10273 réponses à ce sujet

[Lumikki]

Terror_K wrote...

The problem is though, to make ME3 great they need to get rid of the problems ME1 and ME2 has. Most of my wishes for ME3 are pretty much just that it be less like ME2.

Just corrected that one. I'm sure you know why.

[nelly21]

Lumikki wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

The problem is though, to make ME3 great they need to get rid of the problems ME1 and ME2 has. Most of my wishes for ME3 are pretty much just that it be less like ME2.

Just corrected that one. I'm sure you know why.

No. I don't know why. ME 1 was Rembrandt to ME 2's Stan Lee! ME 1 was flawless!!! It was the pinnacle of modern human achievment!!! ME 2 has no redeemable value when you take out the intense combat, the quality art, the choices, the decent storyline, and the interesting characters.

What about the inventory? What about the rpg elements? What about the point based combat? Clearly these elements are mandatory in good games! You are wrong Lumikki!!!! Only I know what a good game is because I exclusively play rpgs!!! And as we all know, exclusively rpg gamers are intellectualy superior to all other forms of gamers.

P.S. Please add liberal amounts of sarcasm when reading

[Orchomene]

bjdbwea wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

I wouldn't be surprised if Mass Effect 2 wasn't the game they wanted to make, but was merely the game they intended to make. Only Casey and the other devs can really answer that though, and I doubt that they would.

I don't believe for a second that the same people who created BG 2, Mass Effect and several masterpieces in between, the developers, would think that ME 2 would be the next logical step of evolution. Of course they know the ways in which it was a step back. Of course they know that mass appeal does not equal quality, but can easily mean it's a worse game as far as the features are concerned for which BioWare once stood. But of course they did what they were told to do, it's not their decision after all.

I'm sure it is their decision to do that. That's not as if they tried to put more RPG in a game that lacks some RPG. No, they just put a mediocre story and mediocre dialogue on a gameplay that took most of the development time.

[AlanC9]

bjdbwea wrote...
I don't believe for a second that the same people who created BG 2, Mass Effect and several masterpieces in between, the developers, would think that ME 2 would be the next logical step of evolution. Of course they know the ways in which it was a step back. Of course they know that mass appeal does not equal quality, but can easily mean it's a worse game as far as the features are concerned for which BioWare once stood. But of course they did what they were told to do, it's not their decision after all.

This assumes that the developers have the same restricted view of RPGs that you do; and worse, that they want to keep doing the same sort of games forever. We don't see that in other creative fields.  A good film director makes comedies, dramas, even action pictures. It's mostly the talentless hacks like Michael Bay who stick to one genre.

[AlanC9]

Could you clarify something, Terror_K?

Terror_K wrote...
The main point remains as this overall: good game or not, a direct sequel should be just as much a game for the fans of the first one as the first one was. While this is true for some, there are a great number of those this is not true for.

I'm a little confused as to the precise meaning of the argument. Some ME1 fans like ME2 better, some didn't. So is the argument that the number of who dislike the changes is greater than the number who liked the changes? Is it that the lost utility to the people who disliked the changes is greater than the gain for people who liked them, so ME2 is overall of worse value even if more ME1 fans liked it better? Is it that the design wasn't optimal, since a different version of ME2 could have been equally appealing to improvement  fans without hurting you guys as much (Pareto optimality, IIRC)? Or is it a quasi-Kantian argument that ME1 fans have a right to a game just like it for ME2, regardless of whether some or even most of those fans would prefer a changed design?

[AlanC9]

Orchomene wrote...

I'm sure it is their decision to do that. That's not as if they tried to put more RPG in a game that lacks some RPG. No, they just put a mediocre story and mediocre dialogue on a gameplay that took most of the development time.

Story and VO happen on a parallel track from gameplay design. It's not conceivable that gameplay dev time displaces story unless this happens in the planning process, deliberately. Is that really your argument?

[smudboy]

AlanC9 wrote...

Could you clarify something, Terror_K?

Terror_K wrote...
The main point remains as this overall: good game or not, a direct sequel should be just as much a game for the fans of the first one as the first one was. While this is true for some, there are a great number of those this is not true for.

I'm a little confused as to the precise meaning of the argument. Some ME1 fans like ME2 better, some didn't. So is the argument that the number of who dislike the changes is greater than the number who liked the changes? Is it that the lost utility to the people who disliked the changes is greater than the gain for people who liked them, so ME2 is overall of worse value even if more ME1 fans liked it better? Is it that the design wasn't optimal, since a different version of ME2 could have been equally appealing to improvement  fans without hurting you guys as much (Pareto optimality, IIRC)? Or is it a quasi-Kantian argument that ME1 fans have a right to a game just like it for ME2, regardless of whether some or even most of those fans would prefer a changed design?

While we're at it, let's use hedonic calculus for our Pareto efficiency and start a correlation agreement.

