188 réponses à ce sujet

[obie191970]

Khavos wrote...

Placebo_obecalP wrote...

Khavos wrote...

meaning the game has to be shallow enough to function on a console. 

That's a fallacy IMO, consoles can handle complex games, it simply needs developers with the ability to create complex games and publishers with the courage and ambition to back developers in such ventures.

You are of course entitled to your opinion, but I don't see it as correct.  The control scheme's limited, meaning the interface has to be limited.  That's the biggest restriction, currently.

There's also the demographics.

And what super complex, mature games have been released on the PC and not on console recently?  And. there are a lot of older gamers on the consoles - We've just evolved.....

[Khavos]

Placebo_obecalP wrote...

An interface doesn't need to be limited because you only have 15 buttons and two sticks, it simply needs to be well designed

Demographics? I'm a 37 year old male, been a gamer for 25+ years, work in the game development industry, would much rather game on the 360 than the PC, don't like silly dumbed down arcade games, that kind of demographic?

There is a level of complexity that consoles simply can't handle.  If that wasn't the case, Blizzard would've long since released WoW on one and would currently be rolling in even more obscene amounts of cash than it is. 

And no, that's not the console demographic I was referring to.  Do you think you're a fair representation of the average console gamer?

I'm not attempting to put consoles down - I own one, and it'd be a stupid circular argument based entirely on personal preference, anyway.  

[haberman13]

spock06 wrote...

"Hardcore" RPGs are not fun games. Whats more engrossing?

Pressing an "attack" button and letting the game roll virtual dice so you can see one of three endless attack animations. Well at least that gives you time to ****** to anime chicks while you "play the game"

or

Actually having to challenge yourself somewhat to suceed in a fast based, real time combat environment with sweet explosions and biotic powers going off left and right.

Nobody is calling to remove the combat.  That part of the game rocks.

Its the IMMERSION and RPG systems that we are calling for.

[AmigoAmigo]

totally agree - what was a free roaming galaxy is now a pick your next mission affair. i do like many new elements ie paragon interupts, but the game just feels like levels as oppose to adventures that we love Bioware games for. and why replace the Mako with a silly 'space prospector' type situation. yes the Mako bits could be long and drawn out but far better than circumnavigating a planet with a scanner - bore!

[Liana Shepard]

Are you serious Ryzinn?  It's not "selling out", it's business, it's always been about making money.  And that money is needed to fund new games like ME3.  It's not a charity.  Why not direct your efforts at the market and increasing interest in longer, more detailed, games?
But that's beside the point.  ME2 is not "half-assed".  Look at the artistry, the backgrounds on cultures and planets, and the character history and personality shining through.  A lot of love went into the game despite the fact that it's a business.  It's a wonderful game, I just wish there was more of it.

[WilliamShatner]

Hardcore fans is not the right expression. It paints imagines of angry nerds still pining for the days of gaming when they were 15 years younger.



The right expression is "Fans of the original Mass Effect".



I'm only around 9 hours into ME2 (just met Kaidan) and a large amount of what is happening so far (apart from scanning) is trying to brush ME1 under the carpet or completely diminished what you did in that game. It's' quite infuriating as a fan of the original game. It makes me think whether BioWare have actually played their game!



It's quite sad that Kaidan, a character BioWare gave as little time as humanly possible, is actually the only character speaking sense and is the the voice my character should be!



Oh well maybe it will improve.

[Jonnerz]

Ryzinn wrote...

Thus, and as I so eloquently put it in the topic title, ME3 needs to cater to the HARDCORE FANS. doing so isnt going to alienate the mass market who will buy anything with a good name to it. ME2 drew in teh audience bioware wants, now give em something to really wrap there head around like REAL skill trees, REAL loot, and REAL progression.

People might not want those things. Mass Effect one was great, but the real skill trees, real loot, and real progression, judging by sales figures and reviews, was an awkward blend with a futuristic sci-fi shooter. If people want to loot things, they probably should be playing Dragon Age, Oblivion or Fallout.

Regardless, I'll agree with you about the skill trees.

[FireStormWarning]

There could have been a lot of things added that weren't, but that doesn't mean those things are gone for good.



As for me, I quite enjoy the game. Is an RPG all about a massive inventory system? A clunky system of strengths and weaknesses that takes hours to navigate in and of itself?



Or is an RPG game first and foremost about the story? About the development of the characters, their overcoming (or succumbing to) the obstacles they face?



This is the biggest grind I had with Mass Effect 2. The influence system utilized in Dragon Age, in KOTOR 2 and the like is a great addition because it makes the characters SEEM real.



