10273 réponses à ce sujet

[cachx]

Darth Drago wrote...
-Time constraints? It wouldn’t take an experienced writer no more than a few days to a week to write the lines for each squad mate to use before main production even began.
-Budget constraint? How so? Everyone is still getting paid to write, voice acting and facial dialog animation already.
-Technical constraint? Again how? If they already say a line whats the difference of adding actual original lines in place of the same generic ones? They already are doing the dialog animation so there really isn’t any technical issues to deal with.
Like its been mentioned already in Dragon Age and a bunch of OLDER games your companions will have actual conversations with each other. Having a few original lines and a bunch of generic reused lines per loyalty mission instead of all original dialog is nothing but laziness as I see it.

Cute how people think that the writers have some kind of final say on what happens or not or other details. And later, magic leprechauns put together a game made of dreams and good intentions. Overnight. Videogame production does not work that way. As for the rest , allow me to quote my earlier post.

cachx wrote..
Please note that I'm not opposed to it, but there are limits on what can be achievable (pretty good suggestion thread here).
You do get in-party moments, but they are few and far between. I agree on that.

Also to consider. Dragon Age has no voiced protagonists, ME has two. DAO also relies a little bit more on text.The Kotor games also can cut corners thanks to 'robospeak' and 'alienspeak' (just garbled sounds that repeat over and over). ME2 is already bigger than those, and I imagine ME3 will be even bigger (it has to piggy back on all the
outcomes of ME1 and 2, after all).

You can add to that time constraints (only a few companies can afford multiple delays, like Blizzard or Valve), budget (how many lines can Sheen record before asking for more $$?) or simple space (remeber the stink the game got at launch for being in 2 discs on xbox?)

Most people arguing against the dialogue are unwilling to go to the Campaign Dialogue Thread, and prefer to stick to ad nauseam arguments, so I won't bother linking it again.

Also, a very reelevant and wise quote by M. Gamble, posted here yesterday:

Michael Gamble wrote...

FataliTensei wrote...
Not
until late 2012? Good, maybe they'll take their time and get the next
one right

LOL.

Edits: fixing formatting...

Modifié par cachx, 18 juin 2010 - 09:54 .

[Darth Drago]

Great list Smikkieboy. from: http://social.biowar...797/244#2914005

CLIP SIZE/ AMMO CARRYING CAPACITY
- The ammo/thermal clip joke. I personally hated the entire concept of adding something that wasn’t needed to cater to the shooter crowd. It was poorly designed and implemented in every aspect.

PROJECT FIREWALKER
-I totally agree on the Firewalker, it stank and from what I hear it hasn’t been upgraded in Overlord, at least not enough.

SCANNING
-Planet scanning has to be one of the worst ideas for this game and its considered a mini game and one that people actually like to do as well.

STORY
-The main story was not good at all. It’s a sad thing when the recruiting and loyalty missions have more depth, better written and are more enjoyable to do then the main Collector quest in its entirety. To top it off I had already figured out most of what was going on before I got to the Collector ship on my first playthrough.

MISSIONS
-Yep longer ones especially for the Freedoms Progress, Horizon, Collector ship, Reaper IFF, and the final battle. So all the main quest ones actually. The point about the breaking up your team could have been used during the Collector ship or the Reaper IFF missions easily as well.

N7 MISSIONS
-The N7 missions did seem to have a rushed or even unfinished feel to many of them and it would have been nice if we didn’t have several 5 minute or less ones to do nothing like walk here or go flip a switch. There also wasn’t nearly enough of them.

WEAPON ACCURACY
-Good question about the missing crouch. Apparently someone found an exploit in the game and instead of fixing the problem they just cut out the crouch feature.

LEVEL CAPS
-Hopefully in the first actual expansion we will get the level cap raised but I honestly would be surprised if they did. I think they royally screwed up the leveling and talents (sorry powers now) to not give you enough of them to choose from as well as having the stupid 1, 2, 3, 4 point system to raise your powers.

SQUAD MEMBER COMMANDS
-Squad commands was a weak system especially when you look at what Dragon Age Origins used. Last time I checked the X-box 360 controller has an 8 way directional pad, to bad its rarely fully used. ME2 a more tactical game, yea right.