Those who like ME1 like it for what it's worth.  Ditto with ME2.  Unfortunately, ME2 is not coherently worth much.  Unless you absolutely love popcorn, cover shooting and explosions over story.

Modifié par smudboy, 22 juin 2010 - 03:52 .

[bjdbwea]

AlanC9 wrote...

This assumes that the developers have the same restricted view of RPGs that you do; and worse, that they want to keep doing the same sort of games forever. We don't see that in other creative fields.  A good film director makes comedies, dramas, even action pictures. It's mostly the talentless hacks like Michael Bay who stick to one genre.

Nothing wrong with doing different things, but it should be an improvement. To use your comparison, it's as if a Hollywood director produced a great movie followed by a mediocre TV series.

[AlanC9]

smudboy wrote...
While we're at it, let's use hedonic calculus for our Pareto efficiency and start a correlation agreement.

Those who like ME1 like it for what it's worth.  Ditto with ME2.  Unfortunately, ME2 is not coherently worth much.  Unless you absolutely love popcorn, cover shooting and explosions over story.

See, that's the thing -- Terror_K actually makes an argument, rather than pretending to make one so he can insult ME2 fans.

I mean, even you can't believe what you just said there. If we really are using hedonic calculus, your second paragraph is irrelevant except to determine the value you personally place on the experience.

Edit: or was the first paragraph  a joke, and we don't have to do any such calculation because your personal taste is objectively and obviously correct?

Modifié par AlanC9, 22 juin 2010 - 04:25 .

[nelly21]

bjdbwea wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

This assumes that the developers have the same restricted view of RPGs that you do; and worse, that they want to keep doing the same sort of games forever. We don't see that in other creative fields.  A good film director makes comedies, dramas, even action pictures. It's mostly the talentless hacks like Michael Bay who stick to one genre.

Nothing wrong with doing different things, but it should be an improvement. To use your comparison, it's as if a Hollywood director produced a great movie followed by a mediocre TV series.

Except it really isn't. You're basing your analogy on your opinion. To many ME 2 fans, this story was fine. You don't like the story. Others did. I enjoyed it. My only problem with the story is that the Collectors are creepy but not as seemingly inexorable as the Reapers. That's my opinion.

You are taking your opinion and using it as unquestionable fact. It isn't. What you thought was dumbing down was was evolution to very many others.

My point is that ME 2 wasn't a TV series. It was Aliens 2. Still a damn good movie, different focus in the story.

[Fraevar]

nelly21 wrote...

My point is that ME 2 wasn't a TV series. It was Aliens 2. Still a damn good movie, different focus in the story.

Except that Aliens still had a coherant theme in surviving against the aliens and the mother/daughter relationship between Ripley and Newt. ME2 is really missing the same kind of central theme - I had thought that Shepard needing to deal with being dead and thus less-than-human would be that theme, but unfortunately Shepard's death ended up being just a simple plot device to skip ahead two years.

[Orchomene]

AlanC9 wrote...

Orchomene wrote...

I'm sure it is their decision to do that. That's not as if they tried to put more RPG in a game that lacks some RPG. No, they just put a mediocre story and mediocre dialogue on a gameplay that took most of the development time.

Story and VO happen on a parallel track from gameplay design. It's not conceivable that gameplay dev time displaces story unless this happens in the planning process, deliberately. Is that really your argument?

Tasks can be parallel, what is important is the production effort resource wise you put in it. Seeing the inconsistencies, discontinuities, lacks of originality in the story, it appears that this part of the design was not very important. It's the same for all the RPG elements and the lack of originality of the gameplay. It seems to me that they didn't put much effort in this game.

Edit : I would be interested to see the budget and time consumption in this game. They used an already made engine (UE) that they already used. They did not have to create a lot of background that was already created for ME1. The gameplay doesn't differ much from the middle TPS as far as I can say. The lack of linearity and dialogue options imply that the effort was not import in story design. Background design was also pretty poor. !so, where did they spend the money ?

Modifié par Orchomene, 22 juin 2010 - 04:32 .

[nelly21]

Delerius_Jedi wrote...

nelly21 wrote...

My point is that ME 2 wasn't a TV series. It was Aliens 2. Still a damn good movie, different focus in the story.

Except that Aliens still had a coherant theme in surviving against the aliens and the mother/daughter relationship between Ripley and Newt. ME2 is really missing the same kind of central theme - I had thought that Shepard needing to deal with being dead and thus less-than-human would be that theme, but unfortunately Shepard's death ended up being just a simple plot device to skip ahead two years.

The central theme is still the Reapers. The Collectors are a threat simply because of their association with the Reapers. This game's story was used to explain part of the motivation of the Reapers and how they are created. To say the story is not relevant is absurd. It hints at their motivations. It shows you their methods.

