1638 réponses à ce sujet

[crimzontearz]

Ok, pal. I don't mean to stand in the way of your hatered. If you feel like blaming someone for daring to write something he or she pleases as a writer just because you don't like it or expected something else, then please do.
I call this childish entitlement, but suit yourself. There's nothing else I could add to this. Only that this whole thing you discribed has nothing to do with Bioware's attitude at all. You're talking about a creative decision.

Happy blaming and hating for you.

LOL truth is that 2 designers pushed for a happier, optional, ending (which would have pleased many) but the lead writer chose to go his way with the sucky delivery, likely because, if he did not, no one would have picked his precious pet endings (which are already according to the official telemetry) less than HALF as popular as destroy)

But, you know, it's ok. Really, I will be ambiguous about buying the game new (if after full spoilers I still want to buy it) and BW can speculate as per why I am choosing that venue. Win win.

[nevar00]

GimmeDaGun wrote...

nevar00 wrote...

I never really hated the game as it isn't terrible, it's just mediocre and incredibly disappointing. Very linear and streamlined to the point where I never really felt the urge to play through a second time. None of your decisions (especially stuff like the Collector Base and rachni) not mattering didn't help things. Then the ending mission was a disappointment and of course the rest we all know. I've tried to play through twice since beating it the first time with some of the other Shepards I already had and honestly I got bored both times and quit in the middle.

The multiplayer was much better and I usually don't even care much for multiplayer.

The same could be said about the other two games too... so I don't get your point really. It's really a matter of taste and expectations. 

Considering I did not feel that the other two games were "very linear and streamlined to the point where I have never really felt the urge to play through a second time"... I would not say the same about the other two games.  I played through them multiple times with different scenarios playing out assuming there would be consequences for my actions which, at the time, certainly improved the replayability of the two.  So I don't get your point really...

Mass Effect 1 was a very dirty game.  It had flaws and honestly I didn't like it the first time I played it.  But once you get used to it on the second time through knowing where to go and how often to save and everything and getting used to the stiff controls, I actually think I like the combat in that game more than the other two.  There are much more options in that game, the others play out like mediocre gears of war clones in the combat.  Not sure what this has to do with anything but I thought I'd throw that out there.

[GimmeDaGun]

crimzontearz wrote...

Ok, pal. I don't mean to stand in the way of your hatered. If you feel like blaming someone for daring to write something he or she pleases as a writer just because you don't like it or expected something else, then please do.
I call this childish entitlement, but suit yourself. There's nothing else I could add to this. Only that this whole thing you discribed has nothing to do with Bioware's attitude at all. You're talking about a creative decision.

Happy blaming and hating for you.

LOL truth is that 2 designers pushed for a happier, optional, ending (which would have pleased many) but the lead writer chose to go his way with the sucky delivery, likely because, if he did not, no one would have picked his precious pet endings (which are already according to the official telemetry) less than HALF as popular as destroy)

But, you know, it's ok. Really, I will be ambiguous about buying the game new (if after full spoilers I still want to buy it) and BW can speculate as per why I am choosing that venue. Win win.

As I said, suit yourself. 

[GimmeDaGun]

nevar00 wrote...

GimmeDaGun wrote...

nevar00 wrote...

I never really hated the game as it isn't terrible, it's just mediocre and incredibly disappointing. Very linear and streamlined to the point where I never really felt the urge to play through a second time. None of your decisions (especially stuff like the Collector Base and rachni) not mattering didn't help things. Then the ending mission was a disappointment and of course the rest we all know. I've tried to play through twice since beating it the first time with some of the other Shepards I already had and honestly I got bored both times and quit in the middle.

The multiplayer was much better and I usually don't even care much for multiplayer.

The same could be said about the other two games too... so I don't get your point really. It's really a matter of taste and expectations. 

Considering I did not feel that the other two games were "very linear and streamlined to the point where I have never really felt the urge to play through a second time"... I would not say the same about the other two games.  I played through them multiple times with different scenarios playing out assuming there would be consequences for my actions which, at the time, certainly improved the replayability of the two.  So I don't get your point really...

Mass Effect 1 was a very dirty game.  It had flaws and honestly I didn't like it the first time I played it.  But once you get used to it on the second time through knowing where to go and how often to save and everything and getting used to the stiff controls, I actually think I like the combat in that game more than the other two.  There are much more options in that game, the others play out like mediocre gears of war clones in the combat.  Not sure what this has to do with anything but I thought I'd throw that out there.

Well, I don't know. I don't agree with you on this one. Every single ME game is streamlined. The only noticable difference I see is that ME3 has less dialogue choices which kind of takes away from the role-playing side of things and from the illusion of having control over the character. It's one of those changes I don't like about ME3, but it does not make the first two less streamlined for me. 

[CronoDragoon]

I disagree that ME1 is streamlined, but I also have no clue why the connotation is bad here. ME2 was streamlined so much because ME1 was such a clunky, bloated mess when it came to things like inventory, planet exploration, etc. They streamlined it a bit too much in ME2, which is why ME3 reintroduced some gameplay elements such as customized weapons, weapon weight, a more robust skill system, etc. Dialogue aside, the gameplay of ME3 strikes the right balance between intricate and streamlined for me.

