140 réponses à ce sujet

[Seboist]

termokanden wrote...

I agree 100% android. Unfortunately, that isn't really my point here.

We were told that it's not good enough to wish for BioWare to make sequels because apparently making sequels is lazy. I think it's nonsense.

Hero worship was also brought up as a negative. There I am simply asking: Why does this not apply to TW2? Half-cyborg supersoldier or badass monsterkiller with superpowers. Definite hero worship in both cases.

TW2 doesn't have politicians acting like 5 yo retards groveling at the feet of the Geralt in the intro in order to stroke the player's ego in the most juvenile manner imaginable(ME3) or tells us he's a brilliant leader despite never showing such ability in the game(Miranda speaking of Shep in ME2).

[android654]

With Geralt it's a little different. He's not worshiped. He's treated like a leper. People avoid him, he gets stiffed on jobs, he's only a witcher because any other opportunity was taken from him at a very young age and his entire existence in TW2 is merely showing up in the wrong place while trying to rescue a friend. Shepard on the other hand is an intergalactic celebrity, chosen because of another celebrity status he receives in the military, and all persons fawn over him dying at the opportunity to join him.

In the games, Geralt has to work in order to get cooperation, Shepard merely has to show his/her face. That's the difference between them, Shepard will always be a hero, Geralt just happened to be there.

There's nothing wrong with sequels. Hell, I'm going to see Fast and Furious 17 after Resident Evil 9, but if Vin Diesel starts riding a bicycle or Alice has a sex scene with a zombie, then I'm done.

[termokanden]

Yes, that part is almost painful to watch. Luckily it's just a few minutes of the game.

The hero worship in itself exists in both games and I don't really have a problem with it. It's a fantasy and I'm sure a lot of us would not be interested in playing an average Joe sitting in an office 8 hours a day.

Android: Fair enough, I only meant that the game portrays Geralt that way, not that it is his actual reputation in the game. However, it seems to me that playing an outcast badass is not any less of an ego boost than the one in Mass Effect 3. Of course I agree that when you compare the writing in the ME3 intro scene with pretty much any scene in TW2, they are worlds apart. It is probably my least favorite part of any BioWare game.

Modifié par termokanden, 08 juillet 2012 - 11:23 .

[android654]

termokanden wrote...

Yes, that part is almost painful to watch. Luckily it's just a few minutes of the game.

The hero worship in itself exists in both games and I don't really have a problem with it. It's a fantasy and I'm sure a lot of us would not be interested in playing an average Joe sitting in an office 8 hours a day.

No, but I prefer the average guy who's thrust into horrible situations left to his own devices. Max Payne comes to mind. He's not worshiped, he's vilified and left to his own devices, and yet he kills everyone in his path. A role model if ever I saw one.

[slimgrin]

termokanden wrote...

Oh I do. Don't get me wrong this is not an attack on TW2. But it's just that while some of the criticism of DA2 and ME3 in particular is spot on, a lot of it is just seems like random attacks on BioWare to me.

But I admit I do not see the difference between the two (or three) cases of hero worship. I actually don't even see what the problem is in the first place.

Bioware really hasn't begun to milk their two IP's yet, but they're set to, and that's my issue with the industry as a whole. How many TES, COD, Halo, or Fallout games do we need? It seems gamers are as reluctant as developers to embrace a new IP. I can't relate with that. I want three Witcher games and no more. I think Fallout and TES should be done at this point. But try telling gamers that. 


What's happened with Bioware's recent outings is unrelated to the OP and I'm not going there.

Modifié par slimgrin, 08 juillet 2012 - 11:17 .

[Hathur]

slimgrin wrote...

Hathur wrote...

I find it a little sad that all people seem to want is just another sequel of an existing intellectual property... how about Bioware making a new IP entirely? Something new for a change, not just rehashes of old games.

Because it's easier to make sequels and they're still profitable. Unfortunate but true. Bioware's hardly the only offender though.

You're missing the point... I said I found it sad that the people HERE seem to want nothing but sequels... I get why Bioware and all game companies make sequels -- profitability.

