10273 réponses à ce sujet

[FlyingWalrus]

bjdbwea wrote...

FlyingWalrus wrote...

Fact is change is a part of the gaming industry and it's not unusual for game mechanics to be altered or changed in the middle of a series.

So you believe change for the sake of change is always a good thing.

No. What you'll see is that change happens because the designers get a new idea or want to try something different out. If they think they can do something better, I more than welcome them to try.

No one would have complained if BioWare had developed better means of providing an inventory. Instead, they cut it out altogether. Yeah, it's change. But is it an improvement? No.

I'd say it cut about 10 or 20 hours of disintegrating items into omnigel, so yeah, it is an improvement from what we had.

Same with the Mako, same with loading screens.

I would've lamented the Mako, if the worlds were something worth keeping. As it stood, they were not. Loading screens I DO lament. I want them out in ME3, or at least not as frequent.

Yeah, it's change to dumb down gameplay mechanics. Is it better? No.

If by dumbing down you mean "sharpening up" and streamlining, yes they are, in a way. The game is a lot closer to their original vision for Mass Effect than ME1 was. This can be seen by the early ME trailers.

Yeah, it's change to go from spoken briefings to text boxes. Better? No.

I don't even know what you're on about. There were a lot more "text boxes" in ME.

And of course it's change to go from an amazing story on par with any good movie to a dozen unrelated short stories loosely tied together by a main plot that barely deserves the name. Is it a change for the better? Of course not.

This is a matter of taste, so it's moot, really.

Bottom line: If you have a proven concept, there sometimes is no need for change. I guess they figured it would sell better (dumbing down seems to be somewhat like the answer to everything in the gaming industry these days), but there are indications it actually didn't even accomplish that.

VGChartz and Metacritic would prove you sadly, sadly wrong. There is elegance in simplicity, but I do hope they build more upon the foundation that is ME2 to make ME3 the best of the series. Like I said, more Talents, equipment, your squadmates having ARMOR, and being able to use the Hammerhead freely in large worlds that have actual rewards for exploring would go a long way to making the next game great.

[ShakeZoohla]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

ShakeZoohla wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Cutting out the Mako? If it means cutting out copy and pasted worlds and putting in levels that are built up from the ground up and different then oh yes, cut that crap out. Those open worlds were the easy way out, and now they have been replaced by 10 character specific side missions and a few other N7 sidequests.

No, that's not what it means.  It means they cut out a big aspect of gameplay from the first game, that added another layer and helped to keep things diverse.  Like it or not a lot a lot of people enjoyed the mako, and those copy and pasted worlds. 

And like it a lot, a lot of people hated the mako.  Look, I'm not against a change of pace, that was something that ME 2 sorely lacks.  However the Mako represents Filler to the extreme. 

Compared to planet scanning?  I'd have to disagree.  But yeah ME2 does lack gameplay variety, which makes me think that improving the mako, instead of dumping it, would have been a good choice.

[Mx_CN3]

ShakeZoohla wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Cutting out the Mako? If it means cutting out copy and pasted worlds and putting in levels that are built up from the ground up and different then oh yes, cut that crap out. Those open worlds were the easy way out, and now they have been replaced by 10 character specific side missions and a few other N7 sidequests.

No, that's not what it means.  It means they cut out a big aspect of gameplay from the first game, that added another layer and helped to keep things diverse.  Like it or not a lot a lot of people enjoyed the mako, and those copy and pasted worlds. 

I'm very happy that that "layer" was cut out.  I liked the Mako well enough on the primary  missions, but it was terrible for the side missions.  Driving through mountains was not fun.

[Thajocoth]

I really liked both games.



ME2 had more main plot missions, which was something I really liked, but far less optional content. The few side-missions that you could take on random worlds were also too generic to me. I much preferred the Mako's addition of exploration into the game, keeping it from being a straight-up shooter.



It also felt to me like there was less dialog stuff, and most of what you said didn't actually matter. Occasionally you'd get a choice or two that does, but for the most part not. This also made it feel like more of a straight-up shooter.



Mineral gathering in ME2 sucked. Majorly. It was a well coded minigame, sure, but it wasn't fun. The best it did was break up some of the monotony of the game becoming more of striahgt-up shooter.



I also liked that you weren't overwhelmed by upgrade options when you leveled up in ME2. In the first one, you spend all your points over many levels on the same thing to get good at that thing, not really gaining much... But here, you feel like you're gaining more as you go.



