81 odpowiedzi w tym temacie

[DavianBurke]

I'm surprised that many of you seem to be discussing the ongoing and progressively worse failures of this studio with an eye towards their next release in the "hopes" it will be better. 

The following timeline is from my perspective that Dragon Age = rpg, Mass Effect = shooter

Dragon Age Origins & Mass Effect 1
These games were fantastic. Story driven, gripping, characters owned the stage. DA:O was the height of Bioware's RPG endeavours. Their peak. Mass Effect 1 was the introduction of a fantastic new IP rich in lore and with an epic story. A little more RPG'ish than the setting felt like it should be. 

Mass Effect 2
Their last indisputable good game. They took ME1, removed the Mako, made it more action orientated (the combat was much smoother than ME1). Inventory management was far slicker and less micromanagement. 

Dragon Age 2
I personally loved the storyline, though I know many people didn't like how Kirkwall-centric it was.The combat became more action and less RPG and while it made combat feel more fluid, I missed the more precise tactics of the original. Of course, there was also the issue of the ninja enemies dropping in, and every dungeon and home being a variation of the same 3 maps. The first sign of the issues this studio is sinking from. 

Mass Effect 3
Combat is fun, a solid build up from Mass Effect 2. The experience, for me, was epic all the way. Even the "fetch quests" felt to me like supply runs during wartime. While I personally cannot stand the EA stance that every game must have multiplayer, ME3MP was fantastic. The cooperative nature of it was well done. The upgrades and unlock system was great. I do wish they would have released the weapons and characters for direct purchase (of in game credits) at a premium price rather than a random only method. 

The ending was the most steaming pile of drek I've encountered in any game before or since. Casey Hudson was so out of touch with his own writing staff and the fans it's disgusting. The single reason I won't be playing again. Bad enough that an otherwise great game bears a lifetime shadow of pure POS'ness. 

Dragon Age Inquisition
The confluence of all that is wrong with this studio rolled into a supposed AAA release. Built on an engine forced on them by EA via threats of reduced funding otherwise, the game is riddled with bugs and hard coded issues. Especially on PC, but no platform was spared. What's more, in an effort to leech the success of games like Skyrim they built a huge world... and couldn't fill it with actual substance. So we get shards. Alchemy that takes hours of herb gathering. A crafting system that is tacked on and made more complex than necessary so as not to be accused of being too simple (what happened to the hard hidden dungeon with a block of "meteor rock" in it that you take to the dwarven smith to make you an Excalibur?).

There are dozens of threads on the issues, and a since closed over 700 page long thread of PC specific issues. 



So... we have a string of hits starting from Baldurs Gate through ME2... and then in the last 5 years we've seen 3 huge duds. Three AAA games with major issues that lead us to threads showing up begging them not to mess up again.


There's no way they get anymore of my money. Period. 

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

While I thoroughly enjoyed my play through of Dragon Age Inquisition, after 160 hours I have no desire to return and replay it.  I have no desire to even try out a different class in the game.  There is too much grinding for a replay. I had no issues with the gameplay on the XBox 360 other than that the graphics were not even up there with the better games of last gen. There was so much going on that they had to roll back the graphics quality on it, but at least the game played.

 

The crafting system was fine, but it was part of the MMO type grind that was really needed to move forward in the story without getting your ass handed to you. If they had true leveled encounters, a player could skip a lot of that stuff and move on.

 

But this is the thing with RPGs. It's the throw back to the pen and paper stuff. How many people play through Skyrim a second or third time? You put your 200 hrs into the game and that's about it. Maybe you go back to it a few years later. You're left with pleasant memories but you don't want to repeat them, and that's fine.

 

**************

 

ME3 - Bioware ruined the Mass Effect universe with the stupid reaper invasion and ending. That ending was a torch the franchise ending. They're not going to be able to move beyond it without numerous ass pulls, retcons, and canon setting. Sorry folks. We'll have to deal with it. Our choices matter except when they don't - even the decision you made with the rachni will have a huge impact on the final battle.