I just find it a little depressing that this is what gamers seem to want, if this thread is anything to go by. Of course I know they'll make sequels -- but why people want them in such abundance and not a new world / setting to explore baffles me.

Sequels have their place, sure - it can be fun to explore an existing setting in greater detail... but basically everyone person in this thread spoke of wanting a sequel to an already existing game... not something new.... that's a little saddening to me is all.

[Rockworm503]

slimgrin wrote...

termokanden wrote...

Oh I do. Don't get me wrong this is not an attack on TW2. But it's just that while some of the criticism of DA2 and ME3 in particular is spot on, a lot of it is just seems like random attacks on BioWare to me.

But I admit I do not see the difference between the two (or three) cases of hero worship. I actually don't even see what the problem is in the first place.

Bioware really hasn't begun to milk their two IP's yet, but they're set to, and that's my issue with the industry as a whole. How many TES, COD, Halo, or Fallout games do we need? It seems gamers are as reluctant as developers to embrace a new IP. I can't relate with that. I want three Witcher games and no more. I think Fallout and TES should be done at this point. But try telling gamers that. 


What's happened with Bioware's recent outings is unrelated to the OP and I'm not going there.

Need MOAR Final Fantasy!

[termokanden]

I'm trying to explain that it's possible to want a sequel for Jade Empire (because I liked the setting and thought it was a really fun game) and at the same time also a completely new setting.

No other company is likely to make a sequel for Jade Empire. Therefore it seems relevant to mention it here. The same goes for the other BioWare settings.

Don't jump to conclusions and take that as a sign that we don't want anything new.

Modifié par termokanden, 08 juillet 2012 - 11:27 .

[Luke Pearce]

Skelter192 wrote...

Bioware would take a simple Pirate story such as finding booty and make it about saving the world and getting married.

I would like to see a studio make a pirate rpg that takes itself seriously though until then I have Sid Meier's Pirates. Also have you ever heard of Mount and Blade? The team is working on making their own open world pirate rpg.

No I haven't...thanks, I'll keep my eye on that game. I am just itching for a good pirate rpg! Bioware has never done anything like it so that's why I would like to see them have a go.

android654 wrote...

I'd like to see them have some balls and make a real mature game for once and not a teen drama in the middle of a child's fantasy book. Maybe a nice noire detective rpg that's well written and feels like a Humphrey Bogart movie.

Sounds good! Lots of potential for an awesome story.

Fuinris wrote...

Steam punk. And take out the gritty. We've seen enough of it lately. Of course there can be handled mature themes and violence in combat, but not the 'mature'-mark which has been stamped on every movie, game and tv series in the last couple of years.

Except the Ebon Hawke/Party Camp/Mansion an airship would do. Airship pirates anyone?

Yes please! Steampunk is something I like but most developers rarely get it right...There are a few steampunk-ish games coming out though (Bioshock Infinite and Dishonored for example) so Bioware can wait a bit before they have a go.

I don't get why people DON'T believe a new IP will work...I thought the reveal of Watch Dogs proved that people WANT to see something new! I can see why. This gen has been huge on the sequels (5 assassins creed games, a new COD game every year and Halo games out the wazoo! Trilogies of many games such as mass effect, uncharted, etc.) and people are getting tired. So while they may be alright games I still think it's time to bring out some new ideas to get people interested.

Some people are hoping for sequels to their fave Bioware games such as Jade Empire, KOTOR and Bulders Gate and while I would be really happy if they announced a sequel I would be even more excited for a fresh new IP set in an interesting locale or has a lot of potential for a complex story.

[termokanden]

I still don't think it has much to do with picking a new or an old setting but rather the story and the gameplay mechanics.

For example, I would not want to play a game that has Duke Nukem Forever's quality just because it's in a brand "new" steampunk setting.

New settings can of course be fun. But I think in particular in fantasy, there is a tendency to invent a new setting that is basically like every other setting, but THIS TIME, elves are called snoozleflurfls and orcs are blue. A new good setting would be welcome. But it shouldn't have to be new just to be new.

