30 réponses à ce sujet

[MagicalCameron]

To begin with these are just my opinions and thoughts my two cents as it were. I don't mean to offend anyone with my thoughts or my poor grammar.
Recently i completed Fallout 4 which i looked forward too immensely only to be let down by the hype train and my own expectations. In my own opinion Fallout 4 is a very disappointing game and i think Bioware as a studio could learn a lot from Bethesda's shortcomings. Personally i like to think most RPG mechanics should never be streamlined, from previous instalments only ever improved and added too. Taking features away, only reduces the games original charm which made it special to fans. Fallout 4 being a prime example. The first mass effect is my all time favourite game for many reasons but mainly because of the scale and detail of everything and when they reduced that down in future instalments it did sadden me a bit. I actually liked the first citadel area from the first game and hated the way the 3rd game did it i liked having massive areas to walk round in and etc. 
The main point i'm trying to make is i really hope Bioware don't go down the same route as Bethesda a make a good FPS game but a bad RPG. I hope they added and maintain mass effects RPG mechanics and going back to more of mass effect 1's feel from space exploration while also making the game appear big which goes hand in hand with space travel. I love the mass effect series and i can't wait for the next instalment.
Would love to hear anyone else thoughts on the topic or just in general?

P.S if anyone from Bioware reads this keep up the good stuff, really loved the latest Dragon Age DLC

[Fogg]

Hm, just the other day I completed some quest in Fallout 4, and while the questgivers were talking to me, Piper liked me so much she also started talking to me. And everyone was talking to me. And I was like, please streamline this.

 

But then I never liked Bethesda games storywise, it's stupid you can be 'King of the Thieves', 'arch mage the best of the Mages', 'übergeneral xl of the soldiers' and 'the greatest emperor of gladiators' all at once, while still having to save the entire world.

[Dalakaar]

[x] Reported
[x] Sorry, I'm Retired
[ ] Reserved For Future Use
[ ] Venom
[ ] GI
[ ] Claymoar
[x] No Bang
[ ] Those Poor Hamsters
[ ] RNG
[x] 1v1 Me Babby
[ ] Hax
[ ] Ding Dong Bannu
[ ] In A Single Cast
[x] E-Peen Thread
[ ] It's A Crutch
[ ] Playing The Weapon
[ ] Biovar Pls
[ ] Necro
[x] TL;DR
[x] Working As Intended™
[x] No
[x] LoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooL
[ ] BioWareMod
[ ] Support Class Only
[ ] Innuendo
[x] L2P
[ ] Angry Pugs
[ ] Kitten GIFs
[ ] Quarian Biology

[x] Off Topic

[ ] Tali's Sweat
[x] Inb4

[ ] Should Be Stickied

[x] What the actual f**k?

[ ] Krogan Dream

[x] I should go
[x] Stay Classy, BSN

BSN Response Form
ME3MP Edition

[Degrees1991]

ME 1 is my favourite as well and I actually started with 2. That game for me would have been almost perfect if the actual gameplay (you know the reason we play games) was better.
First felt like a RPG. Don't want to see a cheap super weapon though.
ME3 was good for customising guns if only they did it with the armour as well.
I liked the side quests more in 1 than the others especially 3. That Elcor rescue mission should have been more than just scanning a planet. Don't care for mako customisation but that seems like a decent feature as well.

[Lee T]

You are more hopefull than me. As far as I'm concerned Bethesda did the same mistakes Bioware did in their last four games. Confusing streamlining with oversimplification, adding disconnected mechanics, trying to appeal to the shooter crowd, are all things Bioware has already done. If Bioware canno't learn from their mistakes, I'm not sure they will learn from Bethesda's.

[Greetsme]

There are two things for Bioware fans to fear, and they are......

 

1 - The Frostbitten engine.

2 - Endings.

 

I know, just reading the words make you cringe doesn't it?