 

I never want to see an ending like this again. I've chosen all three endings, and I'm an entitled whiner.

 

I like the idea of no inventory system. I hate inventory systems. I don't like the idea that our Spectre was allowed to hack bank terminals for money and rob peoples' homes and everyone thought it was okay. Dumpster diving for credits - here's  something I really hate about RPGs. I know it's traditional for RPGs to be an Easter Egg hunt for treasure, but this is Mass Effect, not Dungeons and Dragons. If we're being paid to do a mission, pay us the full amount for the mission - don't have us hacking bank ATMs, dumpster diving, and stuff like that for  extra credits. I don't have a problem with corpse looting. And I'd like less power tripping for the player. Please don't have whether someone's kid gets their diapers depend upon our character fetching them from the shop two doors down or firing a probe onto some other planet.

[Vazgen]

But this is the thing with RPGs. It's the throw back to the pen and paper stuff. How many people play through Skyrim a second or third time? You put your 200 hrs into the game and that's about it. Maybe you go back to it a few years later. You're left with pleasant memories but you don't want to repeat them, and that's fine.

A lot. The beauty of that game is that you can completely different characters with different motivations and goals, doing different quests and fighting differently (or not at all). What you described can actually be applied to Mass Effect. With Skyrim you can go back whenever you want and create a totally different character. I didn't play DAI but I know that it doesn't offer that degree of freedom. It's not open world that makes the game replayable (though it helps), it's the amount of stuff you can do in that world and possible character variations. 

[Ahriman]

What you described can actually be applied to Mass Effect. With Skyrim you can go back whenever you want and create a totally different character.

Actually, you can become everything in one playthrough. You can drop your robe and stuff anytime and start wrecking things with two-hander. Nothing stops you from being magic wolf asassin. The only reason to create a new character is a change of race/gender, which is purely aesthetical.

[Vazgen]

Actually, you can become everything in one playthrough. You can drop your robe and stuff anytime and start wrecking things with two-hander. Nothing stops you from being magic wolf asassin. The only reason to create a new character is a change of race/gender, which is purely aesthetical.

It is possible to create a character with entirely different motivations. I'm talking about roleplay, not gameplay. You will always be the first human Spectre in Mass Effect. In Skyrim you can avoid being a Dragonborn. 

[Ahriman]

It is possible to create a character with entirely different motivations. I'm talking about roleplay, not gameplay. You will always be the first human Spectre in Mass Effect. In Skyrim you can avoid being a Dragonborn. 

Roleplay is quite, hmm, "virtual" there. Since every path is very much thing in itself and game makes no efforts in creating borders and alternatives. Choice of not doing something is not a choice unless it opens another path. You can "roleplay" pacifist in shooter, but it won't get you anywhere.

I do realise difference between CRPG and sandbox roleplay, but M&B, for example, while having shallow roleplay doesn't allow you to be a merchant and a robber in same time.

[Vazgen]

Roleplay is quite, hmm, "virtual" there. Since every path is very much thing in itself and game makes no efforts in creating borders and alternatives. Choice of not doing something is not a choice unless it opens another path. You can "roleplay" pacifist in shooter, but it won't get you anywhere.

I do realise difference between CRPG and sandbox roleplay, but M&B, for example, while having shallow roleplay doesn't allow you to be a merchant and a robber in same time.

The limits are the ones player sets upon himself. You can be a leader of the Companions and a guildmaster of the Thieves Guild at the same time, sure. But if your roleplay allows it, why not? The thing about Skyrim is that your limitations come mostly from your own imagination.

An example:

An honorable warrior who contracts vampirism one day and seeing how people turn on him breaks something in him. He starts to avoid people, only come out during nights for both physical and psychological reasons. One day he is caught feeding on a villager. He is thrown into jail, his reputation ruined. He escapes and hides in the Riften sewers only to discover the Thieves Guild who accept him for what he is and give him shelter. In search of a cure he might get into the College of Winterhold or he might embrace his new identity and continue his descent into darkness - Dark Brotherhood. 