That said, some allowances have to be made for the casual adience, and it seems like a lot of traditionalists/hardcore gamers don't want to allow that.



Would you rather Bioware be unable to make games at all?



As for the point about choosing between weapons, this ONLY works until you unlocked the Spectre weapons in the first game. With these unlocked, the other weapons became obsolete. They could never match the power or upgradability of their Spectre counterparts.



And what of the influence system? At least with Mass Effect 2, there is reason to listen to your crew, to get to know them and to try to please them... even if only on a basic level. Where was this in Mass Effect 1?



I could continue to ask these questions all day, but it's really a pointless debate to have over an internet message board.



No one is right. No one is wrong. It all comes down to your tastes as an individual. I would have preferred more story and less combat, but that is me. Some want more combat and less dialog. Again... that's fine. We all need to learn to respect each other's opinions and not resort to ad hominem attacks simply because we disagree.

[Kohaku]

Ryuuichi009 is right. Please. Someone. Anyone. Put the search bar back at the top.

[LoweGear]

This will be fun...

[quote]Ryzinn wrote...

-Dozens of armors to choose from including the famed Collosus X armor
[/quote]

There were dozens of armors to choose from... whose color schemes you can't even change, and whose only differences performance wise are stats.

[quote]-Dozens of Weapons to choose from including Spectre Weapons[/quote]

Dozens of weapons differing only in appearance and barely changing stats. Not like it mattered, since when you got Spectre Gear, you won't need any more of those other weapons anyway, since Spectre weapons have the highest overall stats of any weapon in-game.

[quote]-Dozens of upgrades to choose from[/quote]

Which only add incremental advantages that you hardly even notice in game anyway, unless they're game-breaking upgrades like Frictionless Materials

[quote]-Branching skill trees[/quote]

What branching skill trees? All of your skills only advanced till you can no longer sink points into them, which is hardly "branching". If you're referring to needing to drop points into a skill to unlock another skill, guess what ME2 has that too.

[quote]-60 lvls[/quote]

So?

[quote]Now lets look at ME2
-Maybe 12 different armor pieces to choose from. The number may not be entirely accurate but it's definitely less then what we saw in ME2. Not to mention Collosus X is no where to be found and Light, Medium and Heavy armors were done away with all together. On another note instead of providing armor for our allies they only get a spare costume. [/quote]

Armor pieces which you can mix and match to provide a different customized appearance to your armor, along with the ability to change armor color and patterns. Also, what's with the fixation for Collosus armor?

[quote]-2 weapons of each type... Yay? [/quote]

Better than when you had only one type of weapon in ME1 - yes, one. An assault rifle was an assault rifle no matter what you did to it, and only had full auto. At least we now have a choice of a full auto assault rifle, or a burst-fire assault rifle.

[quote]-Instead of Heat sink upgrades or Pollonium upgrades we get "Pistol damage 1/5" upgrades or something lame like that. I actually dont mind this as the upgrades were what I would always have too many of in my inventory which brings me to another point that we'll get to later.[/quote]

You liked having too many items in your inventory?

[quote]-A horrible skill tree system with maybe 3 skills at the most to choose from. The first game did it so much better but hey, we gotta cater to the retards dont we bioware? Who cares about the fans, they'll get over it.[/quote]

4 skills actually, and more if you choose the Soldier class or advanced training specialities. Also, each skill can be upgraded into two different variants when leveled up, which is more than what ME1 had to offer.

[quote]-30 lvls (Cut in half from the previous game, much like everyting else no?)[/quote]

It's just a level cap you know.

[quote]Not to mention the main areas of the game (Zakeera ward, Omega, and Illium) are all TINY and boring. The presidium in ME1 + the wards were waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay bigger then any of the locations presented in ME2.[/quote]
 
Actually, the Presidium level in ME1 was no larger than the Omega levels in ME2, it only had the appearance of being massive because of the background. And I'd take the more interesting atmosphere and characters of Omega, Illium and the Zakera Wards over the sterile Presidium in ME1.

[quote]Hell, Noveria had a bigger set up then Omega. When I picutre the presidium or a ward I picture a giant sprawling city that I should be able to explore every nook and cranny of. Not a closed off 2 story building in the ward. [/quote]

You mean that wasn't the case with ME1's wards? They only looked large because some levels were subdivided by elevators. I don't remember the ME1 wards being giant sprawling cities where you can explore nooks and cranny's either. If you wanted to see large sprawling cities, you looked out the window.

[quote]Going back to the side quests, in ME1 the sidequests and planets were huge and you were basically just tossed into these worlds with no sense of where to go or what to do. You had to figure it out for yourself. [/quote]

Which was a rather boring and repetitive process, considering that most of the planets changed only visually, with nothing really interesting in them at all.

