250 réponses à ce sujet

[The Spamming Troll]

ME1 is the only good game ive played from bioware.

its the reason i own an XBOX and a PS3, hoping maybe one day ill get another game like ME1.......maybe witcher 2 will do it for me.

[poerksen]

ME2 & 1 > ---------------------------------------- ME3. Not just because of the ending.

[Druzgot]

No it wasnt bad game, it is all.
me1 better than me2 and me2 better than me3

[Unit-Alpha]

I would have said yes, but then the ending. Sorry, but the ending is the big point of contention. It embodies everything bad about working under EA: rushed deadlines, cut content, creativity in a vacuum.

[thunderhawk862002]

It was never really a question if they can make good games under EA, it was whether or not the quality would suffer under the more strict deadlines. So basically would the games be better with lower cash reserves but a more lax time constraint or better with more money but with the sacrifice of not having enough time to do everything you wanted to. Also would BioWare have stayed more to the 'hardcore' gamers or would they have still broadened themselves to incorporate the casual player?

So for me yes BioWare can make good games under EA. Even though I was disappointed in DA2 I thought it was an enjoyable game. However, I do think EA's ownership has had a negative impact on the games potential.

[99DP1982]

Unfortunately I have an opinon, that since take over by EA, Bioware has a lack of defined strategy...

That may be a fault of EA...

To be honest. I hope that the remakes (enhanced edition) of BG and the Wasteland 2 project will give a middle finger to managers at those companies...

In every aspect it is better when companies specilize to fit the market.

I'm not sure when exactl has started the trend of mass action gaems/shooters/ with tons of hype and marketing BS.

The specilized products CAN BE more profitable and bring to the bottom line more. It's a matter of things like - target customer - interaction with the targeted customer - that alone can save you millions on the marketing hype. Then if you will focus at the core in the genre, you can get better sales. That's especially true if you are making a spinoff of the orignal prodcut (in this case a sequel). You add some tweaks here and there, but keep the core of the product the same.

Think Coca-cola and Coca-cola light... -or- LEGO city life, and LEGO pirates, etc.

That's where you get cost savings, you enhance the product which was well recieved.

In case of ME, it would be slapping new graphics onto ME world, enhancing exploration and vehicle usage, perhaps enhance inventory management... but keeping the multiple hubs, multiple meaningful sidequests, high level of interaction, class restricted non-combat skills, choices and consequences, which you can see the outcomes in the next game or ending... (that's as old as Baldur's game if not more - why was it cut?!).

I have no idea why all the focus went into the combat (3rd game and 3rd combat system) and graphics (which is far from great with low res textures)... I really do not... (should have went into story and lore, into dialogs, and player's options to take at the threat as he thinks is the best, not getting railroaded. first you get this support, then that support, and in between you fight hundreds of clones) To create a great IP, only to butcher it at the end... bad business practice.

I consider ME3 a good game - it received 7 in my books... but that's far below expectations
DA2 got 6 in my records
SW:TOR - unrated . I do not play MMOs. I would definately pay extra if they would release a game, with MP solutions of NWN... but MMO, nah.. for action side I have things like Diablo... DotA, etc.

So for me, it's been a series of bad experiences with Bioware under EA. Far below expectations, which leads to my stance, of not pre-ordering any game untill the trust will be regained with next 2-3 awesome games... (froma a discount bin). The only company I trust currently on pre-orders is Blizzard, I'm very sure they will deliver on the game expetations. SC2 is a very good example of that.

And I have a lot of faith in the Brian Fargo's Wasteland 2 project...

[Fireblader70]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Fireblader70 wrote...
Interesting. If that's how you feel, then cool.

I, however, thought that the skills, weapon and armour customisation were improved. I also thought the layout of missions was expanded upon through use of ladders, wide areas and even controllable mechs. The missions were also bigger in scale, from what I can remember.

Granted, there were less missions overall (still a lot), and many fetch quests, but the quality of the others seemed to be up to the same standards and perhaps even more so than ME1 and ME2.

Choice seemed to be prevalent in the game, much like the previous instalments. Auto-dialogue, while annoying at times, did not prevent the ability to choose your many responses for the rest of the game.

This is how I saw the game.  Not less of everything, as you feel, but instead more of some aspects and less of others, such as dialogue choice, but they were not reduced enough to cause any serious damage.

Something has to be causing this difference in opinion... that's what interests me.

See graph posted above.

<edit> and below.

