10273 réponses à ce sujet

[SkullandBonesmember]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

I'm sorry, but BK3's failing was that it was just too damn complex for the target audience.

Read my edited post. It wouldn't have failed if they didn't try to fix what wasn't broken.

[Ecael]

MassEffect762 wrote...

uberdowzen wrote...

It's utter crap anyway, half the arguments against violent video games are that people who commit violent crimes often own an 360. That's like saying if you own a dishwasher and commit a violent crime it must be related to the dishwasher.

Or that inanimate tools kill people.

I demand a ban against all dishwashers. Think of the children!

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Nuts and Bolts was actually interesting while the old Banjo Kazooie games were just Super Mario 64 rehashes. Banjo Kazooie fanbase?

http://forums.banjo-...ms/default.aspx

http://www.rare-extreme.com/forums/

You made my point.

Banjo Kazooie has a cult following with those who preferred the N64 over the more popular Playstation growing up.

BK3 went the route Bioware would eventually end up going. Trying to "reach out" to a wider audience at the expense of their already established fanbase. TerrorK put it perfectly a few pages back.

That isn't illustrated in the reviews you posted, though. BK3's score took a nosedive (a 10-12 point one) by reaching out to the X-Box 360 crowd instead of Nintendo players.

Mass Effect 2 on the other hand, gained 4-5 points by simplifying the RPG elements. As I've said many times, the goal is not to get shooter fans in another shooter, but to get them interested in an RPG.

[Onyx Jaguar]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

I'm sorry, but BK3's failing was that it was just too damn complex for the target audience.

Read my edited post. It wouldn't have failed if they didn't try to fix what wasn't broken.

THat old style of platforming was broken, it died during the PS2 and Gamecube run.  With Prince of Persia and Uncharted do you really think a platformer in that vein that is not SUper Mario Galaxy (which itself is quite a bit different) would succeed?  

[superimposed]

The old Banjo-Kazooie games were not 'just Mario 64'. That's like saying Mass Effect is 'just Jet Force Gemini' because they're third person shooters.

[Onyx Jaguar]

superimposed wrote...

The old Banjo-Kazooie games were not 'just Mario 64'. That's like saying Mass Effect is 'just Jet Force Gemini' because they're third person shooters.

Hub world, jumping into Pictures, performing tasks to collect Jiggies.  Some of the platforming is different (the mechanic between the two characters) but it is as close to Super Mario 64 as World at War is to Call of Duty 4.

[cachx]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

THat old style of platforming was broken, it died during the PS2 and Gamecube run.  With Prince of Persia and Uncharted do you really think a platformer in that vein that is not SUper Mario Galaxy (which itself is quite a bit different) would succeed?  

It could as a small PSN / Marketplace game (something like Rocket Knight, but better ).

And Rare really took a nosedive for me after the DKC games, the abusive amount of collection were terrible on... pretty much everything else they did.

[SkullandBonesmember]

Ecael wrote...

BK3's score took a nosedive (a 10-12 point one) by reaching out to the X-Box 360 crowd instead of Nintendo players.

Mass Effect 2 on the other hand, gained 4-5 points by simplifying the RPG elements. As I've said many times, the goal is not to get shooter fans in another shooter, but to get them interested in an RPG.

EXACTLY what I'm saying. If Rare had kept the focus on their established fanbase, it would have been way better. 5-7 equates to average, 8 above average.

Screw the critics. If by RPG you meant combat over plot and character interaction, so be it, but when you get down to it, Bioware is infamous NOT because of gameplay, but because of interesting character.

superimposed wrote...

The old Banjo-Kazooie games were not 'just Mario 64'. That's like saying Mass Effect is 'just Jet Force Gemini' because they're third person shooters.

+1

[Onyx Jaguar]

cachx wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

THat old style of platforming was broken, it died during the PS2 and Gamecube run.  With Prince of Persia and Uncharted do you really think a platformer in that vein that is not SUper Mario Galaxy (which itself is quite a bit different) would succeed?  

It could as a small PSN / Marketplace game (something like Rocket Knight, but better ).

And Rare really took a nosedive for me after the DKC games, the abusive amount of collection were terrible on... pretty much everything else they did.

I agree, but I still believe Viva Pinata and Nuts and Bolts are far more intersting than anything they've done since Blast Corps and the marketplace needs more experimentation such as that.  Nuts and Bolts would have been praised if it wasn't a Banjo Kazooie game, even though the fundamentals are exactly the same as the old ones, its just that you are platforming with vehicles you make from scratch rather than on foot.