[EagleScoutDJB]

I don't know if hate is the right word for it but it's still the only Bioware game I own that I haven't completed more than one plythrough. I still play the MP a lot but for me the SP has zero replay value.

[GimmeDaGun]

CronoDragoon wrote...

I disagree that ME1 is streamlined, but I also have no clue why the connotation is bad here. ME2 was streamlined so much because ME1 was such a clunky, bloated mess when it came to things like inventory, planet exploration, etc. They streamlined it a bit too much in ME2, which is why ME3 reintroduced some gameplay elements such as customized weapons, weapon weight, a more robust skill system, etc. Dialogue aside, the gameplay of ME3 strikes the right balance between intricate and streamlined for me.

I was talking about the story.

[Ecrulis]

Hate is the wrong word, I never really hated the game, I was disappointed with it, combat mechanics wise I actually enjoy it but the story is a complete literary mess, but then again I saw that problem coming as far back as ME2.

[Redbelle]

GimmeDaGun wrote...

CronoDragoon wrote...

I disagree that ME1 is streamlined, but I also have no clue why the connotation is bad here. ME2 was streamlined so much because ME1 was such a clunky, bloated mess when it came to things like inventory, planet exploration, etc. They streamlined it a bit too much in ME2, which is why ME3 reintroduced some gameplay elements such as customized weapons, weapon weight, a more robust skill system, etc. Dialogue aside, the gameplay of ME3 strikes the right balance between intricate and streamlined for me.

I was talking about the story.

And if anything ME3 was more streamlined than ME2.

Heavy weapons. Gone.
Drivable tanks. Gone.
Holstering weapon. Gone.

Everything that was added to ME3 only added to the combat. The rest of the game scarely acknowledged that Shepard was more than a gun with a mouth.

Environmental Hazards in SP. Gone.
Door and Terminal Hacking. Gone.

These game mechanics fundamentally alter the play experience by adding variation and brief breaks between combat.

Or to put it another way.

Mass Effect's 3 later missions were one note. And it held that note longer than ME1 and 2's missions. And there comes a point when you hold that one note long enough..... It just becomes noise.

These things are not game breaking, for me at least. But once you notice they are gone, you start to wonder when you'll get to the point where you can engage in these activities..... and when you realise that they are gone for good.

Well...... ME's lost something that was part of the mixture that made Mass Effect so good to begin with.

After all. Lose the icing on the cake. All your left with is sponge and who in their right mind does that for a child's 11th birthday? (Not that I'm still bitter or anything) <_<

Modifié par Redbelle, 12 février 2014 - 05:55 .

[CronoDragoon]

Redbelle wrote...
And if anything ME3 was more streamlined than ME2.

Heavy weapons. Gone.

This is a bit dishonest. The weapons system in ME3 is far more intricate than ME2. Highlighting one feature that was removed and failing to mention everything added is not good practice for discussion.

Drivable tanks. Gone.

True.

Holstering weapon. Gone.

Lol.

Environmental Hazards in SP. Gone.

Less than ME2 to be sure, but it still exists in the geth dreadnaught mission and at least one N7 mission.

Door and Terminal Hacking. Gone.

True. I'm actually curious about this: was the feedback largely negative? I enjoyed these minigames but I could also see a scenario where many find them annoying.

Modifié par CronoDragoon, 12 février 2014 - 06:01 .

[GimmeDaGun]

Redbelle wrote...

GimmeDaGun wrote...

CronoDragoon wrote...

I disagree that ME1 is streamlined, but I also have no clue why the connotation is bad here. ME2 was streamlined so much because ME1 was such a clunky, bloated mess when it came to things like inventory, planet exploration, etc. They streamlined it a bit too much in ME2, which is why ME3 reintroduced some gameplay elements such as customized weapons, weapon weight, a more robust skill system, etc. Dialogue aside, the gameplay of ME3 strikes the right balance between intricate and streamlined for me.

I was talking about the story.

And if anything ME3 was more streamlined than ME2.

Heavy weapons. Gone.
Drivable tanks. Gone.
Holstering weapon. Gone.

Everything that was added to ME3 only added to the combat. The rest of the game scarely acknowledged that Shepard was more than a gun with a mouth.

Environmental Hazards in SP. Gone.
Door and Terminal Hacking. Gone.

These game mechanics fundamentally alter the play experience by adding variation and brief breaks between combat.

Or to put it another way.

Mass Effect's 3 later missions were one note. And it held that note longer than ME1 and 2's missions. And there comes a point when you hold that one note long enough..... It just becomes noise.

These things are not game breaking, for me at least. But once you notice they are gone, you start to wonder when you'll get to the point where you can engage in these activities..... and when you realise that they are gone for good.

Well...... ME's lost something that was part of the mixture that made Mass Effect so good to begin with.

After all. Lose the icing on the cake. All your left with is sponge and who in their right mind does that for a child's 11th birthday? (Not that I'm still bitter or anything) <_<

I try again. I was talking about the story not the game mechanics.