[Andarthiel_Demigod]

 I said it once and I'll say it again. I want a Feudal Japan RPG where you get to pick a class/role.

[Mylia Stenetch]

Skelter192 wrote...

Elhanan wrote...

ibbikiookami wrote...

A truly mature game like The Witcher (uncensored, *** americans) and TW2, set in the Dragon Age universe.

Personally, do not define this as mature.

Well since you never played it you wouldn't really know. 

I want Bioware to make a game that doesn't treat my like some dumb, angsty teen.

I felt that The Witcher, was not an adult mature but gamer mature. 

Edit, if I want to look for an mature game based on the idea of being an adult instead of just what most people call mature I look to Atlus first, mainly for the Persona series, and the enojyment of Catherine.

Modifié par Mylia Stenetch, 09 juillet 2012 - 12:53 .

[Mylia Stenetch]

android654 wrote...

^It's because Bioware has cemented their reputation. They frown upon new ideas and want to leech off of whatever has proven to be profitable. They don't care about making good games, they care about making good selling games. There's an inherent difference between the two.

You mean any entertainment conglomerant? They all do it, this is nothing new from Bioware, movies, other gaming companies, music industry etc. The path of least resistance and lowest common demonination will always prevail over something new and risky.

[Chromie]

Mylia Stenetch wrote...

android654 wrote...

^It's because Bioware has cemented their reputation. They frown upon new ideas and want to leech off of whatever has proven to be profitable. They don't care about making good games, they care about making good selling games. There's an inherent difference between the two.

You mean any entertainment conglomerant? They all do it, this is nothing new from Bioware, movies, other gaming companies, music industry etc. The path of least resistance and lowest common demonination will always prevail over something new and risky.

So I guess games like Wasteland 2, Witcher, Shadowrun Returns, Underrail, Deadstate, Age of Decadence, Divinity Original Sin and all the other turn based rpgs comings out in 2013 must be doing the same? What about Obsidian or Bethesda? They do their own thing (Obsidian most of the time) and look at how it's paid of for Bethesda with Skyrim selling over 10+ million copies.

[Dominus]

I want to see a BioWare vs. Black Isle Studios Fighter Game. 

Morrigan/Wrex/Shepard Vs. Nameless One/The Master/Dak'kon.

Nameless One Wins. IMMORTALITY

Modifié par DominusVita, 09 juillet 2012 - 12:57 .

[Mylia Stenetch]

Skelter192 wrote...

Mylia Stenetch wrote...

android654 wrote...

^It's because Bioware has cemented their reputation. They frown upon new ideas and want to leech off of whatever has proven to be profitable. They don't care about making good games, they care about making good selling games. There's an inherent difference between the two.

You mean any entertainment conglomerant? They all do it, this is nothing new from Bioware, movies, other gaming companies, music industry etc. The path of least resistance and lowest common demonination will always prevail over something new and risky.

So I guess games like Wasteland 2, Witcher, Shadowrun Returns, Underrail, Deadstate, Age of Decadence, Divinity Original Sin and all the other turn based rpgs comings out in 2013 must be doing the same? What about Obsidian or Bethesda? They do their own thing (Obsidian most of the time) and look at how it's paid of for Bethesda with Skyrim selling over 10+ million copies.

Once again, even if you put all those games out how many CoD rehashes will come out? For one unique game that does come out how much sequels, reboots, rehashes, or just quick cash grabs will happen. I am stating that Bioware is doing nothing new.

Also to play on the idea of least resistance, Bethesda did make a sequel called Skyrim to their very popular series. Title alone would help sell and push a lot of product for that, same of Bioware hoped for ME3. Of course Bethesda did better in the long run of it, but they still made sure to maximize profits with their tried and true standard.

Still looking into the other parts of this forums, Bioware can still milk stuff out since people still want a Romance DLC.

