179 réponses à ce sujet

[Majestic Jazz]

Yeah, I know, this topic like many of my other topics are full of hyperbole, but I still think there is some substance in it. As you may have known by now, Bioware's GM Mr. Aaryn Flynn said that Dragon Age: Inquisition will NOT be a template for what to expect with Mass Effect 4. Personally, I say thank god!

 

Now depending on your stance, you may view this in different ways. Some would view this as Bioware wanting to make it clear that ME4 would be its own unique style of game, despite the great success of DAI and the urge that many people would want ME4 to simply be a copy & paste of DAI with Mass Effect skin and story.....the same way some people want the new Star Wars: Battlefront to be a copy & paste of Battlefield with Star Wars skin. That would be a positive way of looking at Mr. Flynn's comments.

 

Some others would view this as Bioware trying to separate ME4 from DAI due to some of the negative feedback that DAI has and the concern that this style of gameplay would find itself into ME4. Concerns such as to name a few....

 

- A MMO-style experience that DAI has

 

- The lack of cinematics that DAI suffers from regarding the over used "over the back" camera style used to cut down on cinematics in order to create large worlds.

 

- Large worlds with much filler content and not much stuff that directly ties into the story other than fetch quest and the emphasis on telling the story of a world through notes/letters rather than through character dialog. This ties back into the 1st point.

 

- 100+ Hour game with only about 15-20 of those hours being true story content while the rest is just filler. Many of the large worlds in DAI does not host any story content at all! Again, linking back to the first point.

 

 

Now before I finish, let me just point out that during last summer, Bioware made it be known that ME4 WOULD be taking some core design elements from DAI. Read here

 

 

So, what do you take of this regarding the future of DA and how it appears that that Bioware is trying to separate ME4 from DAI despite the "success" of DAI.

[United Servo Academy Choir]

One game is an RPG, and the other is a shooter, so I would hope not. The moment Mass Effect shed the poorly implemented RPG stuff was the moment the game got exponentially better.

 

Also, Mass Effect was an 8 hour game with about 50 hours of filler content (and miles of reused environments).

[frankf43]

The way you have structured your post makes it impossible to differentiate between AF's comments and your commentary on them. 

[Abyss108]

Yeah, this has nothing to do with feedback. The second article says it shares some coded systems, nothing to do with the "style of gameplay" inquisition has.

 

(Also, outside of the BSN, feedback for inquisition has been very positive)

[AlanC9]

Bio never exactly repeats formulas. Why would they start with ME4?

[X Equestris]

I read that article, and I think you're trying to twist it to push the narrative the DAI was a failure. I wouldn't expect Bioware to use Inquisition as a template because it isn't suited for every sort of game they want to make.

[SofaJockey]

"I know, this topic like many of my other topics are full of hyperbole"

 

yep.

 

"but I still think there is some substance in it. "

 

nope.

 

"As you may have known by now, Bioware's GM Mr. Aaryn Flynn said that Dragon Age: Inquisition will NOT be a template for what to expect with Mass Effect 4."

 

Understandable, one is fantasy dragons, other is sci-fi space opera / shooter.

 

"Some would view this as Bioware wanting to make it clear that ME4 would be its own unique style of game...

That would be a positive way of looking at Mr. Flynn's comments. "

 

yep.

 

"Some others would view this as Bioware trying to separate ME4 from DAI due to some of the negative feedback..."

 

mmm, lets see, is Aaryn actually trying to distance himself from 116+ GOTY DAI and put the boot in?

nope.

[Arakat]

It seems to me Mass Effect and Dragon Age have always been separate and different series. I'd be more surprised if ME4 did take significant inspiration from DA:I.

[Lebanese Dude]

The reach in the OP. 

 

[DarkKnightHolmes]

That's because the ME series is more interested in turning into a shooter so obviously they wouldn't bother taking inspiration from other RPG's.

[AresKeith]

The reach in the OP. 

 

 

It's pretty standard for the threads he make

[daveliam]

That's because the ME series is more interested in turning into a shooter so obviously they wouldn't bother taking inspiration from other RPG's.

 

Which is unfortunate, in my opinion.  It's why I really can't stand the 'battle mechanics' in ME2 and ME3, I don't want an RPG shooter.  I want an RPG.  I hate shooters.  But, for Bioware's story-telling, I'm willing to put up with the quasi-shooter aspects of the ME series.  I hope it doesn't go further down the shooter path, personally.  I almost gave up on ME2 because it was jarring how "shooter"-like it was.

[aaarcher86]

Seriously, find something better to do with your time.

[Avejajed]

It wouldn't have anything to do with being a different game by a different team or anything. 

[Cyonan]

A lot of people seem to mis-interpret the "we can borrow a lot of the core systems" statement to mean "this is going to be Inquisition: Space Edition". That coupled with the success of DA:I probably led them to wanting to be clear that Mass Effect has always been a different game from Dragon Age and is going to continue to be its own game. That's all I got out of Aaryn's statement, and your OP seems less hyperbole and more twisting words.

