11 réponses à ce sujet

[whatup5656]

Some food for thought for the DEVS...and I would have to agree
ME 2 just didnt blow my mind. While I still loved it...Heavy Rain did what Bioware should have done.


"Mass Effect 2 was a game about choices. Yes, it
did have aliens, a plot to shake the universe on its very foundation,
sex sequences, and an epic soundtrack to tie it all together. But
ultimately Mass Effect 2 completely hinged itself on the decisions
commander Shepard made. The alliances you chose, the romances you
engage in, and even your save file from the last game all played a role
in shaping the storyline that unfolded till the very end. However,
while Mass Effect 2 did keep many of its promises there was one really
powerful storytelling element that was all but absent from the
gameplay. Something that Playstation 3's exclusive Heavy Rain has in
spades.



Giving decisions to a player and then telling them that they will
experience the full weight and consequences of their actions is a hefty
promise to make. For a consequence to be experienced, the player needs
to genuinely care about the characters. Mass Effect 2 never really gave
me the chance to love my team. Sure I collected them, met them, learned
about their hobbies and sexual preferences. In some ways I became
attached, more for their combat usefulness than anything else though.
The most interesting characters are received late in the game (spoiler and spoiler) and they aren't covered nearly enough, while the useless
predictable eye candy hovered about for no particular reason at all
(spoiler and spoiler). You learn about them through forced conversation
that only sometimes seem to flow, and it's only through the game's
cutscenes that characters really seem alive.



As far as character development goes, Heavy Rain is everything that
Mass Effect 2 should have been. Players are given the chance to see
some history and background into the lives of each member of Heavy
Rain's cast, they're given the opportunity to develop a bond with each
character. The difference between Heavy Rain and Mass Effect is pacing,
and while being a semi-linear storyline gives Heavy Rain a bit of an
advantage, there are things that the RPG genre could learn from
PlayStation's Interactive Drama.



After all, what good is having to 'face the consequences' if the only
consequences you'll have to face are at the very end of the game?
Forcing characters to make tough choices early on, to live with
mistakes sooner in the game creates more of an attachment. If players
know they aren't really going to have to worry about things until the
very end of the game, what's the point of giving choices to begin with?
You might as well stick a button at the very end of the last boss fight
that asks 'would you like the good or bad ending?'



Heavy Rain succeeds in this because it is a game defined by your
decisions. From the most mundane aspects of your life to the more
complex ones Heavy Rain will always trudge onward. Some of these
choices effect the end of the game, others only change the mood of
individual scenes, but either way the player is forced into an
emotional connection with the characters and that's a good thing. Most
of my crew in Mass Effect I found simply talking to just to see if they
had anything new to say not because I was genuinely interested in what
they had to say. The difference is like night and day, and that's not
to say that Bioware made a bad game. They just left relationships too
open, and as a result made them less intimate.



Now obviously these are two extremely different games being compared,
but both of them have made similar promises. Would Mass Effect 2 been
better if attacking the spoiler was put on a strict timetable? What
about if character deaths meant more? Or if alliances were more
susceptible to break, or harder to gain trust-wise? I feel the game
would have been absolutely perfect if just for a little more of
everything. Take some of that 'decision wheel' script and break it up a
little bit more, feed me more information aside from when I'm forced to
go to Life Support to see if maybe Thane wants to talk. Sure it was
nice to be able to do things at my own pace, but a little more drama
would have made the experience all the more worthwhile."

http://www.gaminguni...iled--1108.html

Modifié par whatup5656, 27 février 2010 - 06:14 .

[whatup5656]

http://www.gaminguni...iled--1108.html

[hex23]

"Heavy Rain" is a low rent "Shenmue".



If you notice "Heavy Rain" isn't selling very well, and isn't receiving much critical acclaim. And it's always these hole in the wall sites that compare it to "ME2", because they want attention.

[TJSolo]

Because sales equal how good a game actually is.

[newcomplex]

Well, once you get to a technical scale, storyline branches in Heavy Rain result in nothing but more quicktime events. Having the same effect in ME would be making full fledged levels. It isn't equally workable.

I think bioware *still* has more to learn from the Witcher.    Seriously, I've never played a RPG where I felt like the choices I made were more relavent, the world was more cohesive, and I've never cared more about a plot.    Don't get me wrong, the ending was sub-par, and character development was too, but I think Bioware has a lot of relavent lessons still to learn from it.  

As for Heavy Rain, its just aiming for something else so different that, as the article itself even states, is irrelevent.  

Modifié par newcomplex, 27 février 2010 - 06:35 .

[The Capital Gaultier]

Heavy Rain is a very railed game. I like what they've done, but I don't think I'd pay $60 for it. Neither would I expect Mass Effect to follow such a strict storyline.