ADDITIONAL IDEAS
-I like the idea of space combat. For a game that takes place in space with the potential to run into a lot of enemies it sure seems dull. Of course does the Normandy even have any other weapons other than the front ones? Vehicle combat is wasted in ME2 with no actual vehicle to use even if you got the worthless Hamerhead with its paper thin armor and other issues it has all on its own. They had a good thing going with the Mako but instead of fixing and expanding it the dropped it in favor of something I consider worse than planet scanning.

Modifié par Darth Drago, 18 juin 2010 - 10:06 .

[tonnactus]

frylock23 wrote...


5. This is the most minor of my quibbles.  I had to deal with the personal problems of all my squaddies to have a reasonable expectation of final success, but no one seemed to care that Sheperd had issues of his/her own that remained unresolved throughout the entire game.  No resolution with your LI, no resolution with your Cerberus issues, no resolution of being essentially dead to everyone for two years.  And yet, no one seems to care that Shep might be suffering from the same sorts of distractions that will get the other squaddies killed in the end.  Isn't it plausible to think that the leader of the impossible mission might need to find some closure on a thing or three before s/he goes into the final mission?  Just a thought.

They made the "cameos" with old players dissapointing and wanted made the player to cheat. Most obviuos and in a very primitive way they did it with miranda...
So shepardt talk with her and watch at her butt.
Solving issues with old partners should be obvious for the old shepardt to made his mind clear. Or at least even talk with his mother before he went to the "suicide mission" .

But shpeardt is dumb robot and cerberus pawn in this game anyway.

[Pocketgb]

cachx wrote...

Darth Drago wrote...
-Time constraints? It wouldn’t take an experienced writer no more than a few days to a week to write the lines for each squad mate to use before main production even began.
-Budget constraint? How so? Everyone is still getting paid to write, voice acting and facial dialog animation already.
-Technical constraint? Again how? If they already say a line whats the difference of adding actual original lines in place of the same generic ones? They already are doing the dialog animation so there really isn’t any technical issues to deal with.
Like its been mentioned already in Dragon Age and a bunch of OLDER games your companions will have actual conversations with each other. Having a few original lines and a bunch of generic reused lines per loyalty mission instead of all original dialog is nothing but laziness as I see it.

Cute how people think that the writers have some kind of final say on what happens or not or other details. And later, magic leprechauns put together a game made of dreams and good intentions. Overnight. Videogame production does not work that way. As for the rest , allow me to quote my earlier post.

cachx wrote..
Please note that I'm not opposed to it, but there are limits on what can be achievable (pretty good suggestion thread here).
You do get in-party moments, but they are few and far between. I agree on that.

Also to consider. Dragon Age has no voiced protagonists, ME has two. DAO also relies a little bit more on text.The Kotor games also can cut corners thanks to 'robospeak' and 'alienspeak' (just garbled sounds that repeat over and over). ME2 is already bigger than those, and I imagine ME3 will be even bigger (it has to piggy back on all the
outcomes of ME1 and 2, after all).

You can add to that time constraints (only a few companies can afford multiple delays, like Blizzard or Valve), budget (how many lines can Sheen record before asking for more $$?) or simple space (remeber the stink the game got at launch for being in 2 discs on xbox?)

Most people arguing against the dialogue are unwilling to go to the Campaign Dialogue Thread, and prefer to stick to ad nauseam arguments, so I won't bother linking it again.

Also, a very reelevant and wise quote by M. Gamble, posted here yesterday:

Michael Gamble wrote...

FataliTensei wrote...
Not
until late 2012? Good, maybe they'll take their time and get the next
one right

LOL.

Edits: fixing formatting...

Good post, and Gamble is my new hero

[Iakus]

frylock23 wrote...

First the things I like about ME2:

1. The gameplay was a lot more fun.  I'm no shooter player, but I found it exciting and enjoyable enough to keep me coming back for a scenario here and there.

2. I was glad to be able to get rid of the endless list of mods that I was never going to use and was too lazy to Omni-gel.

3. I like the idea of having to delegate the right people for the jobs and the idea of split squads in the final mission.  It was what I used to imagine my unused squaddies doing in ME1 actually.  To see them actually at it was quite fun.  I would actually like to see this aspect deepened and used more often in ME3 to tell the truth particularly if they are going to stay married to the idea that Shep must have an enormous group of squaddies from which to choose.

