10273 réponses à ce sujet

[KitsuneRommel]

SuperMedbh wrote...

S&B isn't a troll, he honestly believes ME2 was a step backwards insofar as narrative was concerned. I don't quite get why he wastes time on Bioboard forums whinging about it-- it's not as if Bioware is the only game company out there, vote with your feet and all that. But chacun a son gout, as the Swedes say when they speak French.

He isn't but he just wants to turn every game into an interactive movie. While it isn't a curse word like it was when CD-ROM games came out is not what everyone enjoys either.

S&B: Have you played/heard of Shenmue on Dreamcast or Blade Runner ? Both sound like games you'd enjoy?

[SkullandBonesmember]

uberdowzen wrote...

\\\\

I apologise for calling you a troll, I was just pissed at seeing the word sploshun again. Even if you don't mean it to be inflammatory, I think it has become that way and I really wish you'd stop using it.

How 'bout a compromise? I keep the sig, but will no longer use 'SPLOSHUNS in my posts?

[uberdowzen]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

uberdowzen wrote...

\\\\\\\\

I apologise for calling you a troll, I was just pissed at seeing the word sploshun again. Even if you don't mean it to be inflammatory, I think it has become that way and I really wish you'd stop using it.

How 'bout a compromise? I keep the sig, but will no longer use 'SPLOSHUNS in my posts?

Sure. What about Headshots?

[SkullandBonesmember]

KitsuneRommel wrote...

He isn't but he just wants to turn every game into an interactive movie. While it isn't a curse word like it was when CD-ROM games came out is not what everyone enjoys either.

S&B: Have you played/heard of Shenmue on Dreamcast or Blade Runner ? Both sound like games you'd enjoy?

Oh yeah I remember Shenmue! Only played the 2nd though. It was great but if memory serves correctly, it didn't really give you dialogue options, plus it's dated. And NO, I DO NOT want to turn EVERY GAME into an interactive movie, but again, we are a huge demographic and there's practically no games for us.

[SkullandBonesmember]

uberdowzen wrote...

Sure. What about Headshots?

Don't push your luck. I'm keeping me headshots that I lurve so much. 

But no, I won't make a habit out of it.

Modifié par SkullandBonesmember, 11 mai 2010 - 08:55 .

[bjdbwea]

Terror_K wrote...

I think the main point some of us are trying to make is that ME2 was designed to appeal more to the "'Sploshun" crowd than the first game was, and thus was far shallower and overly simple for it. This doesn't automatically mean that all those who like ME2 or think its better are part of this crowd though. When trying to make a game more mainstream they are, after all, trying to get as many people in as possible, so of course they're not solely going for the 'Sploshun fan and only the 'Sploshion fan, but quite often mainstreaming does mean lowering ones standards to appeal to Common Joe.

But also keep in mind, for some of you on the other side of the fence, that just because a person complains about ME2 being dumbed down more for the shooter crowd that that doesn't also automatically mean that said person wants a turn-based, isometric, dice-roll fest filled with more stats than the contents of all the accounting firms in the world put together. Many of us simply want a better balance, and many of us wouldn't have been so annoyed if the changes hadn't been taken to such extremes. Some ideas with ME2 were good on paper as a concept, but were simply taken too far in execution. That said, others were horrible even as a concept.

The point is, one needs to find a good balance when marrying two genres together like this, and a lot of us feel that ME2 didn't get that balance, and that ME1 was actually closer to it.

This. If anyone from BioWare reads only one post from the last 20 pages or so, it should be that one.

[The_11thDoctor]

KitsuneRommel wrote...

aang001 wrote...

No REACTION TO BRINGING GETH WITH YOU ANYWHERE!!!!

Oh come on now! You're just nitpicking. Do you have any inkling how much resources Bioware would have had to put forth into ME2 just so there's some continuity/immersion? Your expectations are just too high sir.

No Im not nitpicking, yes I do know roughly how much resources they poured into the game and that doesnt matter to what I stated, unless your trying to prove me right in saying it wasnt enough. My expectations arent high, yours are just too low. If I told you my higher expectaions than the " I thought this was obvious list", you head would explode. It's 2010. It's time someone had better expectations from Bioware. Bioware is a great company, but they randomly drop the ball on somethings that make no sense. Like why isnt there long hair in the game or the phyiscs system to deal with that, muscles, cloth etc?! Thinks that should be in any game from PS2 era - now...