*Edit*
To the rest of the games there, I hope they do succeed, I want more unique games out there. That is why I am excited, which I stated in the thread about it the new Cyberpunk game CDProject is planning. I as a person try to treat each game in it's own vaccum, and not to play into the fanboiism that does come into the gaming world. I got burned with that when I played KoToR II long ago, and with CoH and vowed never to be like that since those burnings.

Modifié par Mylia Stenetch, 09 juillet 2012 - 02:22 .

[BatmanPWNS]

A game where you blow a lot of sh!t up. The RPG would be where you get to pick what sh!t to blow up.

[android654]

Mylia Stenetch wrote...

Skelter192 wrote...

Mylia Stenetch wrote...

android654 wrote...

^It's because Bioware has cemented their reputation. They frown upon new ideas and want to leech off of whatever has proven to be profitable. They don't care about making good games, they care about making good selling games. There's an inherent difference between the two.

You mean any entertainment conglomerant? They all do it, this is nothing new from Bioware, movies, other gaming companies, music industry etc. The path of least resistance and lowest common demonination will always prevail over something new and risky.

So I guess games like Wasteland 2, Witcher, Shadowrun Returns, Underrail, Deadstate, Age of Decadence, Divinity Original Sin and all the other turn based rpgs comings out in 2013 must be doing the same? What about Obsidian or Bethesda? They do their own thing (Obsidian most of the time) and look at how it's paid of for Bethesda with Skyrim selling over 10+ million copies.

Once again, even if you put all those games out how many CoD rehashes will come out? For one unique game that does come out how much sequels, reboots, rehashes, or just quick cash grabs will happen. I am stating that Bioware is doing nothing new.

Also to play on the idea of least resistance, Bethesda did make a sequel called Skyrim to their very popular series. Title alone would help sell and push a lot of product for that, same of Bioware hoped for ME3. Of course Bethesda did better in the long run of it, but they still made sure to maximize profits with their tried and true standard.

Still looking into the other parts of this forums, Bioware can still milk stuff out since people still want a Romance DLC.

How many years apart was Skyrim from Oblivion? The answer, too many for them to conceivably be simply cashing off of the style or name. Look at what they're doing with Dead Space. It's the same thing they did with Mass Effect and Dragon Age. They copied a more actiony playstyle since it sold well with other titles. That's why most games suck and cause a stale market.

Think about how many games copied God Of War once it became popular. How many copied Halo? How many copied Gears of War? Mortal Kombat? All great games, but they had people literally take their framework, change the skins, and have the audacity to call it a new game. That's lazy and it undermines the originals that were originally good games by comparing them to cheap knockoffs.

That's why I get excited over a game like Alpha Protocol, L.A. Noire, or Alan Wake. They're too different to be considered heavily influenced on other titles and despite the general consensus, their originality make them instant classics in my eyes.

You want to be a success? Make a game for the sake of making a good game. If you worry only about the dollars, you'll ignore the integrity fo the product. That's why BW sucks now. They had two original and really new ips and in their last two chapters, they ditched their original ideas for profits and the end result was a weaker product.

[Mylia Stenetch]

android654 wrote...
How many years apart was Skyrim from Oblivion? The answer, too many for them to conceivably be simply cashing off of the style or name. Look at what they're doing with Dead Space. It's the same thing they did with Mass Effect and Dragon Age. They copied a more actiony playstyle since it sold well with other titles. That's why most games suck and cause a stale market.

It does not matter the length of time between sequels, it was still based on the hype from this, it is like Half-Life 3, people will buy it cause they know Half-Life as an excellent series, it does not matter what it brings forth. This is the same for the Elder Scrolls series, people see this and will buy it no matter-what it is the same effect people have with Bioware games.

Think about how many games copied God Of War once it became popular. How many copied Halo? How many copied Gears of War? Mortal Kombat? All great games, but they had people literally take their framework, change the skins, and have the audacity to call it a new game. That's lazy and it undermines the originals that were originally good games by comparing them to cheap knockoffs.

