1067 réponses à ce sujet

[Jordy Laforge]

TJSolo wrote...

Time Spiral wrote...

...

Or it could indicate that the hype and many new found fans are posting due to the happines of a a new game that can blind them for the time beeing.

The happiness of a new game blinding them?! HAA!

Why not just, "They are happy with the new game,"?

Only time will be able to truly tell the two apart.
But chances are if a person is not able to see the flaws of something; they are blinded by it.
Which is also different from a person able to see the flaws of something and still accept it.

If one does not perceive or believe that what you think is a "flaw"actually is a flaw how could they be "blind" for not seeing it?

Modifié par Jordy Laforge, 09 mars 2010 - 11:01 .

[Darth Drago]

I totally agree with the OP. Another new weapon and a heavy weapon at that…. So fun.

sonsonthebia07 wrote...

There is the Firewalker pack coming very soon. I'm sure that plenty more will be released in time, the game hasn't been out that long in case you haven't noticed.

I don't understand why people cannot accept that this is simply a different type of rpg, an action-rpg hybrid. No, the game doesn't have to have a massive inventory of relatively useless items. No, the enemies don't have to have an experience number over their heads after every kill. You are still assuming the role of Commander Shepard. Your actions still have some impact on others (although I wish your actions had more of an impact than they currently do).

Pray tell what you would have done differently.

-ME2 is now a completely a third person shooter with some RPG elements. Every new heavy weapons download just supports this.

How to fix this would have been to release a game that had more RPG elements in the first place. There are way to many quests that are all shooter and no real dialog if any. How many quests gave you the option to convince the boss/sub-boss to just walk away or surrender for example?

ratzerman wrote...

Couldn't agree more, Shavon. Expanding the game's audience is great and all, but not at the expense of the core fanbase. If Bioware keeps cranking out garbage like this lightning gun nonsense, they're going to reach a point where they'll be losing more customers than they gain. Shooter fans are fickle.... they'll move on to the new hotness, and Bioware will be left scratching their heads, wondering what they did wrong.

-Assuming ME3 will be a clone of ME2 then BioWare has at least another game to cater to the shooter crowd. As far as BioWare is concerned I might get Dragon Age but that’s it. They will have to re-earn me as a customer to make me even think about supporting them in the future. Games cost to much to buy to waste on a game that has a rushed out the door and incomplete feel to it like I got with ME2.

Modifié par Darth Drago, 09 mars 2010 - 11:00 .

[Jaysonie]

Darth Drago wrote...


I totally agree with the OP. Another new weapon and a heavy weapon at that…. So fun.

sonsonthebia07 wrote...

There is the Firewalker pack coming very soon. I'm sure that plenty more will be released in time, the game hasn't been out that long in case you haven't noticed.

I don't understand why people cannot accept that this is simply a different type of rpg, an action-rpg hybrid. No, the game doesn't have to have a massive inventory of relatively useless items. No, the enemies don't have to have an experience number over their heads after every kill. You are still assuming the role of Commander Shepard. Your actions still have some impact on others (although I wish your actions had more of an impact than they currently do).

Pray tell what you would have done differently.

-ME2 is now a completely a third person shooter with some RPG elements. Every new heavy weapons download just supports this.

How to fix this would have been to release a game that had more RPG elements in the first place. There are way to many quests that are all shooter and no real dialog if any. How many quests gave you the option to convince the boss/sub-boss to just walk away or surrender for example?

ratzerman wrote...

Couldn't agree more, Shavon. Expanding the game's audience is great and all, but not at the expense of the core fanbase. If Bioware keeps cranking out garbage like this lightning gun nonsense, they're going to reach a point where they'll be losing more customers than they gain. Shooter fans are fickle.... they'll move on to the new hotness, and Bioware will be left scratching their heads, wondering what they did wrong.

-Assuming ME3 will be a clone of ME2 then BioWare has at least another game to cater to the shooter crowd. As far as BioWare is concerned I might get Dragon Age but that’s it. They will have to re-earn me as a customer to make me even think about supporting them in the future. Games cost to much to buy to waste on a game that has a rushed out the door and incomplete feel to it like I got with ME2.

Bioware has over 14 years of criticly aclaimed hardcore rpgs. They can cater to who they want to at this point seeing as how the have been catering to the Rpg crowd for so long. Anytime they try to release a game that isnt heavy on loot or dialouge(sp?) they get flamed by the Rpg gamers who then hale the end of bioware as a hardcore rpg company(jade empire comes to mind). It gets old after a while.

Modifié par Jaysonie, 10 mars 2010 - 12:36 .

[TJSolo]

Jordy Laforge wrote...

TJSolo wrote...