Things I wish they hadn't done:

1. Planet scanning.  It was a neat idea, but the idea of making us poor, mouse-beholden PC players tediously scan every inch of planet for resources was just cruel especially at the tediously slow speeds of the scanner and the lack of drone payload.  Even with the improvements, it was next to impossible to fully mine and explore most systems without having to return to the Fuel Depot at least once even if you only scanned the mineral Rich planets.

2. The vastly expanded cast of squaddies.  I don't mind the idea of having more options, but in the amount of gameplay time you allowed, there was no way to adequately flesh out those characters the same way their ME1 counterparts were fleshed out.  Maybe with much better writing it could have been pulled off, but I would much rather have fewer available squaddies than a virtual disaster movie cast of squaddies all suffering from a lack of screen time that hampers their depth and my ability to care about them.  I liked all my ME1 squaddies and felt horrible every single time I had to sacrifice one.  In ME2, I didn't care much one way or the other about my squaddies with the exceptions of Garrus and Tali who benefited from having been in ME1 where I got to know them.  It wasn't that I disliked the ME2 squaddies with the exception of Jack; I just hadn't been hooked by them as characters like I had with their ME1 counterparts.

3. The game suffered from bigger and smaller at the same time.  It felt to me like they wanted to make every experience bigger and add more.  That's an admirable goal, but I don't think they had the allowed gameplay time to flesh it all out properly.  As a result, Omega and the Citadel, both interesting and worthy destinations in and of themselves, felt cramped because the actual areas you had access to were so restricted.  They added more systems I could fly to, but they didn't add more things I could do there.  In ME1, every system had a mission, and while I don't necessarily need that with ME2, having so many empty systems made the universe feel smaller much like Citadel did.  I had a bigger squad, too, which I partially addressed above.  But as a result of having so much, I wound up with much less in terms of forming an actual relationship with any of them.  I wanted to romance in ME1, but I felt like I was setting up a cheap one nighter in ME2.  I'm not saying the goals weren't noble here only that they added so much that in the gameplay time they allowed, there just wasn't any way of fully fleshing it all out in as satisfying a way as you did in ME1.

4. Story.  I feel like the story suffered in ME2.  This can be attributed to #2 and #3 in some ways.  The central villains of the story were the Collectors and discovering how to stop them, but that story arc took place over roughly 4 missions interspersed with 10 or so recruitment missions (count is likely off) and the same number of loyalty missions.  Do the math and that's one actual plotline mission for about every five unrelated crew missions.  It's no wonder that I never exactly built up any sense of outrage or emotion or even any sense of urgency to deal with the Collectors.  I spent more time dealing with everyone else's dysfunctional families and dark pasts than I did my supposed actual goal.  Again, this didn't have to be a detractor.  ME1 had you dealing with your squaddies issues too, but it wasn't necessary to the central goal in the same way.  Had there been a lot more gameplay to the game along with a lot more squad interaction, I think we could have fleshed out the Collectors as enemies and still fit in the squaddies' issues.  But, there just wasn't enough time.

5. This is the most minor of my quibbles.  I had to deal with the personal problems of all my squaddies to have a reasonable expectation of final success, but no one seemed to care that Sheperd had issues of his/her own that remained unresolved throughout the entire game.  No resolution with your LI, no resolution with your Cerberus issues, no resolution of being essentially dead to everyone for two years.  And yet, no one seems to care that Shep might be suffering from the same sorts of distractions that will get the other squaddies killed in the end.  Isn't it plausible to think that the leader of the impossible mission might need to find some closure on a thing or three before s/he goes into the final mission?  Just a thought.

All very good points.  I hadn't even thought of #5, but it's an excellent one.  Guess I should thank my lucky stars my Shep didn't get himself killed by falling debris after getting that chilly reception on Horizon  

Honestly, it still amazes me that so many people seemed to be perfectly fine with how badly the story suffered in ME 2. 

[Pocketgb]

Stories for Bioware games have always been "meh", at least for me. I've just always liked to chill with the homies in them.

[Some Geth]

Pocketgb wrote...

Stories for Bioware games have always been "meh", at least for me. I've just always liked to chill with the homies in them.

I think all BioWare fans think like this they just don't want to say it:innocent:.