Mass Effect should be so much more than it is now. The world is amazing and the books are too. Im just waiting for the gameto get up to what it should be. I pray they'll get it right ME3. ME1 good, ME2 great with flaws, but ME3 should be F-ing amazing to the point no other game wants to come out after it. Other companies should be sweating bullets trying to push their release date to before it comes out when ME3 hits. If they fix the issues I stated, the game will finally be a 10 in my eyes. If I ignore most flaws in the game....it in the 7-8-ish catagorey if I'm being incredibly nice when rating it. Great things happen in the game, but the execusion of somethings are just a miss. Loved anything Quarian in the game. A 7-8 is non bioware games 9-10 though for a lot of games out there. I hold Bioware with some of my other fav companys at higher standards, like Atlus, SNKP, Valve, Square, Nippon Ichi, Namco, Aksys, Kojima Pro etc... they are held at a higher bar than companies like...capcom etc. If you can physically play a ubisoft game I consider that an improvement over most the crap they make... Im getting off topic.

[KitsuneRommel]

aang001 wrote...

No Im not nitpicking, yes I do know roughly how much resources they poured into the game and that doesnt matter to what I stated, unless your trying to prove me right in saying it wasnt enough. My expectations arent high, yours are just too low. If I told you my higher expectaions than the " I thought this was obvious list", you head would explode. It's 2010. It's time someone had better expectations from Bioware. Bioware is a great company, but they randomly drop the ball on somethings that make no sense. Like why isnt there long hair in the game or the phyiscs system to deal with that, muscles, cloth etc?! Thinks that should be in any game from PS2 era - now...

Mass Effect should be so much more than it is now. The world is amazing and the books are too. Im just waiting for the gameto get up to what it should be. I pray they'll get it right ME3. ME1 good, ME2 great with flaws, but ME3 should be F-ing amazing to the point no other game wants to come out after it. Other companies should be sweating bullets trying to push their release date to before it comes out when ME3 hits. If they fix the issues I stated, the game will finally be a 10 in my eyes. If I ignore most flaws in the game....it in the 7-8-ish catagorey if I'm being incredibly nice when rating it. Great things happen in the game, but the execusion of somethings are just a miss. Loved anything Quarian in the game. A 7-8 is non bioware games 9-10 though for a lot of games out there. I hold Bioware with some of my other fav companys at higher standards, like Atlus, SNKP, Valve, Square, Nippon Ichi, Namco, Aksys, Kojima Pro etc... they are held at a higher bar than companies like...capcom etc. If you can physically play a ubisoft game I consider that an improvement over most the crap they make... Im getting off topic.

1: Use more paragraphs
2. I did not write that text
3. He was being sarcastic
4. I'm not holding my breath on ever playing a 'perfect game'. Especially when people have completely different opinions on what games should have.

[SkullandBonesmember]

aang001 wrote...

No Im not nitpicking, yes I do know roughly how much resources they poured into the game and that doesnt matter to what I stated, unless your trying to prove me right in saying it wasnt enough. My expectations arent high, yours are just too low. If I told you my higher expectaions than the " I thought this was obvious list", you head would explode. It's 2010. It's time someone had better expectations from Bioware. Bioware is a great company, but they randomly drop the ball on somethings that make no sense. Like why isnt there long hair in the game or the phyiscs system to deal with that, muscles, cloth etc?! Thinks that should be in any game from PS2 era - now... 

Mass Effect should be so much more than it is now. The world is amazing and the books are too. Im just waiting for the gameto get up to what it should be. I pray they'll get it right ME3. ME1 good, ME2 great with flaws, but ME3 should be F-ing amazing to the point no other game wants to come out after it. Other companies should be sweating bullets trying to push their release date to before it comes out when ME3 hits. If they fix the issues I stated, the game will finally be a 10 in my eyes. If I ignore most flaws in the game....it in the 7-8-ish catagorey if I'm being incredibly nice when rating it. Great things happen in the game, but the execusion of somethings are just a miss. Loved anything Quarian in the game. A 7-8 is non bioware games 9-10 though for a lot of games out there. I hold Bioware with some of my other fav companys at higher standards, like Atlus, SNKP, Valve, Square, Nippon Ichi, Namco, Aksys, Kojima Pro etc... they are held at a higher bar than companies like...capcom etc. If you can physically play a ubisoft game I consider that an improvement over most the crap they make... Im getting off topic.

I was being sarcastic my friend, just saying what a lot of others do.

[TMZuk]

I liked both games.

I also thought both games had flaws.

In ME I thought some of the voice-acting was rather poor. The inventory was horrible, as was the xp per kill, and the shallow side-quests. The interiors was very repetitive. The ridiculous amounts of equipment thrown at you was downright annoying. Great setting, great storyline and great characters.