[Booth]

Sorry - my opinion is absolutely different. First of all I dont like to much almost senseless "quantity" in the game mechanics. Much stuff isnt the one and only possibility to create fun. Espacially ME1 was in that case NOT my favorite game. There was MUCH ground space to drive around... but it was just rather empty. And the driving was that slow... driving on a bicycle feels even faster than that. Then of course the tons of useless weapon-stuff which was mostly different only by a name with a number behind. That was so boring.

 

ME1 was a real good game ALTHOUGH it did very much in a way I didnt like. Almost all RPG-statistic/item-stuff was in my opinion rather poor. Which also is in Fallout 3/New Vegas. Tons of stuff which was useless. The side stories was also rather poor. All cerberus stuff was almost without tension and personal feelings. Also your companions had very poor depth. The shooter part wasnt a straight shooter but wasnt a good cover shooter, too. It was rather weird especially when you got better equipment because you were absolutely overpowered and could shoot minutes without stopping.

 

The main quests and the main story was really well done. Rest was average... or even not very well in my opinion.

 

And then they put away most RPG-stuff already in ME2 and ME3. In my opinion a good decision. If you cant make a real good RPG... make at least a rather good shooter with a rather good story and some RPG-mini-stuff in there. In other words: DO FOCUS. And focus on what you really be good at.

 

But... you have good chances that Bioware will follow your wish - cause that is the direction where the most money can be made. Fallout 3/4, GTA, Skyrim, etc... in my opiniion these games are just huge number-monsters without personal depth. Its just about runninng around in a "free world" where freedom means to shoot, collect and do anything you want... so a deep personal story-focused connection cannot be established. But thats what people like. They dont want deep emotions with NPCs... they want deep emotions by running around, shooting, collecting and running around even more.

 

Its the same stuff in film industry with e.g. Star Wars 4-6 vs. 1-3. The first trilogy just had deeper personalities... while the second trilogy was a huge technical feature monster. And thats what people do like most in our times.

 

What a pity.

 

I dont expect ME-A to go on where they left with ME2 and 3 by building up very special npc-characters you felt connected to. Of course there will be some npcs... but... I expect them as thin as in the mentioned games above. Therefor... they probably will give lots of possibility to run around, collect stuff you dont need and shoot anything you see. But... at least they still plan to make a cover shooter like in ME2/3, which was a real fun game part for me. And... maybe "running around" will also be rather dynamic because they maybe enhance the mako to be much faster than a bicycle. To drive really fast over planet surfaces could be also fun if it is done right.

 

But... well... we will see in about a year what they gonna deliver.

[ThomasBlaine]

Bethesda and Bioware aren't the only companies in the video game industry, you know. They're losing ground to awesome new games from younger companies all the time, and the consensus that most of their games are basically streamlined RPG dinosaurs dressed up with modern graphics has been gaining traction for a while, especially this year. They don't own the market anymore, and they certainly won't remain a big part of it forever.

[Gothfather]

Bethesda and Bioware aren't the only companies in the video game industry, you know. They're losing ground to awesome new games from younger companies all the time, and the consensus that most of their games are basically streamlined RPG dinosaurs dressed up with modern graphics has been gaining traction for a while, especially this year. They don't own the market anymore, and they certainly won't remain a big part of it forever.

 

The consensus? Do you know what that word means? Bethesda and Bioware are not dying companies their last two games, DA:I and FO4 both made sales RECORDS. Record sales is NOT indicative of "losing ground" but hey people don't like facts. The internet has created the 'age of opinion' vs the actual information age. Facts are being marginalised as inconsequential because they are inconvenient to opinion based arguments. Now you may dislike where the AAA RPG industry is going because games and the experiences they give us are SUBJECTIVE, but your opinion about a subjective subject doesn't make it objective just because it is your opinion.

 

Right now the AAA RPG industry has been dominated by Bethesda, Bioware and CDPR and all three companies have arrived at the same place from three separate starting points their game development has been towards this same point. And what we are seeing is strong narrative, open world mechanics with an emphases on action based combat systems vs mathematical number crunching combat.  And how has the market reacted to this? There have been three widely successful games developed by these companies that are making sales records. You might not LIKE the direction that RPGs are going but increased sales is NOT a marker of failure. Increased sales is a marker of success, it may be success of a product you don't like but it is success none the less.