[Iakus]

Some Geth wrote...

Pocketgb wrote...

Stories for Bioware games have always been "meh", at least for me. I've just always liked to chill with the homies in them.

I think all BioWare fans think like this they just don't want to say it:innocent:.

I'm kinda proof positive this is not true

To me, interacting with the story is pretty much the entire purpose of an rpg.

  Bad story=bad game=might as well be playing Borderlands

[Some Geth]

iakus wrote...

Some Geth wrote...

Pocketgb wrote...

Stories for Bioware games have always been "meh", at least for me. I've just always liked to chill with the homies in them.

I think all BioWare fans think like this they just don't want to say it:innocent:.

I'm kinda proof positive this is not true

To me, interacting with the story is pretty much the entire purpose of an rpg.

  Bad story=bad game=might as well be playing Borderlands

Tell me how ME1 had a good story and it is bad gameplay=bad game.

[SithLordExarKun]

Darth Drago wrote...


Great list Smikkieboy. from: http://social.biowar...797/244#2914005

CLIP SIZE/ AMMO CARRYING CAPACITY
- The ammo/thermal clip joke. I personally hated the entire concept of adding something that wasn’t needed to cater to the shooter crowd. It was poorly designed and implemented in every aspect.

PROJECT FIREWALKER
-I totally agree on the Firewalker, it stank and from what I hear it hasn’t been upgraded in Overlord, at least not enough.

SCANNING
-Planet scanning has to be one of the worst ideas for this game and its considered a mini game and one that people actually like to do as well.

STORY
-The main story was not good at all. It’s a sad thing when the recruiting and loyalty missions have more depth, better written and are more enjoyable to do then the main Collector quest in its entirety. To top it off I had already figured out most of what was going on before I got to the Collector ship on my first playthrough.

MISSIONS
-Yep longer ones especially for the Freedoms Progress, Horizon, Collector ship, Reaper IFF, and the final battle. So all the main quest ones actually. The point about the breaking up your team could have been used during the Collector ship or the Reaper IFF missions easily as well.

N7 MISSIONS
-The N7 missions did seem to have a rushed or even unfinished feel to many of them and it would have been nice if we didn’t have several 5 minute or less ones to do nothing like walk here or go flip a switch. There also wasn’t nearly enough of them.

WEAPON ACCURACY
-Good question about the missing crouch. Apparently someone found an exploit in the game and instead of fixing the problem they just cut out the crouch feature.

LEVEL CAPS
-Hopefully in the first actual expansion we will get the level cap raised but I honestly would be surprised if they did. I think they royally screwed up the leveling and talents (sorry powers now) to not give you enough of them to choose from as well as having the stupid 1, 2, 3, 4 point system to raise your powers.

SQUAD MEMBER COMMANDS
-Squad commands was a weak system especially when you look at what Dragon Age Origins used. Last time I checked the X-box 360 controller has an 8 way directional pad, to bad its rarely fully used. ME2 a more tactical game, yea right.

ADDITIONAL IDEAS
-I like the idea of space combat. For a game that takes place in space with the potential to run into a lot of enemies it sure seems dull. Of course does the Normandy even have any other weapons other than the front ones? Vehicle combat is wasted in ME2 with no actual vehicle to use even if you got the worthless Hamerhead with its paper thin armor and other issues it has all on its own. They had a good thing going with the Mako but instead of fixing and expanding it the dropped it in favor of something I consider worse than planet scanning.

Why do you keep repeating the same thing for 4 months in a row? Every "critisicm" you make revolves around the same thing said time and again. Not that i am trying to attack you but i am just wondering what is your motivation.

[Iakus]

[quote]Some Geth wrote...

[quote]iakus wrote...

[quote]Some Geth wrote...

[quote]Pocketgb wrote...

Stories for Bioware games have always been "meh", at least for me. I've just always liked to chill with the homies in them.[/quote]I think all BioWare fans think like this they just don't want to say it:innocent:.
[/quote]

I'm kinda proof positive this is not true

To me, interacting with the story is pretty much the entire purpose of an rpg.

 [quote]Some Geth wrote...