In ME2 I thought the storyline was a lot weaker, and worse: At points downright innane. As others have touched upon; the reaction you get from your romantic partner from the first game, is absurd. Even more so with Shep's terrible responses. And having a poor inventory in the first game is no excuse for having none in the second. Finally: Femshep walks like a man! Terrible.

The character sheet was over-simplified, and even if the missions were great, I didn't want a shooter, I wanted an RPG. Better and more interaction in between the shootouts.

But: Great missions, fine crisp graphics, great atmosphere. Great that the xp per kill was gone, so you could actually attempt to avoid combat, rather than seeking it at every turn. And best: I thoroughly enjoyed the darker outlook everything had, and the slummy underside of the galaxy.

Modifié par TMZuk, 11 mai 2010 - 01:37 .

[Terror_K]

uberdowzen wrote...

Dammit, I have to break my promise again...

I don't think that Bioware designed ME2 to drag in the "Common Joe Sploshun Fan" and if they were, then they failed miserably. My Halo lovin', Call of Duty fan friend I suspect would have little to no interest in ME2 (I mean this is the guy who played FO3 for 5 minutes, decided that it was "gay, it's just like your birthday party and ****" and then booted up CoD World at War). I genuinly think that Bioware thought that the majority of ME1 fans would be happy with the changes made in the sequel, and honestly I think they were right.

Except that they fully admitted they were doing this. They outright stated that they were trying to make the game more mainstream and make it appeal to more people overall, saying that they needed to do such things to make a profit and keep going. They even pointed at DAO now and then and said "if you want a stronger RPG, look there" and one dev I recall even apologised to some unhappy longtime BioWare fans for the way the game was being marketed and said that he understood how they felt and that it was an unfortunate side-effect of wanting to reach as many gamers as possible.

What I think BioWare were trying to do, given what they said and what we got, is appeal to as many people as possible. And they were going more for bringing in a new audience than they were appealing to an old one. They at least admitted to this in marketing, saying that marketing to newcomers is more important than marketing to a fanbase you already have you will likely buy the game anyway. I think that this has extended to the game too, as despite them constantly defending the game and saying the marketing wasn't entirely accurate and that we would still be getting a strong RPG in ME2, this wasn't the case in the end.

I'm not sure a majority of ME1 fans are happy with the changes. A majority of forumites and gamers in general, yes. ME1 fans... I dunno. There's a lot of angry and disappointed people out there, otherwise these topics wouldn't keep coming up. I don't think BioWare were right here at all. The most profitable route is not always the right one or the best one.

I also am not a fan of this viewpoint that there's the hardcore gamers who like the finer things (it could almost be called gaming pretention) like Braid and deep complex RPGs and then there are the common gamers who are obssessed with "sploshuns". My problem with this is that we're all gamers and we should be banding together against the real enemies: legislators who try and put forward stupid anti-gaming laws, idiots who don't think that gaming is good enough to be art (like Ebert) and, of course, zombies.

I don't think any of the people who didn't like ME2 are people who want isometric turnbased dice roll fests. I never said that (and I wouldn't because I actually like those old school RPGs), but I do take issue with them saying that ME2 isn't any good. You're simply being inflammatory if you say that it's a bad game (because it isn't by any standard a bad game).

ME2 may be a good game, but that doesn't mean its a good RPG and that also doesn't mean it's good as a sequel to ME1. Because quite frankly, its not a good RPG or a good sequel. Even as a game while I'd admit that it's a good game... even a great one, it's not an excellent one worthy of a perfect 10 or even a 9 in my books. Not when it's supposed to be a follow-up to ME1... not when it has so many flaws, is so watered down and lacking in depth and is only a stone's throw away from being an above average TPS with excellent presentation and cinematography. It's actually the interactive movie features that stop it from failing in this regard and hold it up because it does so well at it. The RPG elements are pathetic, the shooter elements adequate but the interactive movie stuff is pure awesome.

I guess what I'm saying is that, yes... it isn't by any standard a bad game. But that doesn't mean its automatically an excellent one either.

Okay, I may not talk like I feel the game is an 8/10 one like I claim, with many of the things I say coming across that ME2 is a horrible failure more deserving of a 4/10. But this is because the factors that I miss or annoy me about ME2 get to me a lot, so I bring them up a lot. I want to be sure as much as I can that ME3 doesn't suffer the same issues by expressing my disdain and annoyance. Praising the game repeatedly isn't going to accomplish anything or lead to any changes, and quite frankly the game already gets a lot of praise I don't think it quite deserves. If people like me and others who are unhappy with ME2 don't keep this up, the issues will drown in the oceans of praise out there ME3 will just end up just as shallow as ME2 was, if not more so.