 

As for your pacifist example, you can roleplay a pacifist in Skyrim and still complete questlines. College of Winterhold is possible as is Thieves Guild (I know, I've done it)

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

In Skyrim, I'd already become a werewolf which made it impossible to contract vampirism. My dishonorable Nord sneak thief - assassin became the dragonborn. Sonja! Dishonor before Death! She was a Stormcloak - it was by fate not choice. Talos made the choice for her. She was exploring the northern wastes and there was a fight going on, something fell in the water behind her, and a message appeared - "You are now a Stormcloak." Talos has spoken! Promptly she visited Ulfric. I played through all the guilds including the Dark Brotherhood - very cool set of quests. The only thing I've not done is play the DLC. Now I bought the big TES for the PC, and I might revisit them at sometime when I want to invest the time. The thought of spending all those hours again.... I really need to wait until the bad weather. But then this summer is a waste since I tore my rotator cuff and can't play golf.

 

Morrowind: 350 Hrs.

Oblivion: 600 Hrs. - yeah I don't see a replay here. I have many fond memories, but I think that's enough time.

Skyrim: 300 Hrs. - should play the DLC.

[themikefest]

I like Skyrim. Lots of fun. Don't know how many hours I put into the game. 

[DavianBurke]

I forgot to mention how dire it is that the studio working on ME4 is the same studio that brought us DAIMP. How in the world they could go from the near masterpiece that was ME3MP to the drek put forth on the next title is beyond me. Severely limited maps on release, buggy as all heck. It was an embarrassment. 

I don't have nearly as much info on BioWare Montreal as I do the Edmonton offices, but assuming the same staff are involved I could only surmise Frostbite is the reason the multiplayer didn't hold up. There's no other reason the same team of people could have rolled a 1. Since ME4 is bound to be Frostbite as well since they've supposedly made every mistake possible on it with their Beta version that was released as "DA:I" it may be marginally better, but I have serious doubts. The track record for this studio is terrible now. 4-5 years of commercially successful (thanks to huge marketing and bankable reputation*) and dubiously critically successful games that have publicly disappointed gamers has ensured not a dollar of mine goes to them. I'll let other schmucks beta test their games on release so the "next one" is better. 

*now gone 

[themikefest]

I like DAI, but if the next ME game is like DAI, I most likely would only do 1 or 2 playthroughs just to say I played it. 

[InterrogationBear]

I forgot to mention how dire it is that the studio working on ME4 is the same studio that brought us DAIMP. How in the world they could go from the near masterpiece that was ME3MP to the drek put forth on the next title is beyond me. Severely limited maps on release, buggy as all heck. It was an embarrassment. 

I don't have nearly as much info on BioWare Montreal as I do the Edmonton offices, but assuming the same staff are involved I could only surmise Frostbite is the reason the multiplayer didn't hold up. There's no other reason the same team of people could have rolled a 1. Since ME4 is bound to be Frostbite as well since they've supposedly made every mistake possible on it with their Beta version that was released as "DA:I" it may be marginally better, but I have serious doubts. The track record for this studio is terrible now. 4-5 years of commercially successful (thanks to huge marketing and bankable reputation*) and dubiously critically successful games that have publicly disappointed gamers has ensured not a dollar of mine goes to them. I'll let other schmucks beta test their games on release so the "next one" is better. 

*now gone 

So much crap in one post. Unbelievable.

 

Montreal, which was pretty small at the time, made the ME3-MP for the base game and the Omega-DLC. They had nothing to do with the DA:I-MP.

And your comments regarding Frostbite are laughable. You have no idea what a graphics engine is.

 

Switching to Frostbite is the best thing that could have happened to Mass Effect. The limitations of the Unreal-engine severely impacted the design of the trilogy.

[L. Han]

^Sounds like you don't either. Engine alone does not magically makes a game better. If anything, there are more developers who are experienced with the Unreal Engine compared to the Frostbite engine. The Frostbite engine isn't flawless. It's got tonnes of limitations just like any engine. It's a matter of experience and modability.