Bad story=bad game=might as well be playing Borderlands[/quote]
Tell me how ME1 had a good story and it is bad gameplay=bad game.
[/quote]

while bad gameplay can hurt a game, and beyond a certain point it makes the game unplayable (Oblivion's leveling system) I am willing to tolerate a certain amount of bad gameplay for a good story.

good gameplay +bad story=boring game I might play once then shelve

mediocre gameplay +good story=game I'll always come back to

good gameplay +good story=I'll wear out the disk

ME 1 was a good old-fashioned sci-fi adventure, (complete with oddly humanoid-looking aliens).  It's classic space opera, with a threat to the galaxy only you can stop, and you stop it your way.  Sure other rpgs have threats to the nation/world/reality, but this one played out like an entire season  of Star Trek episodes, or Farscape, or whatever science fiction program you could name.
The story felt epic, spanning hundred of parsecs and thousands of years.  The true threat unfolded gradually, over the course of the game, and it wasn't until your conversation with Vigil near the very end that you learn just how far back the  Reapers go, 
ME 1 wasn't particularly deep, no, but it wasn't trying to be.  It was trying to be a big epic space adventure, and it succeeded at that admirably.  It promised two more volumes of this, direct sequels.  In tis it crashed and burned.  At least with one of them.

With ME 1, I had exactly two problems

1 I didn't like the limited activations the DRM restricted you to

2) The game felt a little bit short.

With ME 3, even if its the best game ever, I know  I'll have at least one problem:

To import a game, I'll have to play through ME 2 again

[Pocketgb]

iakus wrote...

Some Geth wrote...

Pocketgb wrote...

Stories for Bioware games have always been "meh", at least for me. I've just always liked to chill with the homies in them.

I think all BioWare fans think like this they just don't want to say it:innocent:.

I'm kinda proof positive this is not true

To me, interacting with the story is pretty much the entire purpose of an rpg.

Interacting and relating with my companions has always been what's sold me for a Bioware game, amd ME2 delivers very nicely in this sense.

The plot for their games have always been rather subpar and riddled horrendously with plotholes and never enough to stand on their own. After KotOR, I can't even begin to imagine how the rest of Bioware's games would play out without the party member interaction. ME1's plot only intrigued me because of the knowledge and history of the Reapers. The rest of it was pretty dismissable and did an annoying boomerang near the end.

Same goes for ME2, really. All drama and suspense revolved around your squadmates, and I loved it for that.

[Iakus]

Pocketgb wrote...

iakus wrote...

Some Geth wrote...

Pocketgb wrote...

Stories for Bioware games have always been "meh", at least for me. I've just always liked to chill with the homies in them.

I think all BioWare fans think like this they just don't want to say it:innocent:.

I'm kinda proof positive this is not true

To me, interacting with the story is pretty much the entire purpose of an rpg.

Interacting and relating with my companions has always been what's sold me for a Bioware game, amd ME2 delivers very nicely in this sense.

The plot for their games have always been rather subpar and riddled horrendously with plotholes and never enough to stand on their own. After KotOR, I can't even begin to imagine how the rest of Bioware's games would play out without the party member interaction. ME1's plot only intrigued me because of the knowledge and history of the Reapers. The rest of it was pretty dismissable and did an annoying boomerang near the end.

Same goes for ME2, really. All drama and suspense revolved around your squadmates, and I loved it for that.

Well, unlike others here, I'm not going to call you a whiner for not liking Mass Effect 2 1 

But seriously, character interaction is also excellent in a Bioware game, and it often ties directly into the plot.  But as I said before, it blew up in ME 2.  Yes, the characters are interesting, and i would have liekd to get to know some of them better.  Problem is it wasn't done well enough. The emotions feel so artificial, constructed for the sole purpose of advancing the plot:

A few conversations and one quest and we're now best buddies with the squadmates?   Minds totally clear, they are unquestoningly loyal,  The potential  LIs are throwing themselves at you.  Bioware has done better than that in the past.

Your old contacts from ME 1, with only a couple of exceptions either don't care that you're alive, or think you're a traitor for working for Cerberus.  How'd that happen?  How's that at all realistic.  The hero of the galaxy showing up alive and well in the Presidium should cause a MAJOR stir.  Especially if you get your Spectre status back.

The minor npcs sure seem to care you're back  though  How did all these people get my email address?