[quote]ME2 doesnt give you that sense and instead holds your hand like you're a retard whose never played an RPG before. Now granted, ME1 sidequests and planets were rather dull and copy/pasted but atleast you wernet having your hand heald and told where to go. No point A to point B Bull sh**.[/quote]

I'd rather have the more interesting and more varied set pieces of ME2 as opposed to the, as you said yourself, "dull and copy/pasted" sidequests of ME1. Whether it be sending out Shepard by himself with no squadmates on a tilting starship, or navigating through thick smog fighting against enemies you can barely see, or rushing against time to save a starship from crashing, or even just reminiscing the days with the Normandy's wreck.

[quote]And atleast finding resources was a little bit more interesting in ME1. [/quote]

Like clicking "Survey" on a planet and getting a text message that we found something? Or playing through the same old minigame of send the arrow to the center of the goal over and over again?

[quote]The loyalty system is also completely dumbed down and linear.
Step 1: Talk to squad mate
Step 2: Do there quest (atleast, if nothing else the char quests were interesting)
Step 3: Loyalty gained lolololol nj you r teh winner [/quote]

You do know that certain actions can actually remove a character's loyalty for you right (like choosing a particular character for another in a certain conversation), and you can actually fail certain loyalty missions if you choose differently.

[Solid N7]

haberman13 wrote...

spock06 wrote...

"Hardcore" RPGs are not fun games. Whats more engrossing?

Pressing an "attack" button and letting the game roll virtual dice so you can see one of three endless attack animations. Well at least that gives you time to ****** to anime chicks while you "play the game"

or

Actually having to challenge yourself somewhat to suceed in a fast based, real time combat environment with sweet explosions and biotic powers going off left and right.

Nobody is calling to remove the combat.  That part of the game rocks.

Its the IMMERSION and RPG systems that we are calling for.

I agree with this, but not withthe  whinner and trolls  about combat and stupid things

[Phoenixblight]

Khavos wrote...

Kalfear wrote...

ME1 and DA:O worked fine on my 360, whats the issue? Lost Odysee with 4 disks worked fine on my 360

I wouldn't call either of them complex games, especially given that they were designed for the console market.  You can tell when playing them on the PC.  ME2's even worse in that regard.  Nineteen different functions mapped to the spacebar.  I may be exaggerating slightly.

DAO was not made for the COnsole market. It was designed to be for the PC. They ported to the console.

[Khavos]

Phoenixblight wrote...

Khavos wrote...

Kalfear wrote...

ME1 and DA:O worked fine on my 360, whats the issue? Lost Odysee with 4 disks worked fine on my 360

I wouldn't call either of them complex games, especially given that they were designed for the console market.  You can tell when playing them on the PC.  ME2's even worse in that regard.  Nineteen different functions mapped to the spacebar.  I may be exaggerating slightly.

DAO was not made for the COnsole market. It was designed to be for the PC. They ported to the console.

Sure about that? 

[Swank Baron]

Speak for yourself, I was a huge fan of ME1 and I'm an even bigger fan of ME2. Don't generalize the people who enjoy these games like you our, it cheapens your point.



The inventory system and world exploration in ME1 was a tedious chore and what they've done in ME2 is a complete upgrade. Only thing that could use an improvement is inter-party conversations and sidequests.

[spock06]

haberman13 wrote...

spock06 wrote...

"Hardcore" RPGs are not fun games. Whats more engrossing?

Pressing an "attack" button and letting the game roll virtual dice so you can see one of three endless attack animations. Well at least that gives you time to ****** to anime chicks while you "play the game"

or

Actually having to challenge yourself somewhat to suceed in a fast based, real time combat environment with sweet explosions and biotic powers going off left and right.

Nobody is calling to remove the combat.  That part of the game rocks.

Its the IMMERSION and RPG systems that we are calling for.

RPG systems?  You mean a lot of needlessly complicated menus and interfaces, useless loot that you have to micromanage, and pointless skill trees?  I understand some people like these things, but ME2 succeeds pretty well without them I think.  As for immersion...I don't know what to say to that ME2 to me is pretty much the most immersive game I've ever played in terms of sucking you in to the story, world, and characters.

[Master Smurf]

A return to ME style - not going overboard classic RPG please ie keep the combat (but thats about it)



But there will be no change - it will be even more mainstream, EA will demand it.

BW should make us a classic finale (the true sequel to ME), I dont care if its on 3-4 discs to get all the content.

Then let EA do what they will with spinoffs

[Akimb0]

Jonnerz wrote...