Without this story, the Reapers would still just be big robots that come to destroy everything for "reasons beyond our understanding".

Modifié par nelly21, 22 juin 2010 - 04:33 .

[bjdbwea]

nelly21 wrote...

You are taking your opinion and using it as unquestionable fact. It isn't. What you thought was dumbing down was was evolution to very many others.

Maybe so. We see that development in many branches of entertainment (and elsewhere), that things get simpler and more "immediate" and easier. Apparently, that's what many people want these days. So yeah... "evolution". Nevertheless, that things have been simplified in ME 2, is indeed a fact. And yes, that I don't like it is my opinion. Never claimed it wasn't.

[smudboy]

AlanC9 wrote...

smudboy wrote...
While we're at it, let's use hedonic calculus for our Pareto efficiency and start a correlation agreement.

Those who like ME1 like it for what it's worth.  Ditto with ME2.  Unfortunately, ME2 is not coherently worth much.  Unless you absolutely love popcorn, cover shooting and explosions over story.

See, that's the thing -- Terror_K actually makes an argument, rather than pretending to make one so he can insult ME2 fans.

I mean, even you can't believe what you just said there. If we really are using hedonic calculus, your second paragraph is irrelevant except to determine the value you personally place on the experience.

Edit: or was the first paragraph  a joke, and we don't have to do any such calculation because your personal taste is objectively and obviously correct?

I'm not making an argument, I'm making a statement.

I don't see why not.  Simple number-scoring system, find an equilibrium, then try to determine what all those individual scores have to do with each other from individuals.  It's rather a large study, but sounds something along the lines of what you're going for, but with stats.  Is that your argument?

My taste?  If my taste is "things to make sense" and "be logical", then yes, I'll take the objective and obvious ego trip.

[Orchomene]

nelly21 wrote...

bjdbwea wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

This assumes that the developers have the same restricted view of RPGs that you do; and worse, that they want to keep doing the same sort of games forever. We don't see that in other creative fields.  A good film director makes comedies, dramas, even action pictures. It's mostly the talentless hacks like Michael Bay who stick to one genre.

Nothing wrong with doing different things, but it should be an improvement. To use your comparison, it's as if a Hollywood director produced a great movie followed by a mediocre TV series.

Except it really isn't. You're basing your analogy on your opinion. To many ME 2 fans, this story was fine. You don't like the story. Others did. I enjoyed it. My only problem with the story is that the Collectors are creepy but not as seemingly inexorable as the Reapers. That's my opinion.

You are taking your opinion and using it as unquestionable fact. It isn't. What you thought was dumbing down was was evolution to very many others.

My point is that ME 2 wasn't a TV series. It was Aliens 2. Still a damn good movie, different focus in the story.

Well, no. Really, the story is very poor. The game is character driven, yet the characters are caricatural. There is a strong lack of continuity since almost all the loyalty missions are isolated as side missions. The main story is of abysmal originality. This game can be really enjoying, I don't say it's not. But it's not a game that will be remembered for a long time.

[Fraevar]

nelly21 wrote...

The central theme is still the Reapers. The Collectors are a threat simply because of their association with the Reapers. This game's story was used to explain part of the motivation of the Reapers and how they are created. To say the story is not relevant is absurd. It hints at their motivations. It shows you their methods.

Without this story, the Reapers would still just be big robots that come to destroy everything for "reasons beyond our understanding".

Yes but at the end of Mass Effect 2, we're still at that exact spot. We don't actually learn anything new about the Reaper agenda in Mass Effect 2, we still just know that they plan to kill and/or enslave everyone for some mysterious reason.

Orchomene wrote...
Well, no. Really, the story is very poor.
The game is character driven, yet the characters are caricatural. There
is a strong lack of continuity since almost all the loyalty missions are
isolated as side missions. The main story is of abysmal originality.
This game can be really enjoying, I don't say it's not. But it's not a
game that will be remembered for a long time.

EDIT: Well said, Orchomene.

Modifié par Delerius_Jedi, 22 juin 2010 - 04:44 .

[nelly21]

It has been simplified. I don't think anybody is denying that. What we are saying is that the game is as good if not better than the original. We are saying that simplification does not equal lack of quality.



Also, "easier"? Are we really going to claim that this game is easier than the ME 1? You know that isn't true. I adored ME 1 for a multitude of reasons. Combat was not one of them.



Ultimately, the only "facts" we can throw around are reviews from players and critics and sales. ME 2 has surpassed ME 1 on both fronts. It's a good thing. It means our beloved franchise is going to stick around.

[Some Geth]

nelly21 wrote...

It has been simplified. I don't think anybody is denying that. What we are saying is that the game is as good if not better than the original. We are saying that simplification does not equal lack of quality.

Also, "easier"? Are we really going to claim that this game is easier than the ME 1? You know that isn't true. I adored ME 1 for a multitude of reasons. Combat was not one of them.