I am aware that the game featured less missions. That does not mean they experienced a sudden drop in quality (ignoring fetch quests), which I assume is the point you are trying to make.

I can see why people might be disappointed in this game, but to outright hate it when one loved the similar previous games is an interesting anomaly. Perhaps it really was the hype and exaggerated quotes from developers that is the reason for hatred, which in my opinion is similar to holding a grudge.

It might also be that the current 'trend' on these boards is to criticise the game - the whole idea of being socially accepted, subconscious or conscious.

[abaris]

Fireblader70 wrote...

I can see why people might be disappointed in this game, but to outright hate it when one loved the similar previous games is an interesting anomaly. Perhaps it really was the hype and exaggerated quotes from developers that is the reason for hatred, which in my opinion is similar to holding a grudge.

I want to stress that I don't hate it.

But there's quite a disturbing trend being obvious. They cut some corners with ME1, they cut quite a few with ME2 and they cut almost every corner with ME3.

For me this spells, make as much money with the least possible effort. And since you mentioned the fetch quests, as has been said, they were present in ME1 and ME2, but they're omnipresent in ME3 with a crucial difference. In ME1 and 2 you actually had to do something to fulfill them. In ME3 there's absolutely nothing happening in ways of side quests. You just scan planets.

I don't even blame Bioware or EA for this kind of development. Game development in general has become a very sloppy business aimed at the casual action gamer and the least powerful system, which, to my knowledge, is the Xbox.

[Fireblader70]

abaris wrote...

Fireblader70 wrote...

I can see why people might be disappointed in this game, but to outright hate it when one loved the similar previous games is an interesting anomaly. Perhaps it really was the hype and exaggerated quotes from developers that is the reason for hatred, which in my opinion is similar to holding a grudge.

I want to stress that I don't hate it.

But there's quite a disturbing trend being obvious. They cut some corners with ME1, they cut quite a few with ME2 and they cut almost every corner with ME3.

For me this spells, make as much money with the least possible effort. And since you mentioned the fetch quests, as has been said, they were present in ME1 and ME2, but they're omnipresent in ME3 with a crucial difference. In ME1 and 2 you actually had to do something to fulfill them. In ME3 there's absolutely nothing happening in ways of side quests. You just scan planets.

I don't even blame Bioware or EA for this kind of development. Game development in general has become a very sloppy business aimed at the casual action gamer and the least powerful system, which, to my knowledge, is the Xbox.

Side quests also include those without 'Priority' attached to their name, don't forget, so they're not all fetch quests. I understand your point, though. It's the people that claim to despise the game and place it at the absolute bottom of the pile, despite loving the previous instalments, that confuse me.

The games industry seems to be turning into Hollywood - it is becoming more commercially focused and creativity is degrading, but that's a whole other kettle of fish.

[xsdob]

That depends, for the people who just enjoy playing video games, me3 is great until the endings. If you play more concentrated towards rpg's but also have other genre's you like, me3 is good until the ending. If you don't like playing any other types of games but rpg's, than me3 is adequate but not nearly good enough, until the ending. And if you are an extremist like the guys who like rpg codex, than it is a horrible abomination, regardless of endings.

Modifié par xsdob, 23 avril 2012 - 07:28 .

[abaris]

Fireblader70 wrote...

Side quests also include those without 'Priority' attached to their name, don't forget, so they're not all fetch quests

Yeah, sure. But the ME3 fetch quests aren't quests in the sense of previous instalments. They're simply planet scanning in disguise.

[Fireblader70]

abaris wrote...

Fireblader70 wrote...

Side quests also include those without 'Priority' attached to their name, don't forget, so they're not all fetch quests

Yeah, sure. But the ME3 fetch quests aren't quests in the sense of previous instalments. They're simply planet scanning in disguise.

Well they had to make use of that scanner somehow

[DashRunner92]

All EA did was make ME3 worse. Also the faults you picked out in other games are completely nitpicky. Not having perfect targeting in Witcher 2 (Which I personally had no trouble with) is nothing like completely ruining the narrative of a trilogy and angering thousands of fans. Please, ME3 doesn't even stand up to games like Plantscape or Morrowind, don't even try to compare the RPG's. And at least Bethesda let's people mod their games, so the majority of the problems in Morrowind have been fixed. Also Plantscape is seen as one of the better RPG combat systems, so I have no idea how many older RPG's you've played before, but apparently not many. You seem to be trying way too hard to defend ME3.