 

Studios who uses the Unreal Engine get full tech support from Epic games, as well as a huge array of available resources in the form of 3d assets, animations, rigs, and so on. The only real reason BioWare took the Frostbite engine is because EA wishes to create it's own engine brand like Valve's Source Engine.

 

The way you talk about an older engine is like how you compare the newest version of Corel Painter to an older version of Photoshop. It might lack some features, but it's the artist using the program, not the program itself that matters.

 

Besides, Unreal Engine 4 has a ton of potential as well.

[InterrogationBear]

Studios who uses the Unreal Engine get full tech support from Epic games, as well as a huge array of available resources in the form of 3d assets, animations, rigs, and so on.

Pretty sure the support Bioware can get from DICE is much more expansive than they could ever get from Epic. Almost every EA studio contributes to Frostbite.

 

And it's no secret that UE3 couldn't really handle huge open spaces and we have yet to see bigger UE4 games.

[DavianBurke]

Pretty sure the support Bioware can get from DICE is much more expansive than they could ever get from Epic. Almost every EA studio contributes to Frostbite.

 

And it's no secret that UE3 couldn't really handle huge open spaces and we have yet to see bigger UE4 games.

Well if that's true, wtf happened to DA:I? They had DICE's much more expansive support for it and... meh. 

[Saphiron123]

I'll take the mistakes of DAI over the mistakes of ME3 any day.

 

DAI is way more replayable.

You'd rather be bored? That's what you want me4 to be?

Hey not-shephard, go collect 50 copies of your squad mate's data pad, they're hidden all over the ship!

Hey not-shephard, go shoot 12 enemies and bring me their insignias.

No thanks, mass effect 3 had some ending issues but it also had memorable music and scenes that really stick with me to this day. Aside from the dragon battles, there wasn't anything about DAI I'll remember next year. Most of the content could be classified as a chore, and mass effect has never had that problem.

[Saphiron123]

So much crap in one post. Unbelievable.

 

Montreal, which was pretty small at the time, made the ME3-MP for the base game and the Omega-DLC. They had nothing to do with the DA:I-MP.

And your comments regarding Frostbite are laughable. You have no idea what a graphics engine is.

 

Switching to Frostbite is the best thing that could have happened to Mass Effect. The limitations of the Unreal-engine severely impacted the design of the trilogy.

It's only a good switch if they don't go the dragon age route and throw away most of the good features with the bad. I mean I loved the tactics system, and what do i have now? yes, no, and use more often. My mages in origins could carry out complex multi spell attacks with one another, my mages in inquisiton can't start a single dmaned fight without wasting their barrier 20 seconds before it starts. My mages in origins could use large AOE spells, my mages in inquisition have them turned off by default because they keep activating it for 1 second over and over so they don't regain mana.

Dragon age threw away a lot in the transition, to the point it doesn't even feel like dragon age.

[Vazgen]

It's only a good switch if they don't go the dragon age route and throw away most of the good features with the bad. I mean I loved the tactics system, and what do i have now? yes, no, and use more often. My mages in origins could carry out complex multi spell attacks with one another, my mages in inquisiton can't start a single dmaned fight without wasting their barrier 20 seconds before it starts. My mages in origins could use large AOE spells, my mages in inquisition have them turned off by default because they keep activating it for 1 second over and over so they don't regain mana.

Dragon age threw away a lot in the transition, to the point it doesn't even feel like dragon age.

You compare DAI to Origins but its gameplay is closer to DA2 from what I've seen on YouTube. 

[Vazgen]

Similar looking, but DA2 is a slightly different feel. More active button mashing...and combos.. And harder (on nightmare). Last but not least, the tactics system is more in tact. 

Haven't played neither of them, mostly based on the gameplay I saw on YouTube. I like slow pace of Origins. 

[Vazgen]

Well, you might like the warrior classes in DAI still. Especially 2H Warrior. It's a little slow, like the Origins warrior is. That's about the only comparison I'll make though. The tactical system is gutted.

My least favorite class in Origins... I almost exclusively play as mages