ADDENDUM:  Actually I'd go as far as Battletoads as the Donkey Kong Country games sucked in my opinion

Modifié par Onyx Jaguar, 28 mai 2010 - 05:13 .

[instantdeath999]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Nuts and Bolts was actually interesting while the old Banjo Kazooie games were just Super Mario 64 rehashes. Banjo Kazooie fanbase?

http://forums.banjo-...ms/default.aspx

http://www.rare-extreme.com/forums/

You made my point.

Banjo Kazooie has a cult following with those who preferred the N64 over the more popular Playstation growing up.

BK3 went the route Bioware would eventually end up going. Trying to "reach out" to a wider audience at the expense of their already established fanbase. TerrorK put it perfectly a few pages back.

The thing is, playing ME2, I don't get the impression at all that their number one priority was to reach a new audience.  They definitely had that in mind, but for the most part I felt like they were mostly interested in making a good game.  In a few areas they were definitely going for a larger audience (thermal clips), but it's not like the game took a complete 180.  In fact, I think the combat is vastly improved over the first one.  What I really miss from ME1 is the exploration, and that's really it.  I think ME3 needs to expand a bit on skills (a bit too simplified currently), and give us a bit more weapon/armor choices.

It goes without saying, but that's all just my opinion.

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Ecael wrote...

BK3's
score took a nosedive (a 10-12 point one) by reaching out to the X-Box
360 crowd instead of Nintendo players.

Mass Effect 2 on the
other hand, gained 4-5 points by simplifying the RPG elements. As I've
said many times, the goal is not to get shooter fans in another shooter,
but to get them interested in an RPG.

EXACTLY what I'm
saying. If Rare had kept the focus on their established fanbase, it
would have been way better. 5-7 equates to average, 8 above average.

Screw
the critics. If by RPG you meant combat over plot and character
interaction, so be it, but when you get down to it, Bioware is infamous
NOT because of gameplay, but because of interesting character.

superimposed
wrote...

The old Banjo-Kazooie games were not 'just Mario 64'.
That's like saying Mass Effect is 'just Jet Force Gemini' because
they're third person shooters.

+1

But ME
had almost as much combat as ME2... and it was a lot less fun.  Dragon
Age had tons and tons of combat, too, although it was much more rpgish. 
I think it's a great idea that ME is an RPG with combat that plays like
an action game.  They just need to optomize this a bit in ME3. 

Modifié par instantdeath999, 28 mai 2010 - 05:08 .

[Onyx Jaguar]

Ecael wrote...

MassEffect762 wrote...

uberdowzen wrote...

It's utter crap anyway, half the arguments against violent video games are that people who commit violent crimes often own an 360. That's like saying if you own a dishwasher and commit a violent crime it must be related to the dishwasher.

Or that inanimate tools kill people.

I demand a ban against all dishwashers. Think of the children!

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Nuts and Bolts was actually interesting while the old Banjo Kazooie games were just Super Mario 64 rehashes. Banjo Kazooie fanbase?

http://forums.banjo-...ms/default.aspx

http://www.rare-extreme.com/forums/

You made my point.

Banjo Kazooie has a cult following with those who preferred the N64 over the more popular Playstation growing up.

BK3 went the route Bioware would eventually end up going. Trying to "reach out" to a wider audience at the expense of their already established fanbase. TerrorK put it perfectly a few pages back.

That isn't illustrated in the reviews you posted, though. BK3's score took a nosedive (a 10-12 point one) by reaching out to the X-Box 360 crowd instead of Nintendo players.
.

Wrong, it failed because it was marketed to a segment that Microsoft has had problems marketing to.

[Terror_K]

Ecael wrote...

As I've said many times, the goal is not to get shooter fans in another shooter, but to get them interested in an RPG.

Do you believe that was BioWare goal from the start and that ME1 failed because it was too complex and/or not "shootery" enough, or do you believe that said goal only came into play when ME2 was being made?

[superimposed]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

superimposed wrote...

The old Banjo-Kazooie games were not 'just Mario 64'. That's like saying Mass Effect is 'just Jet Force Gemini' because they're third person shooters.

Hub world, jumping into Pictures, performing tasks to collect Jiggies.  Some of the platforming is different (the mechanic between the two characters) but it is as close to Super Mario 64 as World at War is to Call of Duty 4.

Jet Force Gemini sees you build your squad, travel to different worlds, get new and better weapons and armor, with optional sidequests of which some you must find and discover yourself.