It seems that with the exception of Miranda and Jacob, no other squadmate is aware that you have picked anyone else up for the suicide mission.  In a "build a squad" game, there needs to be intersquad dialogue.  If Bioware didn't have the time or resouorces to do that, they should have gone in another direction.  The lack of it is really immerson breaking.  We don't necessarilly need "dragon Age" levels of involvement (though that would be really nice)  but c'mon!  There's twelve people here, talk!  Share war stories!  Argue!, Hit on each other, even!

I could have gone along with a "build a squad" game if only 1) it flowed more directly from ME 1 and 2) if the relationships were handled better, more realistically

[AlanC9]

SithLordExarKun wrote...

Why do you keep repeating the same thing for 4 months in a row? Every "critisicm" you make revolves around the same thing said time and again. Not that i am trying to attack you but i am just wondering what is your motivation.

It's his thread, after all.

[Some Geth]

[quote]iakus wrote...

[quote]Some Geth wrote...

[quote]iakus wrote...

[quote]Some Geth wrote...

[quote]Pocketgb wrote...

Stories for Bioware games have always been "meh", at least for me. I've just always liked to chill with the homies in them.[/quote]I think all BioWare fans think like this they just don't want to say it:innocent:.
[/quote]

I'm kinda proof positive this is not true

To me, interacting with the story is pretty much the entire purpose of an rpg.

 [quote]Some Geth wrote...

Bad story=bad game=might as well be playing Borderlands[/quote]
Tell me how ME1 had a good story and it is bad gameplay=bad game.
[/quote]

while bad gameplay can hurt a game, and beyond a certain point it makes the game unplayable (Oblivion's leveling system) I am willing to tolerate a certain amount of bad gameplay for a good story.

good gameplay +bad story=boring game I might play once then shelve

mediocre gameplay +good story=game I'll always come back to

good gameplay +good story=I'll wear out the disk

ME 1 was a good old-fashioned sci-fi adventure, (complete with oddly humanoid-looking aliens).  It's classic space opera, with a threat to the galaxy only you can stop, and you stop it your way.  Sure other rpgs have threats to the nation/world/reality, but this one played out like an entire season  of Star Trek episodes, or Farscape, or whatever science fiction program you could name.
The story felt epic, spanning hundred of parsecs and thousands of years.  The true threat unfolded gradually, over the course of the game, and it wasn't until your conversation with Vigil near the very end that you learn just how far back the  Reapers go, 
ME 1 wasn't particularly deep, no, but it wasn't trying to be.  It was trying to be a big epic space adventure, and it succeeded at that admirably.  It promised two more volumes of this, direct sequels.  In tis it crashed and burned.  At least with one of them.

With ME 1, I had exactly two problems

1 I didn't like the limited activations the DRM restricted you to

2) The game felt a little bit short.

With ME 3, even if its the best game ever, I know  I'll have at least one problem:

To import a game, I'll have to play through ME 2 again[/quote]Yes I know the over all plot but hey ME1 had alot of plot holes just like ME2.

ME1 was a good I am with you on that but I just can't get this big hate for ME2 like it is a bad game or a Sonic game:sick: imo it feels more like Star Trek episodes good ones that is anyway if I had my way all games be like Mega Man:wub:don't know what you want .

So to end this post I will say both games are good and this war is as bad as the Star Trek vs TNG war .

[bjdbwea]

AlanC9 wrote...

SithLordExarKun wrote...

Why do you keep repeating the same thing for 4 months in a row? Every "critisicm" you make revolves around the same thing said time and again. Not that i am trying to attack you but i am just wondering what is your motivation.

It's his thread, after all.

Plus, if you believe the official declarations, the changes in ME 2 were due to constant complaining (no doubt mostly from the shooter crowd) on the old forums. I for one don't believe this, as I think the changes - in other words, the cutting out and dumbing down of features - were planned anyway, and the complaints were just a convenient excuse. That's also why I think that no amount of complaining about ME 2 could bring about a different approach for ME 3. Still, if you give them the benefit of the doubt, then it would make sense to continue complaining now too, maybe it'll make a difference after all.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 19 juin 2010 - 05:42 .

[SithLordExarKun]

bjdbwea wrote...



