paper thin pretense of being hispanic was a good idea?

Modifié par Overule, 18 mars 2012 - 03:06 .

[eternalnightmare13]

Hunter of Legends wrote...

Carnage752 wrote...

@PoliteAssasin
It's when you talk to Anderson about leaving Earth. Both options make you say the same thing, but in different tones. Top indicated you want to stay there with him and fight. The other indicated you wanted him to come with you. Shoulda been an option where you were fine with it.

ME1 doesn't even do that.

They say the EXACT same thing.

Exactly.  

[TheSteelArcher]

I actually liked the dialog because it gave you an opportunity to be individualistic in your response. That being said, ME1 did leave you saying the same thing just in different tones and wording. I actually felt dialog was improved upon in ME2 simply because you could get Paragon or Renegade points from nearly every conversation, increasing the sense of individualism and supporting the idea that every thing you do matters. ME3 killed it with giving you only 2 options per response and I was discontented by the option to skip dialog options and decisions all together. It made me feel like ME3 was being just enough of an RPG to say it's in the genre.

[Sirartistic]

Who cares about the shooter crowd! ME was not intended for them!

[Terror_K]

Sirartistic wrote...

Who cares about the shooter crowd! ME was not intended for them!

ME3 clearly was.

[LordCrux]

This topic assumes that there is such a thing as 'the shooter crowd" when in reality it's just "people."

Nice way for a subculture to villianize everything else in the world to make yourselves feel better.

[mauro2222]

Toyou4you wrote...

I like that Shepard talks more. Sure, it's dissapointing compared to the last two games, but it gives Shepard more depth in my opinion.

The problem is not that he talks more

He doesn't shut up! A 30 min dialogue just to choose between "I'm okay" "I've have been better".... really?

[LordCrux]

mauro2222 wrote...

Toyou4you wrote...

I like that Shepard talks more. Sure, it's dissapointing compared to the last two games, but it gives Shepard more depth in my opinion.

The problem is not that he talks more

He doesn't shut up! A 30 min dialogue just to choose between "I'm okay" "I've have been better".... really?

Yes, really.

It's been like that since the first game. The words you see on the dialog nodes have always been the 'gist' of what Shepard says, not vertabim.

Let me make this concept clear to you: on top of this website you see "Home - Projects - Forums - Groups - Albums - etc" not "You Can Click Here If You Feel Like Going To The Front Page Of This Website, Please - etc etc". It's a goddamn menu. Same concept with the dialog wheel.

And furthermore, the first game introduced a lot of race, culture, and tech lore, therefore out of neccesity the dialog contained a lot of expository writing. That's not how people talk in real life, and yet you associate that style of writing as 'smart, intellectual, high quality'. ME2 and 3 doesn't need to explain lore all over again and they clearly wanted the dialog to sound natural in order to develop characters. it's harder to write and perform lines that expresses subtle emotional context than it is to write nerdy technobabble. You clearly don't see that, and interpret anything not in the vein of Star Trek / Stargate as less intellectual for your taste.

Play ME1 again. The dialog format is mostly: Shepard asks a question > NPC goes into a long and detailed description of his race/culture/technology. Yes, real awesome emotional gripping conversation right there.

[Jaron Oberyn]

Ok first of all lord crux, nobody is villainizing anyone. Like it or not, there are different groups of gamers. If you take offense at that, then that's your prerogative. But don't go flaming people who use the correct labels to describe what they're talking about. We are dealing with specifics here.

Second, stop with the "mass effect1 did this" act. Because it didn't. I'm playing through it now. There are very few instances where all dialogue choices lead to one outcome. Very few. The rest is entirely unique dialogue depending on what you say. The conversations have so many permutations based on one of the three dialogue options you choose along with subsequent choices. Mass effect 2 had some of this, but mass effect 3 lost this entirely. As someone said above, the dialogue wheel only comes up for plot decisions or to answer if your feeling happy or sad.


-Polite