[dreamgazer]

crimzontearz wrote...

LOL truth is that 2 designers pushed for a happier, optional, ending (which would have pleased many) but the lead writer chose to go his way with the sucky delivery, likely because, if he did not, no one would have picked his precious pet endings (which are already according to the official telemetry) less than HALF as popular as destroy)

That's not the "truth".  That's your willfully negative conjecture over vague personal messages with one developer. 

[AresKeith]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Door and Terminal Hacking. Gone.

True. I'm actually curious about this: was the feedback largely negative? I enjoyed these minigames but I could also see a scenario where many find them annoying.

Think that's the case of Bioware's "scrap it instead of improving"

Modifié par AresKeith, 12 février 2014 - 06:46 .

[Nole]

I liked the 3 games but thanks to BSN I have come to dislike ME3, a lot.

[dreamgazer]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Door and Terminal Hacking. Gone.

True. I'm actually curious about this: was the feedback largely negative? I enjoyed these minigames but I could also see a scenario where many find them annoying.

I believe both games were criticized for them because they were repetitive and kinda nonsensical, which they really can be. They could have been made much more interesting, but BioWare were batting 0/2.  To the chopping block they go.

The hacking minigames in Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag are proof that they can be fun, challenging, and not at all monotonous.

Modifié par dreamgazer, 12 février 2014 - 06:54 .

[JeffZero]

It's been in my top five games list since Extended Cut, so... no, I never have?

[78stonewobble]

GimmeDaGun wrote...
Ok, pal. I don't mean to stand in the way of your hatered. If you feel like blaming someone for daring to write something he or she pleases as a writer just because you don't like it or expected something else, then please do. 
I call this childish entitlement, but suit yourself. There's nothing else I could add to this. Only that this whole thing you discribed has nothing to do with Bioware's attitude at all. You're talking about a creative decision.

Happy blaming and hating for you.

Well I tend to think it's equally childish to not be able to receive critique or admit to having screwed up or atleast performed worse than expected.

A food analogy:

I like my meat BURNED! ... allways. I think it's the best thing evah. Can I then only expect praise if I only serve burned meat to everyone else?

Or is it not ok to say to me... "You know what? I actually prefer my meat rare... I actually think your burned meat tastes like coal...."

...

The point being... you can go crazy if you're making something for yourself. If you want to make something for other people? Then you have to take their tastes into account...

Modifié par 78stonewobble, 12 février 2014 - 07:48 .

[Iakus]

78stonewobble wrote...

The point being... you can go crazy if you're making something for yourself. If you want to make something for other people? Then you have to take their tastes into account...

HERESY! HERESY! 

[Iakus]

dreamgazer wrote...


I believe both games were criticized for them because they were repetitive and kinda nonsensical, which they really can be. They could have been made much more interesting, but BioWare were batting 0/2.  To the chopping block they go.

I've had my share of criticisms fro ME2, but their hacking/bypass minigames were actually kinda fun.

[KotorEffect3]

Nate_Assassin wrote...

ME3 is cool.

If you hate it go play something else and stop coming here and b****ing about it.

This

[KotorEffect3]

WittingEight65 wrote...

I liked the 3 games but thanks to BSN I have come to dislike ME3, a lot.

So in other words you have allowed the bsn to influence you instead of thinking for yourself? 

[dreamgazer]

iakus wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...


I believe both games were criticized for them because they were repetitive and kinda nonsensical, which they really can be. They could have been made much more interesting, but BioWare were batting 0/2.  To the chopping block they go.

I've had my share of criticisms fro ME2, but their hacking/bypass minigames were actually kinda fun.

I liked their attempt at real-world application, at least, and how they improved over ME1's button responses.

I don't exactly agree with them being "fun", especially the process of following the circuitry in those intentionally obscured images, and they do get very repetitive, especially the block-text hacking.  They're ... tolerable, I suppose.

I prefer hacking games over no hacking games, though.

[wright1978]

iakus wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...


I believe both games were criticized for them because they were repetitive and kinda nonsensical, which they really can be. They could have been made much more interesting, but BioWare were batting 0/2.  To the chopping block they go.

I've had my share of criticisms fro ME2, but their hacking/bypass minigames were actually kinda fun.

I didn't have any issues with the ME2 hacking/bypass mini game. Think they were probably ditched as part of the wider attempts to go for cinematic flow over interactivity.

[Killdren88]

Do I still hate the ending? Most defiantly, would change it in a instant if given a chance. Do I let ruin my enjoyment of games in general as it did during the whole debacle. Not anymore.

[dreamgazer]

wright1978 wrote...

iakus wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...


I believe both games were criticized for them because they were repetitive and kinda nonsensical, which they really can be. They could have been made much more interesting, but BioWare were batting 0/2.  To the chopping block they go.

I've had my share of criticisms fro ME2, but their hacking/bypass minigames were actually kinda fun.

I didn't have any issues with the ME2 hacking/bypass mini game. Think they were probably ditched as part of the wider attempts to go for cinematic flow over interactivity.

Perhaps, but again, it was also likely in response to negative player feedback.

Like ditching the Mako and open exploration in ME2.