[Onyx Jaguar]

superimposed wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

superimposed wrote...

The old Banjo-Kazooie games were not 'just Mario 64'. That's like saying Mass Effect is 'just Jet Force Gemini' because they're third person shooters.

Hub world, jumping into Pictures, performing tasks to collect Jiggies.  Some of the platforming is different (the mechanic between the two characters) but it is as close to Super Mario 64 as World at War is to Call of Duty 4.

Jet Force Gemini sees you build your squad, travel to different worlds, get new and better weapons and armor, with optional sidequests of which some you must find and discover yourself.

Yes but are the controls the same?  Do you have squad commands?  It would be safer in saying that Mass Effect is Ghost Recon Advance Warfighter in space.

Also not to mention the heavy emphasis on collecting in Jet Force Gemini

EDIT:  Aside from the Banjo Kazooie mechnanic and collecting crap to change your character into something, what is the difference between it and Super Mario 64?

Modifié par Onyx Jaguar, 28 mai 2010 - 05:18 .

[SkullandBonesmember]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

EDIT:  Aside from the Banjo Kazooie mechnanic and collecting crap to change your character into something, what is the difference between it and Super Mario 64?

Besides gameplay mechanics and story, what more can be done differently in any game?

[Onyx Jaguar]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

EDIT:  Aside from the Banjo Kazooie mechnanic and collecting crap to change your character into something, what is the difference between it and Super Mario 64?

Besides gameplay mechanics and story, what more can be done differently in any game?

These are minor gameplay mechanics, just an expanded double jump if you will.  The transformations are kind of mirror what you do on the that tiny big world or whatever in Super Mario 64.

The controls are the same
The game design from a hub standpoint is similar
The world design is similar
The graphics and physics as well as the camera feel similar

Its as close to a sequel to Super Mario 64 as Perfect Dark is to Goldeneye

[superimposed]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

superimposed wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

superimposed wrote...

The old Banjo-Kazooie games were not 'just Mario 64'. That's like saying Mass Effect is 'just Jet Force Gemini' because they're third person shooters.

Hub world, jumping into Pictures, performing tasks to collect Jiggies.  Some of the platforming is different (the mechanic between the two characters) but it is as close to Super Mario 64 as World at War is to Call of Duty 4.

Jet Force Gemini sees you build your squad, travel to different worlds, get new and better weapons and armor, with optional sidequests of which some you must find and discover yourself.

Yes but are the controls the same?  Do you have squad commands?  It would be safer in saying that Mass Effect is Ghost Recon Advance Warfighter in space.

Also not to mention the heavy emphasis on collecting in Jet Force Gemini

EDIT:  Aside from the Banjo Kazooie mechnanic and collecting crap to change your character into something, what is the difference between it and Super Mario 64?

Mario was linear, inspite of being able to run in a circle. Banjo kazooie (which was not meant to revolutionise anything, but was based on the N64 platform idea) had a great deal more in the way of buggering around.

[Onyx Jaguar]

superimposed wrote...

Mario was linear, inspite of being able to run in a circle. Banjo kazooie (which was not meant to revolutionise anything, but was based on the N64 platform idea) had a great deal more in the way of buggering around.

Are you referring to the amount of moves in the game or that the Stars were locked in a way that you had to often do them in order in Super Mario 64 while you don't in Banjo Kazooie?

[SkullandBonesmember]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

These are minor gameplay mechanics, just an expanded double jump if you will.  The transformations are kind of mirror what you do on the that tiny big world or whatever in Super Mario 64.

In the broad scheme of things, even 10 years down the road, how much can a racing game be tweaked? Shooter? Sport? The only genres that can have the possibility of the most changes, however subtle, are action and RPGs. Beyond that, not much can be changed, unless until virtual reality Holodeck like interfaces, but until then, we've got PCs and consoles.

[SuperMedbh]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

EDIT:  Aside from the Banjo Kazooie mechnanic and collecting crap to change your character into something, what is the difference between it and Super Mario 64?

Besides gameplay mechanics and story, what more can be done differently in any game?

Between word choice and illustrations, what is the difference between The Dubliners and The Cat in a Hat?  (for the record, I think both are classic books)

[Onyx Jaguar]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

These are minor gameplay mechanics, just an expanded double jump if you will.  The transformations are kind of mirror what you do on the that tiny big world or whatever in Super Mario 64.