I'm not entirely happy with the gear system in either game. Having so many slots and a ton of different versions for each piece is way too much... But only being able to gear yourself and with only up to 4 options per slot is way too little. I did like the ability to "repaint" your gear in ME2 though.

[Dr Bawbag]

Mx_CN3 wrote...

ShakeZoohla wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Cutting out the Mako? If it means cutting out copy and pasted worlds and putting in levels that are built up from the ground up and different then oh yes, cut that crap out. Those open worlds were the easy way out, and now they have been replaced by 10 character specific side missions and a few other N7 sidequests.

No, that's not what it means.  It means they cut out a big aspect of gameplay from the first game, that added another layer and helped to keep things diverse.  Like it or not a lot a lot of people enjoyed the mako, and those copy and pasted worlds. 

I'm very happy that that "layer" was cut out.  I liked the Mako well enough on the primary  missions, but it was terrible for the side missions.  Driving through mountains was not fun.

Surely your issue is with the enviroments and not with the mako?

There wasn't anything wrong with the mako per se, just the terrain in which you had to use it.

If i learnt one thing from ME1, it was Bioware could make large mountain ranges and plenty of them

[bjdbwea]

FlyingWalrus wrote...

The game is a lot closer to their original vision for Mass Effect than ME1 was. This can be seen by the early ME trailers.

I disagree with pretty much of your entire reply, but it's not worth repeating why. This particular notion is funny though. Good one.

Wait... you weren't serious, were you?

Modifié par bjdbwea, 16 juin 2010 - 10:51 .

[Mx_CN3]

Dr Bawbag wrote...

[snip]

Surely your issue is with the enviroments and not with the mako?

There wasn't anything wrong with the mako per se, just the terrain in which you had to use it.

If i learnt one thing from ME1, it was Bioware could make large mountain ranges and plenty of them

Like I said, I liked it well enough on the main missions where you didn't have to spend 3 minutes scaling a mountain.
I do prefer the Hammerhead though, it's (in my opinion) a lot more fun of a vehicle.  The vehicle combat in both was lame (again, in my opinion), so the combat/shields/missle HH gripes aren't relevant to me.

[ShakeZoohla]

Mx_CN3 wrote...

Dr Bawbag wrote...

[snip]

Surely your issue is with the enviroments and not with the mako?

There wasn't anything wrong with the mako per se, just the terrain in which you had to use it.

If i learnt one thing from ME1, it was Bioware could make large mountain ranges and plenty of them

Like I said, I liked it well enough on the main missions where you didn't have to spend 3 minutes scaling a mountain.
I do prefer the Hammerhead though, it's (in my opinion) a lot more fun of a vehicle.  The vehicle combat in both was lame (again, in my opinion), so the combat/shields/missle HH gripes aren't relevant to me.

I wouldn't mind the Hammerhead so much, if i didn't think it was so cheesy, and if there was some real exploring to do with it.  Really, I just liked the option to explore uncharted worlds,  I'll admit the mako controlled like crap, but why remove all exploration?  It's ****ing space!

[cachx]

Terror_K wrote...
It doesn't help that in the wake of ME2's release the once ever-present devs are quieter on the forums than I've ever seen them.

I'm going to guess that dealing with would-be gamedesigners / writers it's not high on their priority list. The only dev you see relatively often is Gaider in the DAO forums, and it's amazing how much of the responses to him boil down to: "Look, here is what you should do". We're lucky if they're reading this topic at all .

ShakeZoohla wrote...
No, that's not what it means.  It means they cut out a big aspect of gameplay from the first game, that added another layer and helped to keep things diverse.  Like it or not a lot of people enjoyed the mako, and those copy and pasted worlds. 

I wasn't aware people liked the Mako until I logged in these forums. I personally didn't like it, and every gaming site, blog or webcomic I read had an issue with it (that and the elevators). Next thing you know, people will be missing the planet scanning by the time ME3 hits.

bjdbwea wrote...

FlyingWalrus wrote...
The game is a lot closer to their original vision for Mass Effect than ME1 was. This can be seen by the early ME trailers.

I disagree with pretty much of your entire reply, but it's not worth repeating why. This particular notion is funny though. Good one. [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/lol.png[/smilie] Wait...you weren't serious, were you? [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/lol.png[/smilie]

Modifié par cachx, 16 juin 2010 - 11:06 .

[FlyingWalrus]

bjdbwea wrote...

FlyingWalrus wrote...

The game is a lot closer to their original vision for Mass Effect than ME1 was. This can be seen by the early ME trailers.

I disagree with pretty much of your entire reply, but it's not worth repeating why.