[finnithe]

He is right. At least in part. But whereas Heavy Rain is a single game, Mass Effect is a trilogy. Looking at the series as a whole, it's quite clear that you'll see (and you already do) choices that you made before (in ME1 and ME2), adversely affecting how ME2/3 plays out. The only difference being that the choices that you made in ME1 that affected ME2 were almost cosmetic in nature. I haven't played the full game (i.e. all the possible choices), so take this with a grain of salt. How different is it for Kaiden to greet you on Horizon instead of Ashley? Does it really affect the story if Conrad Verner is on Illium or not? I'm just throwing things out here, I really don't know if this is true since I'm pretty sure the real consequences will obviously be felt in ME3.

[Terror_K]

I agree to a certain degree, though I still think ME2 does a decent job.



I also agree that BioWare should really look at The Witcher for inspiration... if it wasn't for the fact you were relegated to playing a single character with no party members in a single class, it could have almost surpassed most of BioWare's stuff. That and if it had proper romance instead of a couple of dozen flings.



Maybe it was also the length, but DAO just did party members a lot better. I'm not saying the party members themselves were better (though some were, IMO) but that there was a lot more interaction with them, moments where they'd contribute to things and moments to delve into their past some more. As a result, they felt deeper than the ME2 ones (save perhaps Tali and Garrus, but then that's only because we've got to know them over two games now). Don't get me wrong... ME2's loyalty quests were fantastic and let us delve more into the characters and see some more depth to them... see a bit of what makes them tick, and even see more of their real selves as they let their guard down and show a bit of vulnerability. But it still kind of felt like we had barely talked to them and barely got to know them and then were suddenly thrown into these personal quests... particularly the later ones like Thane's and Samara's. Maybe it's because DAO and Heavy Rain made you feel like the characters were far more part of the narrative and weaved into it, while ME2 felt more like you were just recruiting some guys who beyond helping you didn't have as much of a personal stake in what was going on. I don't know... but I just hope that ME3 gives us a bit more everything when it comes to your party members. More banter, more conversations, more backstory, more involvement in what's happening, etc.

[Big_Stupid_Jelly]

TJSolo wrote...

Because sales equal how good a game actually is.

Not necessarily, but sales DO equal how likely you are to get a sequel to said game..Shenmue 3 being an obvious one, as in its not being made.

[Deflagratio]

The only thing Heavy Rain succeeds at is toppling Halo(Franchise) for "Most undeserving self worth" in all of gaming.

It does nothing unprecedented, and doesn't do anything better than it's spiritual predecessor, Shenmue. It's essentially a Slightly interactive Rail shooter, with the shooting replaced by mundane, QTE changes. It gives me the huge feeling of "We wanted to make movies, but weren't talented enough to make it big in Hollywood, so here's a game composed of broken dreams."

The reason why Heavy Rain's failure as a videogame's is particularly sour, is we have not seen a decent Adventure game in a very long time. I personally was hoping this would change that, but it didn't. At the end of the day, Games are supposed to make you feel a sense of satisfaction and achievement, Heavy Rain makes me feel frustrated, and that's before Plothole'sVille.

Modifié par Deflagratio, 27 février 2010 - 08:34 .

[Deflagratio]

The best point I can make is the complete Irony of the article title. I don't know what Heavy Rain Succeeded in that Mass Effect 2 Failed, but Mass Effect 2 succeeded as a game, Heavy Rain did not. I'd say that's a little more severe. The best analogy I've heard a critic call Heavy Rain is a Choose Your Own Adventure book with a poorer save feature. I'd have to agree.

[Jack_Shandy]

Weird, I just saw that article.

To state my opinion again, it's an unfair comparison. Heavy Rain, as a game, is entirely about the characters. There are four main characters (I think?) and you play as each of them.

Mass Effect is a shooter WITH characters. It has 11-ish main characters who act as squadmates and help you on missions.

Regardless of the quality of the games, look at those facts. Heavy rain has you physically PLAY as four characters, one after the other, through several chapters each- chapters in which the games only goal is to make you love these characters. Mass Effect has you chat to and buddy up with 11 characters, in the middle of shooting aliens.

I've never played Heavy Rain, but it's an unbalanced playing field. Of course you're going to sympathize with them more, you're PLAYING as them. If Heavy Rain didn't manage to make you sympathize with four player characters more than 11 squadmates, then- well, it'd have to be pretty damn bad at it's job.

I don't think making you have more decisions early in the game or anything like that would change a damn thing, really. And personally, I didn't mind ME2's characters at all.

And besides all that,  even if they were movies instead of games: ME2 is a freaking SPACE OPERA, you can't compare it to something dark and harrowing like Heavy Rain and say it failed. It's like saying that Citizen Kane did what Star Wars failed to do!

Modifié par Jack_Shandy, 27 février 2010 - 11:10 .