I also agree that fans should put forward their ideas when Bioware has asked for feedback (although, I am in the camp that developers should only listen to their fans to a certain extent, I believe that fans are their own worst enemies) but I don't want Bioware thinking that the majority of people didn't like ME2 because a) I don't want them to revert back to ME1 gameplay for ME3 because I loved ME2 and I think it makes it look like we didn't appreciate them making the game.

I have to disagree entirely here. The reason I'm doing this is so ME3 ends up far more like ME1 than it does ME2. I don't want to see these problems still there in the final part. And while I appreciate BioWare and have gained a lot of respect for them, I don't think in the case of ME2 they actually deserve appreciation. Even the best of us need a swift kick up the arse for making mistakes now and then, and they sure as hell need a good one after ME2 in my mind.

[bjdbwea]

You say you want an RPG, but don't like XP? How does that fit? If anything, the game could reward you XP for sneaking around enemies too, though Shepard is not Sam Fisher. The whole gameplay and level design would have to be changed for that.



I for one found the concept of XP per mission very boring. Especially since ME 2 throws a lot more combat at you, and a lot more repetitive. At least XP would give it a little more sense. Respawning enemies would have to go of course, that's an outdated concept that never should have made it into the game anyway.

[KitsuneRommel]

bjdbwea wrote...

I for one found the concept of XP per mission very boring. Especially since ME 2 throws a lot more combat at you, and a lot more repetitive. At least XP would give it a little more sense. Respawning enemies would have to go of course, that's an outdated concept that never should have made it into the game anyway.

In our PnP games we almost always give XP at the end of the session. If anything that's more RPGey than getting Z amount of XP from a kill that was no challenge. ME1 is a bit of a Monty Haul type of game.

[ArmedChimp]

This thread always gives me the impression about five people sitting around a table discussing how awful it is and stating everyone feels this way.

[KitsuneRommel]

ArmedChimp wrote...

This thread always gives me the impression about five people sitting around a table discussing how awful it is and stating everyone feels this way.

Nah. More like it's been established a long time ago that people have different tastes and now we are just throwing petty insults at each other.

[tonnactus]

[quote]uberdowzen wrote...


Shepherd's still the focus and it's always irritating in those games when your squad steals your kills.
[/quote]
Why it is irritating when your squad is effective??What with people who want to play a support class?



[quote]


In my recently finished ME1 playthrough as a vanguard, I relied more on my shotgun and carnage than throw etc. And in regards to ablilites like warp, I've played ME1 6 times and I'm still not totally sure what that power is meant to do, except for very slowly drain health.

[/Quote]
You just have to read the description of the ability that explains it.Health drain is the unimportant point of warp in Mass Effect.It reduces damage protection of enemies.One enemie with an armor with a damage protection of 70 end with a damage protection of 17,5.


[Quote]
Firstly how can SMGs suck now? They weren't in ME1. Secondly, they're very good at taking down shields for classes that only have that and pistols.[/quote]

They have a horrible accuracy and a very short effective range.Not good for classes like the engineer and adept.Before the kasumi Dlc comes out i always choose an assault rifle on the collector ship and barely ever used this piece of junk anymore.


[quote]


It's not very fast regenerating health (if it regens at all, I don't actually remember that). I just remember the first time I did Feros, running out of medigel, not being allowed back on the Normandy and having a lot of trouble with the finale.

[quote]
Yes,it did.And that it regenerates slow make the game a little bit more challenging,right? That isnt a bad thing if you ask me.


[Quote]
Really? I often run out of ammo, when I was playing as an Adept. Why Soldier's especially? They have more weapons so technically they have more ammo. I actually run out of ammo quite regularly.[/quote]

Soldiers dont have powers to take away enemie defences.Ammo powers still need bullets.As an adept,you could use singularity on the target,that destroy shields slowly,then follow with a warp bomb.No bullet used except the ones of squadmates that connect sometimes.Even easier with the engineer.Overload shields,then follow with your incinerate.


[Quote]


Well, there was no good interface (on PC at least) to give out orders without pausing. On Xbox, you couldn't seperate your squad members. And on both, often your squadmates wouldn't follow the order anyway.

[/quote]
I still have to use pause because i can only have three powers mapped,and that are my powers.


[quote]
Why are stronger powers better? [/quote]

Because they affect stronger enemies like geth armatures.