Good. Saves me the trouble of repeating why you'd be wrong, if your disagreement wasn't a matter of opinion.

This particular notion is funny though. Good one.

Wait... you weren't serious, were you?

I am serious. Mass Effect was always intended to have fast-paced combat with RPG mechanics supporting and adding depth to the kind of abilities you could use in combat. Like I've said, the lack of talents in Mass Effect 2 was somewhat disappointing, but the improvement of the actual controls and variance in environments, along with the fact that the dialogue, intimate character development, and story were mostly intact, made up for it.

Modifié par FlyingWalrus, 16 juin 2010 - 11:04 .

[Onyx Jaguar]

cachx wrote...

Terror_K wrote...
It doesn't help that in the wake of ME2's release the once ever-present devs are quieter on the forums than I've ever seen them.

I'm going to guess that dealing with would-be gamedesigners / writers it's not high on their priority list. The only dev you see relatively often is Gaider in the DAO forums, and it's amazing how much of the responses to him boil down to: "Look, here is what you should do". We're lucky if they're reading this topic at all .

ShakeZoohla wrote...
No, that's not what it means.  It means they cut out a big aspect of gameplay from the first game, that added another layer and helped to keep things diverse.  Like it or not a lot of people enjoyed the mako, and those copy and pasted worlds. 

I wasn't aware people liked the Mako until I logged in these forums. I personally didn't like it, and every gaming site, blog or webcomic I read had an issue with it (that and the elevators). Next thing you know, people will be missing the planet scanning by the time ME3 hits.

bjdbwea wrote...

FlyingWalrus wrote...
The game is a lot closer to their original vision for Mass Effect than ME1 was. This can be seen by the early ME trailers.

I disagree with pretty much of your entire reply, but it's not worth repeating why. This particular notion is funny though. Good one. [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/lol.png[/smilie] Wait...you weren't serious, were you? [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/lol.png[/smilie]

I love some of the concepts in that demo, wish they'd have got some of em working for both games.  I especially love the look and layout of the Galaxy Map, its 3D!

[bjdbwea]

FlyingWalrus wrote...

I am serious. Mass Effect was always intended to have fast-paced combat with RPG mechanics supporting and adding depth to the kind of abilities you could use in combat. Like I've said, the lack of talents in Mass Effect 2 was somewhat disappointing, but the improvement of the actual controls and variance in environments, along with the fact that the dialogue, intimate character development, and story were mostly intact, made up for it.

Only that they weren't. That's exactly where they lost most of what was the original vision (as far it can be determined, I for one do not claim absolute knowledge about that), not only for the Mass Effect series, but actually all BioWare games up to this point.

[Onyx Jaguar]

Including MDK 2, Shattered Steel and Jade Empire?

[Iakus]

FlyingWalrus wrote...


I am serious. Mass Effect was always intended to have fast-paced combat with RPG mechanics supporting and adding depth to the kind of abilities you could use in combat. Like I've said, the lack of talents in Mass Effect 2 was somewhat disappointing, but the improvement of the actual controls and variance in environments, along with the fact that the dialogue, intimate character development, and story were mostly intact, made up for it.

The bolded part is where you totally lost me, as I saw very little of that in ME 2

In fact, I think it took back some of what was in ME 1

[FlyingWalrus]

bjdbwea wrote...

FlyingWalrus wrote...

I am serious. Mass Effect was always intended to have fast-paced combat with RPG mechanics supporting and adding depth to the kind of abilities you could use in combat. Like I've said, the lack of talents in Mass Effect 2 was somewhat disappointing, but the improvement of the actual controls and variance in environments, along with the fact that the dialogue, intimate character development, and story were mostly intact, made up for it.

Only that they weren't. That's exactly where they lost most of what was the original vision (as far it can be determined, I for one do not claim absolute knowledge about that), not only for the Mass Effect series, but actually all BioWare games up to this point.

Yeah. Bioware is ruined forever. :innocent:

[Mx_CN3]

iakus wrote...

FlyingWalrus wrote...


I am serious. Mass Effect was always intended to have fast-paced combat with RPG mechanics supporting and adding depth to the kind of abilities you could use in combat. Like I've said, the lack of talents in Mass Effect 2 was somewhat disappointing, but the improvement of the actual controls and variance in environments, along with the fact that the dialogue, intimate character development, and story were mostly intact, made up for it.

The bolded part is where you totally lost me, as I saw very little of that in ME 2

In fact, I think it took back some of what was in ME 1

I thought that the dialog and character development was far better done in the second one.  I actually cared about those teammates.  The main storyline suffered, but the stories of the teammates were phenomenally done (imo).