 

There is almost zero reason to listen to your opinion because it isn't representative of positive reviews and increased sales these companies are experiencing. The facts is main stream RPGs are not losing ground because they are making record sales for their games. Is there room for different styles of RPGs in the industry? Sure is, and I am all for companies making RPGs that I don't like, but I am not unreasonable. I don't like peaches but my opinion of peaches isn't tied to my self esteem so i don't need to convince people that their enjoyment of peaches is a character flaw. I simply don't BUY peaches and i sure as hell don't try and convince people that enjoying peaches is a sign of an  unsophisticated palate.

 

If you don't like Bioware/Bethesda games don't buy them, stop manufacturing bullsh!t to justify your opinion. There is zero need. You don't like them great, stop trying to convince others that their enjoyment of said games is wrong. In other words stop acting like a teenager and act like an adult.

[wolfsite]

The consensus? Do you know what that word means? Bethesda and Bioware are not dying companies their last two games, DA:I and FO4 both made sales RECORDS. Record sales is NOT indicative of "losing ground" but hey people don't like facts. The internet has created the 'age of opinion' vs the actual information age. Facts are being marginalised as inconsequential because they are inconvenient to opinion based arguments. Now you may dislike where the AAA RPG industry is going because games and the experiences they give us are SUBJECTIVE, but your opinion about a subjective subject doesn't make it objective just because it is your opinion.

 

Right now the AAA RPG industry has been dominated by Bethesda, Bioware and CDPR and all three companies have arrived at the same place from three separate starting points their game development has been towards this same point. And what we are seeing is strong narrative, open world mechanics with an emphases on action based combat systems vs mathematical number crunching combat.  And how has the market reacted to this? There have been three widely successful games developed by these companies that are making sales records. You might not LIKE the direction that RPGs are going but increased sales is NOT a marker of failure. Increased sales is a marker of success, it my me success of a product you don't like but it is success none the less.

 

There is almost zero reason to listen to your opinion because it isn't representative of positive reviews and increased sales these companies are experiencing. The facts is main stream RPGs are not losing ground because they are making record sales for their games. Is there room for different styles of RPGs in the industry? Sure is, and I am all for companies making RPGs that I don't like, but I am not unreasonable. I don't like peaches but my opinion of peaches isn't tied to my self esteem so i don't need to convince people that their enjoyment of peaches is a character flaw. I simply don't BUY peaches and i sure as hell don't try and convince people that enjoying peaches is a sign of an  unsophisticated palate.

 

If you don't like Bioware/Bethesda games don't buy them, stop manufacturing bullsh!t to justify your opinion. There is zero need. You don't like them great, stop trying to convince others that their enjoyment of said games is wrong. In other words stop acting like a teenager and act like an adult.

 

If I could reach through my PC Monitor to give you a high five, I totally would do that.

[theflyingzamboni]

Sorry - my opinion is absolutely different. First of all I dont like to much almost senseless "quantity" in the game mechanics. Much stuff isnt the one and only possibility to create fun. Espacially ME1 was in that case NOT my favorite game. There was MUCH ground space to drive around... but it was just rather empty. And the driving was that slow... driving on a bicycle feels even faster than that. Then of course the tons of useless weapon-stuff which was mostly different only by a name with a number behind. That was so boring.

 

ME1 was a real good game ALTHOUGH it did very much in a way I didnt like. Almost all RPG-statistic/item-stuff was in my opinion rather poor. Which also is in Fallout 3/New Vegas. Tons of stuff which was useless. The side stories was also rather poor. All cerberus stuff was almost without tension and personal feelings. Also your companions had very poor depth. The shooter part wasnt a straight shooter but wasnt a good cover shooter, too. It was rather weird especially when you got better equipment because you were absolutely overpowered and could shoot minutes without stopping.