Ryzinn wrote...

and most of you arent even reading the post to begin with. Instead you're just skimming through it and saying "ME2 is the best game ever lolololol"

God I hate you guys.

You're looking at both the games through a biased perspective. You support the original without pausing to pinpoint it's major flaws: The lift sequences, the repetitive planets, the fact that earning 60 levels took several months on end... and you refuse to see anything positive in Mass Effect 2. How about the seemless gameplay, the improved combat? But you don't like the new combat. Why? Maybe it's not because it's torn from Gears of War or so fourth, but because it's more challenging?

ME2 isn't the 'best game ever.' Neither is the original. Both are excellent games, and both have flaws. Perhaps you should approach the topic with a more neutral attitude before shouting, 'It's dumbed down for retards!'

Lift sequences were great, more character in one ME1 lift sequence than the entirety of ME2.
Repetative planets replaced by a dumbed down "scanning" mini-game. Awesome. <_<
Level 60 took months on end? No offense but you must have failed HARD at ME1.

Seamless gameplay? Is that why I have loading screens to get to different areas in the Normandy?
Improved combat? You mean taking away all the talent / "power" options I had in ME1?, all the gear?, the better clearer menus?, the utterly stupid "ammo" system?

The only good thing ME2 has going for it in combat, is the location based damage.

I think you missed the point entirely. The combat gameplay IS torn from crap like Gears of War. That's why people don't like it. It's not challenging, it's BORING. Sit behind cover opposite each other and plink off some shots, use a power when it's ready. (Awesome, I only have ONE active power btw, now that the game has been dumbed down, compared to at LEAST 3 the ME1 infiltrator had.) Don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to make out ME1 combat was incredible. It wasn't. However ME2 has only improved it with hit locations. Everything else is the same or worse.

[Kalfear]

Phoenixblight wrote...

Khavos wrote...

Kalfear wrote...

ME1 and DA:O worked fine on my 360, whats the issue? Lost Odysee with 4 disks worked fine on my 360

I wouldn't call either of them complex games, especially given that they were designed for the console market.  You can tell when playing them on the PC.  ME2's even worse in that regard.  Nineteen different functions mapped to the spacebar.  I may be exaggerating slightly.

DAO was not made for the COnsole market. It was designed to be for the PC. They ported to the console.

LOL Phoenix, give it up, hes just bashing RPGs is all.

DA:O was one of the most complexe and original RPGs made in the last decade and anyone that plays RPGs knows this.
Khavos just talking about topics he has no clue about is all!
PS: Your right, DA:O was originally a PC only titles for a couple years till the EA take over when they told BW to port to both 360 and PS3 as well

Modifié par Kalfear, 02 février 2010 - 08:49 .

[Placebo_obecalP]

obie191970 wrote...

And what super complex, mature games have been released on the PC and not on console recently?  And. there are a lot of older gamers on the consoles - We've just evolved.....

ArmA2

[Striker257]

No it doesn't. It should add back in some of the RPG elements such as inventory, and the exploring of worlds/cities/etc. It should be more RPG than it is now, but correct the issues that were in ME1.

[Fujin05]

XyA_DeathKnight wrote...

haberman13 wrote...

100% agree with the OP

Dumbed down for people who don't even appreciate this kind of game.

My "tardo" friends who like COD/Halo etc. don't like ME2, it has too much story and dialogue, yet this game was made for them... but they dont want it. 

Strange

Agreed. I don't think I know even one person that got ME2 that wasn't already a fan of ME1.

ME2 is a good game, but it is no replacement for what BioWare should have done. ME3 needs to be: (ME1 + new story + updated graphics [not console-limited] + improved combat of ME2)

-DK

DOUBLE-AGREED! 

[Thompson family]

Ryuuichi009 wrote...



We need a damn sticky thread.

OP I actually think you have some points but still...

SEARCH FUNCTION DAMNIT. >_<

Now tha't the truth. We do need a damn sticky thread.

Modifié par Thompson family, 02 février 2010 - 08:51 .

[Twitchmonkey]

[quote]Kalfear wrote...

DAO was not made for the COnsole market. It was designed to be for the PC. They ported to the console. [/quote]

LOL Phoenix, give it up, hes just bashing RPGs is all.

DA:O was one of the most complexe and original RPGs made in the last decade and anyone that plays RPGs knows this.
Khavos just talking about topics he has no clue about is all![/quote]

I loved DA:O. I loved it because the world was rich, the party was interesting, the tone was dark, the moral choices were complex; having to make sure I don't misspend a skill point so my build is viable and having to sell off my inventory every quest isn't even on the list of things I remember fondly about DA:O.