Plus, if you believe the official declarations, the changes in ME 2 were due to constant complaining (no doubt mostly from the shooter crowd) on the old forums. I for one don't believe this, as I think the changes - in other words, the cutting out and dumbing down of features - were planned anyway, and the complaints were just a convenient excuse. That's also why I think that no amount of complaining about ME 2 could bring about a different approach for ME 3. Still, if you give them the benefit of the doubt, then it would make sense to continue complaining now too, maybe it'll make a difference after all.

Once again you pull assumptions out of your ass and make ridiculous claims that you cannot back up.

First you claim that shooter fans complained in the suggestion thread, when in reality it was the RPG fans complaining. you now say that is BS and ME2 was already pre planned to be the way it is with yet again offering up a shred of evidence.

[cachx]

bjdbwea wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
It's his thread, after all.

Plus, if you believe the official declarations, the changes in ME 2 were due to constant complaining (no doubt mostly from the shooter crowd) on the old forums. I for one don't believe this, as I think the changes - in other words, the cutting out and dumbing down of features - were planned anyway, and the complaints were just a convenient excuse. That's also why I think that no amount of complaining about ME 2 could bring about a different approach for ME 3. Still, if you give them the benefit of the doubt, then it would make sense to continue complaining now too, maybe it'll make a difference after all.

Bioware stated a long time ago that there were going to get "Richer RPG Features", I just hope that it doesn't give people the impression that the one that whines the hardest, get what it wants.

A lot of people questioning the gameplay changes should see Ms. Norman's presentation, by the way.

[bjdbwea]

cachx wrote...

I just hope that it doesn't give people the impression that the one that whines the hardest, get what it wants.

That is certainly the impression one could get if one looks at the changes from ME 1 to ME 2, gameplay and content wise. But as I said, I assume the gameplay changes were imposed on the developers from the beginning anyway, because it was the goal to appeal to a new and different kind of audience. As far as the content is concerned though, it's obvious that some things were fan service for the loudest groups indeed.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 19 juin 2010 - 06:24 .

[Pocketgb]

iakus wrote...

But seriously, character interaction is also excellent in a Bioware game, and it often ties directly into the plot.  But as I said before, it blew up in ME 2.  Yes, the characters are interesting, and i would have liekd to get to know some of them better.  Problem is it wasn't done well enough. The emotions feel so artificial, constructed for the sole purpose of advancing the plot:

Artificial?
They may not serve much purpose to the plot (in fact the only thing that made many of their sidequests 'plot-related' was their 'loyalty') but I can't really agree that they felt artificial. Some weren't as deep as the rest, but there were plenty of poignent and awesome moments. This post sums it up best. My personal favorite is Garrus' loyalty mission. Just the zoom in on his face, the conflict in his expression, it was just gorgeous.

Bioware is known for making some incredibly strong and memorable characters. I've felt like I've experienced some of the best in ME2. This post pretty much summed up my feelings regarding this.

iakus wrote...

A few conversations and one quest and we're now best buddies with the squadmates?   Minds totally clear, they are unquestoningly loyal,  The potential  LIs are throwing themselves at you.  Bioware has done better than that in the past.

I agree that "loyal" was a bit too strong of a word. For some characters, mainly ones achieved in the later part of the game, it did indeed feel a bit too forced to use that term. But instead I viewed a character being "loyal" to you as them having faith in your abilities, and having faith in the mission.

This made sense to me. If you just recruited them as a merc and didn't care about them as a person, nor help them with relatively personal issues, they'd have a greater inkling of doubt - and that can make all the difference between success and failure.

In regards to the LI's, they've always been forced in the series. They all lead to the same conclusion at the same pace, and that pace always felt largely rushed. Liara's my favorite example in this: two conversations in and she's already wondering why she feels "so close to you" (granted this can be understandable based on the mind melding, but it certainly doesn't help the case).

I felt that LI's were handled better in ME2 not just because of the amount of choices, rather that there feels like there's a bit more development involved for (a few of) them. Miranda has been studying you and helping you for a large amount of time, so coming upon such a connection is more plausible. The best examples are Garrus and Tali - and this isn't because I'm a fanboy for both of them (xP) rather that there's much more history between you and them.

iakus wrote...

Your old contacts from ME 1, with only a couple of exceptions either don't care that you're alive, or think you're a traitor for working for Cerberus.  How'd that happen?  How's that at all realistic.  The hero of the galaxy showing up alive and well in the Presidium should cause a MAJOR stir.  Especially if you get your Spectre status back.