Ultimately, the only "facts" we can throw around are reviews from players and critics and sales. ME 2 has surpassed ME 1 on both fronts. It's a good thing. It means our beloved franchise is going to stick around.

No the combat of ME1 was a good like the ways I can't die or have fun and how about that Mako combat .

[Iakus]

bjdbwea wrote...

nelly21 wrote...

You are taking your opinion and using it as unquestionable fact. It isn't. What you thought was dumbing down was was evolution to very many others.

Maybe so. We see that development in many branches of entertainment (and elsewhere), that things get simpler and more "immediate" and easier. Apparently, that's what many people want these days. So yeah... "evolution". Nevertheless, that things have been simplified in ME 2, is indeed a fact. And yes, that I don't like it is my opinion. Never claimed it wasn't.

Ugh, please don't say simplfying is what people want.  I don't want to think about ME 3 ending up:

See Shepard.  See Shepard Shoot.  Shoot, Shepard, Shoot.

See Shepard Talk.

Blue words means Shepard is nice.

Red words means Shepard is not nice.

Is your Shepard nice or not nice?

[Some Geth]

[quote]iakus wrote...

[quote]bjdbwea wrote...

[quote]nelly21 wrote...

You are taking your opinion and using it as unquestionable fact. It isn't. What you thought was dumbing down was was evolution to very many others.[/quote]

Maybe so. We see that development in many branches of entertainment (and elsewhere), that things get simpler and more "immediate" and easier. Apparently, that's what many people want these days. So yeah... "evolution". Nevertheless, that things have been simplified in ME 2, is indeed a fact. And yes, that I don't like it is my opinion. Never claimed it wasn't.
[/quote]

Ugh, please don't say simplfying is what people want.  I don't want to think about ME 3 ending up:

See Shepard.  See Shepard Shoot.  Shoot, Shepard, Shoot.

See Shepard Talk.

Blue words means Shepard is nice.

Red words means Shepard is not nice.

Is your Shepard nice or not nice?

[smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/angel.png[/smilie].

[Some Geth]

[quote]iakus wrote...

[quote]bjdbwea wrote...

[quote]nelly21 wrote...

You are taking your opinion and using it as unquestionable fact. It isn't. What you thought was dumbing down was was evolution to very many others.[/quote]

Maybe so. We see that development in many branches of entertainment (and elsewhere), that things get simpler and more "immediate" and easier. Apparently, that's what many people want these days. So yeah... "evolution". Nevertheless, that things have been simplified in ME 2, is indeed a fact. And yes, that I don't like it is my opinion. Never claimed it wasn't.
[/quote]

Ugh, please don't say simplfying is what people want.  I don't want to think about ME 3 ending up:

See Shepard.  See Shepard Shoot.  Shoot, Shepard, Shoot.

See Shepard Talk.

Blue words means Shepard is nice.

Red words means Shepard is not nice.

Is your Shepard nice or not nice?

[smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/angel.png[/smilie].

[Some Geth]

Modifié par Some Geth, 22 juin 2010 - 05:18 .

[Some Geth]

So just like ME1 and ME2 stupit internet

[Iakus]

nelly21 wrote...

Delerius_Jedi wrote...

nelly21 wrote...

My point is that ME 2 wasn't a TV series. It was Aliens 2. Still a damn good movie, different focus in the story.

Except that Aliens still had a coherant theme in surviving against the aliens and the mother/daughter relationship between Ripley and Newt. ME2 is really missing the same kind of central theme - I had thought that Shepard needing to deal with being dead and thus less-than-human would be that theme, but unfortunately Shepard's death ended up being just a simple plot device to skip ahead two years.

The central theme is still the Reapers. The Collectors are a threat simply because of their association with the Reapers. This game's story was used to explain part of the motivation of the Reapers and how they are created. To say the story is not relevant is absurd. It hints at their motivations. It shows you their methods.

Without this story, the Reapers would still just be big robots that come to destroy everything for "reasons beyond our understanding".

The Collectors are in exactly three missions.  The mercs are way bigger a threat to Shepard in this game.  Everything we learn about the Reapers was from an info dump EDI gives us at the end of the Suicide Mission.  Everything we learn about the Collectors is from an info dump EDI gives us in the Collector Ship mission.  Story had almost nothing to do with the revelations we received.  ("dead Collector, cue the exposition!") 

The Collectors could have been a very interesting villain group in a better story.  The revelation of what they really are could have been amazing and horrifying, putting them in an entirely new light.  But in this one,  they are just Bug Eyed Aliens that abduct humans.  Keep firing!

At the end, of ME2, they are still "big robots that come to destroy everything for reasons beyond our understanding".  Sure we were given a reason, but it makes zero sense.  I can only hope and pray that ME 3 can put some sort of logical spin on it.  But the whole they've dug is already pretty deep.