 

The main quests and the main story was really well done. Rest was average... or even not very well in my opinion.

 

And then they put away most RPG-stuff already in ME2 and ME3. In my opinion a good decision. If you cant make a real good RPG... make at least a rather good shooter with a rather good story and some RPG-mini-stuff in there. In other words: DO FOCUS. And focus on what you really be good at.

 

But... you have good chances that Bioware will follow your wish - cause that is the direction where the most money can be made. Fallout 3/4, GTA, Skyrim, etc... in my opiniion these games are just huge number-monsters without personal depth. Its just about runninng around in a "free world" where freedom means to shoot, collect and do anything you want... so a deep personal story-focused connection cannot be established. But thats what people like. They dont want deep emotions with NPCs... they want deep emotions by running around, shooting, collecting and running around even more.

 

Its the same stuff in film industry with e.g. Star Wars 4-6 vs. 1-3. The first trilogy just had deeper personalities... while the second trilogy was a huge technical feature monster. And thats what people do like most in our times.

 

What a pity.

 

I dont expect ME-A to go on where they left with ME2 and 3 by building up very special npc-characters you felt connected to. Of course there will be some npcs... but... I expect them as thin as in the mentioned games above. Therefor... they probably will give lots of possibility to run around, collect stuff you dont need and shoot anything you see. But... at least they still plan to make a cover shooter like in ME2/3, which was a real fun game part for me. And... maybe "running around" will also be rather dynamic because they maybe enhance the mako to be much faster than a bicycle. To drive really fast over planet surfaces could be also fun if it is done right.

 

But... well... we will see in about a year what they gonna deliver.

I definitely share the concern that they're going this route, like they did for DA:I. Lots of space to explore, little personality and depth to fill it beyond Skyhold. Still, it doesn't have to be that way just because it's large and full of exploration. I would have thought that depth and breadth were mutually exclusive last year, but the Witcher 3 managed both. So it IS possible to make a huge game with deep characters/world, but it apparently takes some kind of certain something I'm not sure BioWare will have with ME:A. So we'll see.

[The Real Pearl #2]

There are two things for Bioware fans to fear, and they are......

 

1 - The Frostbitten engine.

2 - Endings.

 

I know, just reading the words make you cringe doesn't it?

Add Cutting content from the game and re-branding it as DLC to that list

[AlanC9]

Add Cutting content from the game and re-branding it as DLC to that list

Right. They should just drop cut content altogether.

More seriously, DA:I didn't do this, and I doubt ME:A will either.

[The Real Pearl #2]

Right. They should just drop cut content altogether.

Sarcasm or nah? 

It's a little hard to tell. 

it's not normal to reply to someone to agree with them, it implies you are challenging them. 

[ThomasBlaine]

The consensus? Do you know what that word means? Bethesda and Bioware are not dying companies their last two games, DA:I and FO4 both made sales RECORDS. Record sales is NOT indicative of "losing ground" but hey people don't like facts. The internet has created the 'age of opinion' vs the actual information age. Facts are being marginalised as inconsequential because they are inconvenient to opinion based arguments. Now you may dislike where the AAA RPG industry is going because games and the experiences they give us are SUBJECTIVE, but your opinion about a subjective subject doesn't make it objective just because it is your opinion.

 

Right now the AAA RPG industry has been dominated by Bethesda, Bioware and CDPR and all three companies have arrived at the same place from three separate starting points their game development has been towards this same point. And what we are seeing is strong narrative, open world mechanics with an emphases on action based combat systems vs mathematical number crunching combat.  And how has the market reacted to this? There have been three widely successful games developed by these companies that are making sales records. You might not LIKE the direction that RPGs are going but increased sales is NOT a marker of failure. Increased sales is a marker of success, it my me success of a product you don't like but it is success none the less.