[quote]
What is "stupid" about the protection system.
[/quote]
Because they dont make sense in regard of the "lore". Ever read the books? Scarr lifted an armored tank.

[quote]
How is using the same power over and over any worse than just shooting with a gun?
[/quote]

You mean charge or warp/singularity spamming/drone like in Mass Effect 2??

[quote]
How does crouch improve the combat?
[/quote]

Easy to explain. If i get flanked by an enemy, i dont want to get out of cover, because other enemies in addition to that one would shoot at me.

[quote]
What do you mean by places where you could "really snipe"?

[/quote]

Shoot at targets that are like 100 m away like on the ferros highway.You dont have real snipping in Mass Effect 2. I rather call that indoor fighting using a sniper rifle.

Modifié par tonnactus, 11 mai 2010 - 04:59 .

[AlanC9]

Terror_K wrote...
I'm not sure a majority of ME1 fans are happy with the changes. A majority of forumites and gamers in general, yes. ME1 fans... I dunno.

For that to be true, that would mean that somehow these boards underrepresent ME1 fans, while overrepresenting more general gamers. I don't quite see how that sort of selection would work

As for whether ME2 is a bad RPG, that always depends on your definition of what an RPG is and what one ought to be. As I've said elsewhere, I come from a PnP background. My gaming group decided that the main problem with the D&D system was that it used inventory to define your character, so we switched a lot of our gaming to better systems. This was in 1985. CRPG inventory is a nightmare I've been trying to wake up from for my entire adult life.

[AlanC9]

KitsuneRommel wrote...
In our PnP games we almost always give XP at the end of the session. If anything that's more RPGey than getting Z amount of XP from a kill that was no challenge.

This is a much more common way to handle XP in PnP. In AD&D you couldn't level up except between gaming sessions at all. In many other systems there's no such  thing as kill XP in the first place.

[TJSolo]

AlanC9 wrote...

KitsuneRommel wrote...
In our PnP games we almost always give XP at the end of the session. If anything that's more RPGey than getting Z amount of XP from a kill that was no challenge.

This is a much more common way to handle XP in PnP. In AD&D you couldn't level up except between gaming sessions at all. In many other systems there's no such  thing as kill XP in the first place.

Well the most recent RPGs I played give XP per kill and XP when you complete quests...not sure why people on this board are acting as if the two are exclusive.

[AlanC9]

The main problem with kill XP in RPGs generally is that it sets up a lot of bad incentives.Not really an issue for a game like ME2, of course.



But I don't see anything positive that kill XP does. At the end of the mission you end up in the same place, XP-wise.

[bjdbwea]

AlanC9 wrote...

For that to be true, that would mean that somehow these boards underrepresent ME1 fans, while overrepresenting more general gamers. I don't quite see how that sort of selection would work.

I would imagine that numerous ME 1 fans just moved on after the disappointment with ME 2. Probably figured that while complaining on the forums might bring about changes that BioWare/EA wanted to implement anyway because they help them to reduce development time, no amount of complaints will make them bring back proper RPG elements and story. Unfortunately, that's probably true, but I think we should still at least try. Nevertheless, many ME 1 fans are probably gone, while the shooter-fans-turned-ME-2-fans are always very vocal on these forums (and often rude).

[TJSolo]

What bad incentive? To kill stuff? To explore around to find more things and in turn discover more areas?

The way XP per mission was done in ME2 does not encourage exploration or doing anything outside of the main questline. since you only get about 10% of a main quest XP.



Yeah I end up in the same place at the end of a mission; standing in front of the galaxy map and leveling up. Wanting to instead have a chance to level up inside of a mission.

[SkullandBonesmember]

bjdbwea wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

For that to be true, that would mean that somehow these boards underrepresent ME1 fans, while overrepresenting more general gamers. I don't quite see how that sort of selection would work.

I would imagine that numerous ME 1 fans just moved on after the disappointment with ME 2. Probably figured that while complaining on the forums might bring about changes that BioWare/EA wanted to implement anyway because they help them to reduce development time, no amount of complaints will make them bring back proper RPG elements and story. Unfortunately, that's probably true, but I think we should still at least try. Nevertheless, many ME 1 fans are probably gone, while the shooter-fans-turned-ME-2-fans are always very vocal on these forums (and often rude).

The RPG fans are in it for the long haul, for better or worse.

[TJSolo]

S&B thought you were agreeing to a gag order.

[SkullandBonesmember]

TJSolo wrote...

S&B thought you were agreeing to a gag order.

To the S word, yeah. Not gonna stop posting here because I didn't promise that.