The minor npcs sure seem to care you're back  though  How did all these people get my email address?

Once again:
"PLOT HOLES...
PLOT HOLES EVERYWHERE"

At least a few of the e-mails are actually really good reads, Han Olar's being my favorite (poor guy...) The one from the escaped convict is surprisingly unnerving as well.

iakus wrote...


It seems that with the exception of Miranda and Jacob, no other squadmate is aware that you have picked anyone else up for the suicide mission.  In a "build a squad" game, there needs to be intersquad dialogue.  If Bioware didn't have the time or resouorces to do that, they should have gone in another direction.  The lack of it is really immerson breaking.  We don't necessarilly need "dragon Age" levels of involvement (though that would be really nice)  but c'mon!  There's twelve people here, talk!  Share war stories!  Argue!, Hit on each other, even!

Agree completely. Given possible circumstances, though, I'm not displeased. Check out Cachx's post at the top of this page.

bjdbwea wrote...

That is certainly the impression one
could get if one looks at the changes from ME 1 to ME 2, gameplay and
content wise. But as I said, I assume the gameplay changes were imposed
on the developers from the beginning anyway, because it was the goal to
appeal to a new and different kind of audience.

I have quite a bit of reasoning to believe that ME2 is more on track of what they wanted to create in the first place. ME1 would've worked a thousand times better (and personally a thousand times more enjoyable) if they didn't try to force everything into a third-person-shooter setting.

Modifié par Pocketgb, 19 juin 2010 - 07:10 .

[Terror_K]

cachx wrote...

A lot of people questioning the gameplay changes should see Ms. Norman's presentation, by the way.

I did. I found it mostly insulting and it pretty much confirmed a lot of my suspicions.

[Chuvvy]

I think they should put in DAO's inventory system. Make it more like DAO. DAO is great with anything and everything dialog and character related. ME2 is good with combat a graphics.



BIOWARE COMBINE YOUR TEAMS! YOU'RE SITTING ON A ****ING GOLD MINE!

[Orchomene]

Terror_K wrote...

cachx wrote...

A lot of people questioning the gameplay changes should see Ms. Norman's presentation, by the way.

I did. I found it mostly insulting and it pretty much confirmed a lot of my suspicions.

She just explains that they removed the RPG aspect, then developped a shooter than added back some of the RPG aspects. This is why this game seems that broken. It's just some RPG elements put inside a shooter game. The question is "why did they put back a bit of rpg elements ?" May be for marketing, may be because they didn't want to lose their fan base. As losing people, it's a failure for those that are not totally blinded by the flashy colors and the cult they have for BW. But for BW, it's a good thing. They lose me as a customer but they get more than one in exchange, and customers that are certainly more easy to contempt. You just need to have a look at some comments saying that ME2 story is the best story they have seen in a video game.
That was the same when I used to work in development (services softwares for airline transaction companies). First, I tried to put quality, then the managers asked me to put just what would contempt the client. In the end, I was disgusted to develop dumbed down softwares and couldn't have respect for my work anymore, so I 've quitted.and went back to mathematical research. At least, any research being dumbed down in this field is objectively seen as bad. Not always, but for the most part.

[Pocketgb]

Orchomene wrote...

She just explains that they removed the RPG aspect, then developped a shooter than added back some of the RPG aspects. This is why this game seems that broken. It's just some RPG elements put inside a shooter game. The question is "why did they put back a bit of rpg elements ?"

Because it's catching on. More and more games are acquiring small to large amounts of customization because it's fun and has the potential to add depth. ME2 would be nowhere near as entertaining as it is if there was not a single amount of choice that exists in it already.

Orchomene wrote...

May be for marketing, may be because they didn't want to lose their fan base. As losing people, it's a failure for those that are not totally blinded by the flashy colors and the cult they have for BW.

xD

[Ecael]

Inventory & Looting in ME3: Building Consensus (2)
Morality & Squad Banter in ME3: Building Consensus (1)

Credit goes to Terror_K for the Item Stats idea in (2).

(Click for full image)

The threads contain spoilers, by the way (that's why I can't post them in this subforum).

Modifié par Ecael, 19 juin 2010 - 11:49 .