 

There is almost zero reason to listen to your opinion because it isn't representative of positive reviews and increased sales these companies are experiencing. The facts is main stream RPGs are not losing ground because they are making record sales for their games. Is there room for different styles of RPGs in the industry? Sure is, and I am all for companies making RPGs that I don't like, but I am not unreasonable. I don't like peaches but my opinion of peaches isn't tied to my self esteem so i don't need to convince people that their enjoyment of peaches is a character flaw. I simply don't BUY peaches and i sure as hell don't try and convince people that enjoying peaches is a sign of an  unsophisticated palate.

 

If you don't like Bioware/Bethesda games don't buy them, stop manufacturing bullsh!t to justify your opinion. There is zero need. You don't like them great, stop trying to convince others that their enjoyment of said games is wrong. In other words stop acting like a teenager and act like an adult.

 

What's your problem? I love these games, I'm just tired of people talking like they define the entire industry and should thus be shot to hell for not setting perfect examples. I said absolutely nothing about any of what you're talking about. People can mean something about a game and still buy it because it's a damn good game. Jeez. I can see you're dying to vent, but mind pointing that gun somewhere else?

[DebatableBubble]

Sorry - my opinion is absolutely different. First of all I dont like to much almost senseless "quantity" in the game mechanics. Much stuff isnt the one and only possibility to create fun. Espacially ME1 was in that case NOT my favorite game. There was MUCH ground space to drive around... but it was just rather empty. And the driving was that slow... driving on a bicycle feels even faster than that. Then of course the tons of useless weapon-stuff which was mostly different only by a name with a number behind. That was so boring.

 

ME1 was a real good game ALTHOUGH it did very much in a way I didnt like. Almost all RPG-statistic/item-stuff was in my opinion rather poor. Which also is in Fallout 3/New Vegas. Tons of stuff which was useless. The side stories was also rather poor. All cerberus stuff was almost without tension and personal feelings. Also your companions had very poor depth. The shooter part wasnt a straight shooter but wasnt a good cover shooter, too. It was rather weird especially when you got better equipment because you were absolutely overpowered and could shoot minutes without stopping.

 

The main quests and the main story was really well done. Rest was average... or even not very well in my opinion.

 

And then they put away most RPG-stuff already in ME2 and ME3. In my opinion a good decision. If you cant make a real good RPG... make at least a rather good shooter with a rather good story and some RPG-mini-stuff in there. In other words: DO FOCUS. And focus on what you really be good at.

 

But... you have good chances that Bioware will follow your wish - cause that is the direction where the most money can be made. Fallout 3/4, GTA, Skyrim, etc... in my opiniion these games are just huge number-monsters without personal depth. Its just about runninng around in a "free world" where freedom means to shoot, collect and do anything you want... so a deep personal story-focused connection cannot be established. But thats what people like. They dont want deep emotions with NPCs... they want deep emotions by running around, shooting, collecting and running around even more.

 

Its the same stuff in film industry with e.g. Star Wars 4-6 vs. 1-3. The first trilogy just had deeper personalities... while the second trilogy was a huge technical feature monster. And thats what people do like most in our times.

 

What a pity.

 

I dont expect ME-A to go on where they left with ME2 and 3 by building up very special npc-characters you felt connected to. Of course there will be some npcs... but... I expect them as thin as in the mentioned games above. Therefor... they probably will give lots of possibility to run around, collect stuff you dont need and shoot anything you see. But... at least they still plan to make a cover shooter like in ME2/3, which was a real fun game part for me. And... maybe "running around" will also be rather dynamic because they maybe enhance the mako to be much faster than a bicycle. To drive really fast over planet surfaces could be also fun if it is done right.

 

But... well... we will see in about a year what they gonna deliver.

 

Responding to bolded.

 

 

 

That's BS and you know it. The big three's personalities were nothing but archetypes. There was nothing deep at all about them. The only thing remotely deep was Luke's desire to redeem Anakin.

[The Real Pearl #2]

More seriously, DA:I didn't do this, and I doubt ME:A will either.

I'm more concerned with EA doing this. You've seen battlefield:lightsaber edition It was nostalgia bait. 