That's why I get excited over a game like Alpha Protocol, L.A. Noire, or Alan Wake. They're too different to be considered heavily influenced on other titles and despite the general consensus, their originality make them instant classics in my eyes.

Yes I did state, how many CoD rip offs there out there now, this was my main point is Bioware is not the only company doing it, while they are cash-grabbing, it is not a new phenomenon. As I said, I get excited for now for the games I have played by Altus, since it treats the game as art medium with a amazing story (from what I have done with Persona serires and Catherine). I am also excited for Borderlands 2, even though a sequel it is something unique I have enjoied in recent.

You want to be a success? Make a game for the sake of making a good game. If you worry only about the dollars, you'll ignore the integrity fo the product. That's why BW sucks now. They had two original and really new ips and in their last two chapters, they ditched their original ideas for profits and the end result was a weaker product.

This again is not just Bioware, a lot of companies are doing this now, they want to make games/movies/music generic enough that they can attract a large audiance to make a lot of money which is success for them. Success is a rough ideal to define cause it will be different for everyone you talk to. While there are simmilarities if we all poll what we gauge at this, it is still an interruptation.

Still right now that we are living in a capitalist world, the definition of success is making lots of money and being extremly profitable. This is not my defination of sucess, but it is what the "majority" view it as. Just as the "majority" want better and better graphics or bigger multiplayer, while ignoring single player. Or here "majority" of people wanting some fan-fic, I do not know what else to call it romance DLC, cause of some deep feelings for pixels they developed.

[termokanden]

I thought this was a thread about what people wanted from future BioWare games and not the ills of capitalism. May I remind you that you are currently on the BioWare Social Network patronizing people who like some of BioWare's characters enough to want a romance DLC.

Ah I give up. It's the same debate and opinions every single time; it's like we're following a script here.

[Mylia Stenetch]

termokanden wrote...

I thought this was a thread about what people wanted from future BioWare games and not the ills of capitalism. May I remind you that you are currently on the BioWare Social Network patronizing people who like some of BioWare's characters enough to want a romance DLC.

Ah I give up. It's the same debate and opinions every single time; it's like we're following a script here.

I know where I am at, and my opinion is as valid or invalid as other people here also. To being the same debate, opinion...that is what you want to see. My opinions are mine alone and speak for myself, since not beening on here for a bit, and not paying attention to anything people complaining about post ending romance DLC causing the ending did not fullful this or what character to make romanceable via DLC is ridiculous to me. 

I think Bioware does good charcterizations, stories are usually weak at best, but this is getting out of hand in my opinion. Also it is off-topic it came to off-topic ideas, that may not always preach in favor of Bioware.

[android654]

Mylia Stenetch wrote...

android654 wrote...
How many years apart was Skyrim from Oblivion? The answer, too many for them to conceivably be simply cashing off of the style or name. Look at what they're doing with Dead Space. It's the same thing they did with Mass Effect and Dragon Age. They copied a more actiony playstyle since it sold well with other titles. That's why most games suck and cause a stale market.

It does not matter the length of time between sequels, it was still based on the hype from this, it is like Half-Life 3, people will buy it cause they know Half-Life as an excellent series, it does not matter what it brings forth. This is the same for the Elder Scrolls series, people see this and will buy it no matter-what it is the same effect people have with Bioware games.

Yet no one has really copied Skyrim and the size and amount of content in that game is rather unique to Bethtesda. I'm not against sequels, I'm against people copying off of someone else's product without enough substantive change to make the product their own.

Yes I did state, how many CoD rip offs there out there now, this was my main point is Bioware is not the only company doing it, while they are cash-grabbing, it is not a new phenomenon. As I said, I get excited for now for the games I have played by Altus, since it treats the game as art medium with a amazing story (from what I have done with Persona serires and Catherine). I am also excited for Borderlands 2, even though a sequel it is something unique I have enjoied in recent.

I'm only talking about BW since the topic is about BW. I liked Catherine aswell, a huge part of it is because there's really nothing else like it out there at all. Again, sequels are not bad by any stretch of the imagination. But if we have borderlands, we don't need other studios trying to steal the framework of that game, change the environments and characters a bit, and calling it their own. That's intellectual property theft.