 

As far as the "core systems" bit itself, it doesn't mean it's going to share design elements of Inquisition. Core systems can mean stuff like the AI companions, which is a standard in all BioWare games. They don't need to recreate all that code from nothing, as they can just take Inquisition's code and tweak it a bit to make it work.

 

 

Which is unfortunate, in my opinion.  It's why I really can't stand the 'battle mechanics' in ME2 and ME3, I don't want an RPG shooter.  I want an RPG.  I hate shooters.  But, for Bioware's story-telling, I'm willing to put up with the quasi-shooter aspects of the ME series.  I hope it doesn't go further down the shooter path, personally.  I almost gave up on ME2 because it was jarring how "shooter"-like it was.

 

The only thing is that Mass Effect was always trying to be a RPG shooter.

 

Hopefully they bring back more RPG stuff for the next one, but Mass Effect 3 finally got to a place where the gunplay is actually good. I wouldn't want them to stop just because some people don't like that half of the game's genre. Both the shooting and the RPing they should be trying to improve upon.

[sjsharp2011]

tbh the 2 game series have only 2 thinjgs in common anyway.

 

1 they're both made by the same company.

2 They're both RPG's

 

Aside from that they're entirely different entities DA is set in a more Medieval setting and is a more tactical RPG ME is set in the future and is a more action based James Bond style game. This is just how I see them so dosen't really add anything new but as long as they keep the quality of graphics up on this new Frostbite engine then I'll be happy. I have to admit that playing Inquisition has made me even more excited for ME4 mostly because I get the feeling that the graphics aer going to be outstanding. I think DAi was always going to be a test the water style game for this engine anyway so I think we were always going to be learning from this and using the new found experience for ME or rather Bioware were. For a first game on this new engine I'd say they've done a good job though I just hope it continues on into ME

[Angry_Elcor]

So... I'm guessing that you were basically hoping that no one would actually read the article, and just take your word for what it said?

[CronoDragoon]

Aaryn's point is that things like the Power system in Inquisition influenced a lot of the zone design, in terms of wanting the progression of the game to feel like the Inquisition was slowly restoring order and taking over these areas. That's not going to be the case in Mass Effect, and the purpose of the exploration will be very different, which will lead to different zone design. Hope that makes sense.

 

Which is unfortunate, in my opinion.  It's why I really can't stand the 'battle mechanics' in ME2 and ME3, I don't want an RPG shooter.  I want an RPG.  I hate shooters.  But, for Bioware's story-telling, I'm willing to put up with the quasi-shooter aspects of the ME series.  I hope it doesn't go further down the shooter path, personally.  I almost gave up on ME2 because it was jarring how "shooter"-like it was.

 

Mass Effect was always a shooter with RPG elements, though; it just did a terrible job of it in the first iteration. An RPG featuring guns is more similar to Front Mission, Wasteland, or Xenosaga.

[Wulfram]

The audience for DA is different from the audience for ME. Features that are welcomed by DA audience aren't necessarily welcomed by ME

[Sanunes]

The next Mass Effect game could only distance itself from Dragon Age: Inquisition if people at EA or BioWare were saying they were going to use Dragon Age: Inquisition as a template at any time.  Just because they are going to be sharing core systems does not mean the user experience will be close, in fact it gives the next Mass Effect game more room to grow for they don't have to go back and re-invent those systems for the game.

[Hazegurl]

I didn't like DAI that much but I think they are only trying to say that just because one game had a certain system or style doesn't mean all their games will. The fact remains is that people do suddenly expect a company to fall into the logic of "If it was successful here it would be successful there too" and sometimes companies do fall into that line of thinking. But I see the article as simply squashing that mindset by reminding people that ME4 will be it's own game no matter what. 

[daveliam]

The only thing is that Mass Effect was always trying to be a RPG shooter.

 

Hopefully they bring back more RPG stuff for the next one, but Mass Effect 3 finally got to a place where the gunplay is actually good. I wouldn't want them to stop just because some people don't like that half of the game's genre. Both the shooting and the RPing they should be trying to improve upon.

 

Mass Effect was always a shooter with RPG elements, though; it just did a terrible job of it in the first iteration. An RPG featuring guns is more similar to Front Mission, Wasteland, or Xenosaga.

 

Yeah, sorry, I wasn't clear.  I'm aware that Mass Effect was always an RPG shooter.  I was hoping that the game would maintain balance between the elements and, personally, found that ME2 specifically went too far into 'shooter' land for my tastes.  That's more of what I meant.  Not that it shouldn't be a shooter at all.  Ugh, that would just leave us with that awful melee punch thing.  <shudders>

[Hellion Rex]

Ugh, that would just leave us with that awful melee punch thing.  <shudders>

but i loved the new melee punch thing.

[Captain Wiseass]

I'm in favor of any game mechanic that lets you punch a dude in the face. If it lets you punch a dude in the face with a big shiny holographic blade, all the better.

[Geth Supremacy]

This game was bad enough to make me look at them in a negative light.  I will still buy ME4, but it will be out of a bargain bin.  I don't think their games are worth the money...at least if DAI is now the people that work there.

 

I do not appreciate being charged $70 to be your beta tester and I won't forget it.

 

This is coming from someone who LOVED Bioware.