[Lumikki]

FlyingWalrus wrote...

Yeah. Bioware is ruined forever. :innocent:

Pretty much if you listen sertain few rare people. I'm my self trying to stay out of they way, because it doesn't lead anywhere. You can't show the light for blind man.

It will be interesting to see will ME3 continue ME1 & ME2 stories or will it be it's own story again.

[Mx_CN3]

Lumikki wrote...

FlyingWalrus wrote...

Yeah. Bioware is ruined forever. :innocent:

Pretty much if you listen sertain few rare people. I'm my self trying to stay out of they way, because it doesn't lead anywhere. You can't show the light for blind man.

It will be interesting to see will ME3 continue ME1 & ME2 stories or will it be it's own story again.

Yeah, the way I see it is that we can just let them gripe all day about what the game should/could have been, while the rest of us enjoy the game for what it is.

Modifié par Mx_CN3, 17 juin 2010 - 12:17 .

[bjdbwea]

FlyingWalrus wrote...

Yeah. Bioware is ruined forever. :innocent:

Never said they were. For all indicates the (sole) reason for the changes was to sell more copies. While that doesn't seem to have turned out as well as they certainly hoped, at least development time could be reduced, increasing profits even so.

What is pretty much ruined is the good image they had in my view and my hopes of them creating the kind of outstanding games they used to. I certainly don't "hate" them now, they're just doing what everyone else does after all, but that's exactly it.

[Merci357]

bjdbwea wrote...

FlyingWalrus wrote...

Yeah. Bioware is ruined forever. :innocent:

Never said they were. For all indicates the (sole) reason for the changes was to sell more copies. While that doesn't seem to have turned out as well as they certainly hoped, at least development time could be reduced, increasing profits even so.

What is pretty much ruined is the good image they had in my view and my hopes of them creating the kind of outstanding games they used to. I certainly don't "hate" them now, they're just doing what everyone else does after all, but that's exactly it.

If you could point me into the right direction where to find those games everyone else does that play similar to BioWare games? I'd love to play some more games with extensive dialogue, morality, choices and rich story and background on top of a cinematic presentation, with at least traces of a RPG system.
If I missed anything besides Drakensang 2: River of Time and Alpha Protocol in the recent months, I'd like to know these games.

[Iakus]

Mx_CN3 wrote...

iakus wrote...

FlyingWalrus wrote...


I am serious. Mass Effect was always intended to have fast-paced combat with RPG mechanics supporting and adding depth to the kind of abilities you could use in combat. Like I've said, the lack of talents in Mass Effect 2 was somewhat disappointing, but the improvement of the actual controls and variance in environments, along with the fact that the dialogue, intimate character development, and story were mostly intact, made up for it.

The bolded part is where you totally lost me, as I saw very little of that in ME 2

In fact, I think it took back some of what was in ME 1

I thought that the dialog and character development was far better done in the second one.  I actually cared about those teammates.  The main storyline suffered, but the stories of the teammates were phenomenally done (imo).

Dialog was about even.  Language was a bit more...juvenile though.  Character developement, could have been a lot better.  There was good material to explore.  Unfortunately the "story" was so spread out among the dozen squadmates they all just get lost in the shuffle.  Their stories just ended up being on/off switches for loyalty.

[Iakus]

FlyingWalrus wrote...

Yeah. Bioware is ruined forever. :innocent:

Ruined, no.  But you know the saying: "Trust is hard to earn and easily spent"

[Mx_CN3]

iakus wrote...

Dialog was about even.  Language was a bit more...juvenile though.  Character developement, could have been a lot better.  There was good material to explore.  Unfortunately the "story" was so spread out among the dozen squadmates they all just get lost in the shuffle.  Their stories just ended up being on/off switches for loyalty.

I'd argue that the dialog in the second one was better, and that character development was MUCH better.  In the first one, you had a few dialog options, then a generic mission (for Tali/Garrus/Wrex) or the option of a romance.  At least the loyalty missions in ME2 had a story and had interaction.

It just boils down to preference.  I preferred the characters and dialog (and basically everything outside of the main primary mission) of the second game, some feel the same way about the first.

[Onyx Jaguar]

Yes they were, they were the entire focus of hte main plot. the loyalty missions were side quests. If they offend you, don't do them.

The Collectors were written to symbolize the Reapers since the Geth and Krogan fell apart.  We you even paying attention to ME 2? 

Modifié par Onyx Jaguar, 17 juin 2010 - 03:56 .