This again is not just Bioware, a lot of companies are doing this now, they want to make games/movies/music generic enough that they can attract a large audiance to make a lot of money which is success for them. Success is a rough ideal to define cause it will be different for everyone you talk to. While there are simmilarities if we all poll what we gauge at this, it is still an interruptation.

I disagree. If you told me the concept of Katherine, Heavy Rain or Alan Wake, I would say that they all sound dumb and not to my taste. The developers of those individual games however didn't care about what a group wants, but what they wanted to make. That's what I was getting at. The people making these games need to concern themselves less with focus groups, target demos and past fans and concern themselves more with making the game they want to make.

If you're making something for someone else and not for yourself, you care for the product falls significantly. If you're making somehting for yourself, you care more about how it is going to turn out.

Still right now that we are living in a capitalist world, the definition of success is making lots of money and being extremly profitable. This is not my defination of sucess, but it is what the "majority" view it as. Just as the "majority" want better and better graphics or bigger multiplayer, while ignoring single player. Or here "majority" of people wanting some fan-fic, I do not know what else to call it romance DLC, cause of some deep feelings for pixels they developed.

How anyone wants a romance DLC after the character treatment most of the crew got in ME3 is beyond me. Still, clammoring fans are no excuse for a lack of originality.

[Mylia Stenetch]

[quote]android654 wrote...

Yet no one has really copied Skyrim and the size and amount of content in that game is rather unique to Bethtesda. I'm not against sequels, I'm against people copying off of someone else's product without enough substantive change to make the product their own.
[/quote]

To Skyrim, the idea is the building of the sequel and how it was a comfort for gamers, knowing a world they knew and loved from past games. Made it an easy path for them to build off of first. What they did afterwards, is why they are more successful than ME3, as I said earlier in this thread.

[quote]
I'm only talking about BW since the topic is about BW. I liked Catherine aswell, a huge part of it is because there's really nothing else like it out there at all. Again, sequels are not bad by any stretch of the imagination. But if we have borderlands, we don't need other studios trying to steal the framework of that game, change the environments and characters a bit, and calling it their own. That's intellectual property theft.
[/quote]

While this is a bit about Bioware, I tend to think larger than that, and due to this being an off-topic area bleed into other companies easier than in other threads. I agree also sequels can be good, but they are still designed as a cash-cow since it harkens our happy times with thre predecessor game. While a company might not dirrectly take actually designes from Boderlands as our example is, there will be people who take the idea and make then own idea, Rage anyone?

[/quote]
I disagree. If you told me the concept of Katherine, Heavy Rain or Alan Wake, I would say that they all sound dumb and not to my taste. The developers of those individual games however didn't care about what a group wants, but what they wanted to make. That's what I was getting at. The people making these games need to concern themselves less with focus groups, target demos and past fans and concern themselves more with making the game they want to make.

 If you're making something for someone else and not for yourself, you care for the product falls significantly. If you're making somehting for yourself, you care more about how it is going to turn out. 
[/quote]

I do not disagree with you there, most of the stuff I enjoy mainstream people would hate, cause of it not falling into that comfort zone. While I do applaud the indie or large companies not falling in step with focus groups or any of that sense. I am just saying it is a growing trend where entertainmnet (majoirty not all) is trying to find quick cop out to make a quick buck. There may be some with passion to do excellent, and they do deserve our money, it is still a small breed at the moment.

[quote]
How anyone wants a romance DLC after the character treatment most of the crew got in ME3 is beyond me. Still, clammoring fans are no excuse for a lack of originality.
[/quote]

Fully agree with you on this, but if large companies want to play it safe, they will milk the base dry. But it give them something they clammour for they will spend in two-fold, so it makes them just do a re-hash.  Which is sad, instead of running a new original DLC lets say they could just do that and make just as much or more money. (All theory on it of course).

Modifié par Mylia Stenetch, 09 juillet 2012 - 04:54 .