In the broad scheme of things, even 10 years down the road, how much can a racing game be tweaked? Shooter? Sport? The only genres that can have the possibility of the most changes, however subtle, are action and RPGs. Beyond that, not much can be changed, unless until virtual reality Holodeck like interfaces, but until then, we've got PCs and consoles.

Mega Man Legends, Beyond Good and Evil and Fable have similar gameplay premises to Ocarina of Time (or should I say Ocarina of Time has similar gameplay premise to Mega Man Legends since it came first).  However they do not ultimately play the same way in execution.  The way you play the Banjo Kazooie games is the same in execution and philosophy as Super Mario 64.  So much so that I would almost call Banjo Kazooie the sequel that Super Mario 64 never got.

[SkullandBonesmember]

SuperMedbh wrote...

Between word choice and illustrations, what is the difference between The Dubliners and The Cat in a Hat?

Choices and dialogue go hand in hand with PLOT in video games, even if it's subtle. It's not a gameplay mechanic. The stars are the limit with how far developers can go with a story, especially branching stories.

[Ecael]

Terror_K wrote...

Ecael wrote...

As I've said many times, the goal is not to get shooter fans in another shooter, but to get them interested in an RPG.

Do you believe that was BioWare goal from the start and that ME1 failed because it was too complex and/or not "shootery" enough, or do you believe that said goal only came into play when ME2 was being made?

ME1 wasn't all that complex, but it definitely had things about it that were... inefficient. For example, having I through X of items that were essentially vendor junk. There has to be a way of simplifying that without resorting to the ME2 upgrade system.

And I never said ME1 was a failure. If it was a failure, we would have never seen Mass Effect 2 (and 3).

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

EXACTLY what I'm saying. If Rare had kept the focus on their established fanbase, it would have been way better. 5-7 equates to average, 8 above average.

Screw the critics. If by RPG you meant combat over plot and character interaction, so be it, but when you get down to it, Bioware is infamous NOT because of gameplay, but because of interesting character.

So what happens when critics praise the character development of each of the 12 squadmates in ME2? In general terms, BioWare is famous because of the sheer volume of information and dialogue put into the story and characters. The game world becomes more than revolving around a single plot line or character - BioWare worlds have multiple problems, multiple storylines and multiple protagonists.

On a side note, the Old Republic supposedly has enough text and dialogue to fill 40 novels (or more, now that Drew Karpyshyn's on board).

[SkullandBonesmember]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Mega Man Legends, Beyond Good and Evil and Fable have similar gameplay premises to Ocarina of Time (or should I say Ocarina of Time has similar gameplay premise to Mega Man Legends since it came first).  However they do not ultimately play the same way in execution.  The way you play the Banjo Kazooie games is the same in execution and philosophy as Super Mario 64.  So much so that I would almost call Banjo Kazooie the sequel that Super Mario 64 never got.

So you think the idea for BK3 being Spore or that other similar game lite with cars was an intriguing/smart way to go? Well, the established fanbase would have preferred an "HD Banjo Kazooie" which would not have been a bad thing at all.

[SuperMedbh]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

SuperMedbh wrote...

Between word choice and illustrations, what is the difference between The Dubliners and The Cat in a Hat?

Choices and dialogue go hand in hand with PLOT in video games, even if it's subtle. It's not a gameplay mechanic. The stars are the limit with how far developers can go with a story, especially branching stories.

Right!  I was being rhetorical (but I think you know by now that's how I am).  Seriously, gameplay mechanics are somewhat overrated.  Consider--  the Powerglove was introduced in 1989.  But most major games still are using WASD and mouse controls.  The Wii has been more significant, but hasn't been adopted by most new titles.  If the interface were truly important, it would have changed, just as graphics card requirements have changed on a nearly yearly basis.

So what IS important to games?  Right now, I'd guess at graphics, physics engines, and narrative.  Everything else is just icing.

[SkullandBonesmember]

Ecael wrote...

So what happens when critics praise the character development of each of the 12 squadmates in ME2? In general terms, BioWare is famous because of the sheer volume of information and dialogue put into the story and characters. The game world becomes more than revolving around a single plot line or character - BioWare worlds have multiple problems, multiple storylines and multiple protagonists.

On a side note, the Old Republic supposedly has enough text and dialogue to fill 40 novels (or more, now that Drew Karpyshyn's on board).

As I've said before, such development comes at the expense of way too much combat. Popular consensus is that too much combat is an oxymoron. Previous Bioware games do not have the problem of combat>characters>story. People complain to this day about how KOTOR 1's combat is dull.