[PaddlePop]

simfamSP wrote...

NOTICE:

IF YOU ARE:

STILL PISSED OF ABOUT THE ENDING.
CAN NOT FORM AN OPINION WITHOUT BIAS.
GENERALLY DON'T LIKE BIOWARE ANYWAY.
ARE INFECTED WITH BW NOSTALGIA.

DO NOT BOTHER POSTING.

AND PLEASE, READ MY POST BEFORE RESPONDING.

Blah blah blah whine I Bioware whine blah blah

Well, that's one way to ensure that  whoever stumbles upon your thread is not going to play ball. 

And no, I disagree with you that ME3 is proof that Bioware can still make good games (under EA). In fact, this forum is littered with examples that disprove your silly assertion.

[malhar34]

Fireblader70 wrote...

abaris wrote...

Fireblader70 wrote...

Side quests also include those without 'Priority' attached to their name, don't forget, so they're not all fetch quests

Yeah, sure. But the ME3 fetch quests aren't quests in the sense of previous instalments. They're simply planet scanning in disguise.

Well they had to make use of that scanner somehow

But a scanner can still be implimented in ACTUAL sidequests not just fetch things. I wouldn't even care if you still had to fetch stuff but had to actually go through a compound/fight bad guys and fetch it. Just how ME1 and ME2 fetch quests were. Now you just press a button and hope reapers dont chase you. Answering OP's question ME2 was proof ME3 was good but they cut major corners.

[Fireblader70]

malhar34 wrote...

Fireblader70 wrote...

abaris wrote...

Fireblader70 wrote...

Side quests also include those without 'Priority' attached to their name, don't forget, so they're not all fetch quests

Yeah, sure. But the ME3 fetch quests aren't quests in the sense of previous instalments. They're simply planet scanning in disguise.

Well they had to make use of that scanner somehow

But a scanner can still be implimented in ACTUAL sidequests not just fetch things. I wouldn't even care if you still had to fetch stuff but had to actually go through a compound/fight bad guys and fetch it. Just how ME1 and ME2 fetch quests were. Now you just press a button and hope reapers dont chase you. Answering OP's question ME2 was proof ME3 was good but they cut major corners.

In the words of EDI - 'that was a joke'.

It's clear that Bioware was lacking in resources for certain aspects of the game, that much is true.

I, personally, have always seen Mass Effect as a story and character based experience though, so that's why these problems that other people are having don't really affect me. I can see why they would disappoint other fans, but for those that despise the game because of them... I don't understand. And probably never will!

[Mr. MannlyMan]

It's proof to me that Bioware can no longer make good RPGs under EA. Everything else is debatable.

[HighFlyingDwarf]

GhostV9 wrote...

No. Because Mass Effect 3 is not a good game.

This.

[goofyomnivore]

Outside of Tuchanka ME3 was pretty mediocre to down right bad.

[abaris]

strive wrote...

Outside of Tuchanka ME3 was pretty mediocre to down right bad.

Tuchanka was the one mission where it really shines. The rest was indeed pretty mediocre with a steep drop towards the end. It felt just like the developers saying, let's get this over with already.

[bmwcrazy]

I think ME2 is a better example.

It's a shame that DA2 and ME3 all felt a bit rushed and incomplete.

[DashRunner92]

yummysoap wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

Cadence of the Planes wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Even ignoring the ending. The game lacks polish, and a lot of the design is poor.

Disagree. The game is more polished than most, and has a cinematic feel unlike any other RPG I've played.

That's because it's not a rpg.

For a cinematic rpg, go to ME, the first one. ME3 is a generic shooter and ME2 is something in the middle.

I always told myself I'd never get involved in these sorts of arguments, but whaagh? ME3 had way more skill customization than ME2, as well as reintroducing weapon mods and the like. I can't see how anyone could make the argument that ME2 was more of an RPG than ME3.

Customization is not an RPG. An RPG is something like DA: Origins or Deus Ex 1. ME3 was just a shooter with a little bit of freedom.

[abaris]

simfamSP wrote...

So... apparantley I'm a BioWare drone? Even though I acknowledge the fact that the endings are terrible and the way BioWare handles all of this is utter BS?

As Alistair would say:

"Riiiight..." 

Leaves a sour taste though to start a thread with capslock shouts about who's not supposed to voice their opinion. By an opinionated poster. There's no such thing as an objective observer anyways.