[AlanC9]

I definitely share the concern that they're going this route, like they did for DA:I. Lots of space to explore, little personality and depth to fill it beyond Skyhold. Still, it doesn't have to be that way just because it's large and full of exploration. I would have thought that depth and breadth were mutually exclusive last year, but the Witcher 3 managed both. .

This brings up something I've been wondering about for a while. Has anyone done any sort of objective comparison between the two games? Can't measure "breadth," but we could measure amount of dialogue, gameplay hours, and so forth. Earlier Bio games were a bit more transparent since the localization files were plain text and the audio file storage was pretty easy to understand.

[AlanC9]

Sarcasm or nah? 
It's a little hard to tell. 
it's not normal to reply to someone to agree with them, it implies you are challenging them.

It's like that South Park episode. I can't tell anymore.

[AlanC9]

What's your problem? I love these games, I'm just tired of people talking like they define the entire industry and should thus be shot to hell for not setting perfect examples. I said absolutely nothing about any of what you're talking about. People can mean something about a game and still buy it because it's a damn good game. Jeez. I can see you're dying to vent, but mind pointing that gun somewhere else?

Umm.. you did kinda talk about a consensus, though.

[ThomasBlaine]

Umm.. you did kinda talk about a consensus, though.

 

I did indeed say the word consensus, yes, in the context of a consensus that is growing traction, as opposed to the consensus which is already dominating. The context thus implies that the use of the word in this case does not mean "most gamers everywhere actually hate these games which only incidentally contradicts the sales numbers" as this person enthusiastically seems to have assumed.

[The Real Pearl #2]

It's like that South Park episode. I can't tell anymore.

Lovely references to my favorite cynical show

[theflyingzamboni]

This brings up something I've been wondering about for a while. Has anyone done any sort of objective comparison between the two games? Can't measure "breadth," but we could measure amount of dialogue, gameplay hours, and so forth. Earlier Bio games were a bit more transparent since the localization files were plain text and the audio file storage was pretty easy to understand.

Thing is, I'm not sure if that will tell you much either. I had looked this up awhile ago, but apparently the DA:I script contained a bit over 1 million words, while The Witcher 3 contained about 450,000. I felt like TW3 was able to do more with their words though. Since most of the dialogue comes from the companions and advisors, between your conversations with all of them, and their interactions depending on who you took where with whom, those words are concentrated in a particular part of the game (basically Skyhold and main questline). Not a lot left over for everyone else in the world. Since TW3 had fewer major characters, they could afford to develop them well while still having word budget left over for quest-related NPCs and ambient color. 

There's definitely some inherent issues with the give-and-take of single hero vs. party-based gameplay there. I think what this means for what I'd like to see in future BioWare games though is fewer companions. That way they can all get plenty of development and screen time like they did in DA:I, but the rest of the world can be better developed like TW3.

As for gameplay hours, that would be hard to calculate. For me, first DA:I playthrough (completionist) took me about 150 hours, plus maybe another 15-20 for JoH and Trespasser. TW3 (completionist) took me about 200 hours, plus another 15 for Hearts of Stone, with the much longer Blood and Wine still on the way. Although several of those 200 hours were spent diving for underwater treasure, which is tedius, and I only did because I'm a compulsive completionist. Would not do again. Still, for me at least, even without that, it took me about 40-45 hours longer. Felt more fulfilling too, but that's even more subjective.

[Ahglock]

Responding to bolded.



That's BS and you know it. The big three's personalities were nothing but archetypes. There was nothing deep at all about them. The only thing remotely deep was Luke's desire to redeem Anakin.

To be fair they said deeper not they were super deep. I'd say yes they were deeper but that is a vary low hurdle to jump.

[Booth]

Definetly not "super deep" - not even very deep - but they were deeper even in the opinion of those people who try to discuss star wars movies from a neutral point of view. Of course they were close to archetypes. But obvously that was at least something the author could handle

 

And there we are back at my main advice: DO FOCUS - and focus on what you are good at... or... at least on what you be able to handle well enough