Time Spiral wrote...

...

Or it could indicate that the hype and many new found fans are posting due to the happines of a a new game that can blind them for the time beeing.

The happiness of a new game blinding them?! HAA!

Why not just, "They are happy with the new game,"?

Only time will be able to truly tell the two apart.
But chances are if a person is not able to see the flaws of something; they are blinded by it.
Which is also different from a person able to see the flaws of something and still accept it.

If one does not perceive or believe that what you think is a "flaw"actually is a flaw how could they be "blind" for not seeing it?

I generally stated that there are flaws.
It is not a leap in logic that flaws exist.
If one is unable to perceive something that is there, they are blind to it.
If one is unable to believe something that is there, they are blind to it.
Being able to see flaws is the difference between love and infatuation.

My post is about people that admonish the idea of the word flaw and ME2 in the same sentence.
Now what constitutes a flaw is a different conversation.

[A Fhaol Bhig]

To sum up my thoughts, Bioware will make the games they envision.



They will create the characters, the universe, the way the gameplays, what kind of game it is, what it all includes.



If you like it thats great, if you hate it thats fine, if your both thats great.



This applies to sequels as well because SOMETHING has to change somewhere in the game. That's a fact otherwise its not a sequel. Whether you like the game or not is entirely dependent on your opinion, but just because for instance, Infinity Ward Mostly makes Shooters, does not mean it couldn't make a strategy game.

[TJSolo]

A Fhaol Bhig wrote...

To sum up my thoughts, Bioware will make the games they envision..


They will create the characters, the universe, the way the gameplays, what kind of game it is, what it all includes.


If you like it thats great, if you hate it thats fine, if your both thats great.

This
applies to sequels as well because SOMETHING has to change somewhere in
the game. That's a fact otherwise its not a sequel. Whether you like
the game or not is entirely dependent on your opinion, but just because
for instance, Infinity Ward Mostly makes Shooters, does not mean it
couldn't make a strategy game.

You can say that but...
There has to be some accordance from EA.
There is also an attempt to appeal to customers.
There are finite resources.
So what is envisioned and what gets to stores are different

Of course you could have hardline devs or employees post otherwise.
The reality of the situation is they answer to EA, stockholders, and customers.

This is no way limits them from genres.
It does effect the outcome of the product.

Modifié par TJSolo, 10 mars 2010 - 01:08 .

[TJSolo]

 bad posting

Modifié par TJSolo, 10 mars 2010 - 01:08 .

[Babu Yagu]

A Fhaol Bhig wrote...

To sum up my thoughts, Bioware will make the games they envision.

They will create the characters, the universe, the way the gameplays, what kind of game it is, what it all includes.

If you like it thats great, if you hate it thats fine, if your both thats great.

This applies to sequels as well because SOMETHING has to change somewhere in the game. That's a fact otherwise its not a sequel. Whether you like the game or not is entirely dependent on your opinion, but just because for instance, Infinity Ward Mostly makes Shooters, does not mean it couldn't make a strategy game.

Not sure that's the case. I think that in the case of Mass Effect 2 Bioware listened to what people didn't like about the firtst game and just removed it completely. e.g. inventory, Mako. However. People rarely write on forums like these about things they do like unless they are engaging in some banal argument for the sake of it.
No developer would design a game thinking: "If you like it thats great, if you hate it thats fine, if your both thats great.". They would fall over themselves to make a game that as many people as possible would love. Because if "you hate it" then nobody buys it and they lose a shed load of money.

[A Fhaol Bhig]

Of course the end result is money, and you couldn't really expect bioware to do Modern Warfare 3, I just wanted to point out that every game gets its begginging from just general conceptions..."what if we did this..." and that because games and genres tend to mix together, the end result is something that will always be a mixture of something with something else.



You don't have to always like it, but just because you don't, doesn't mean a hundred others won't.

[AOPotter]

Jaysonie wrote...
The have over 14 years of criticly aclaimed hardcore rpgs. They can cater to who they want to at this point seeing as how the have been catering to the Rpg crowd for so long. Anytime they try to release a game that isnt heavy on loot or dialouge(sp?) they get flamed by the Rpg gamers who then hale the end of bioware as a hardcore rpg company(jade empire comes to mind). It gets old after a while.

Which is exactly the point. After 14 years of producing a certain product the company becomes a brand name for exactly that kind of product. If a well-known softdrink-company suddenly started to fill their cans with cheese instead of soda - what would the consumer-reaction be? "Mmmm - cheese!" or "Cheese just isn't as refreshing as soda!"

RPGs are about choice. The player can tailor his experience to his morals, ideas and preferences. Being a good guy or a bad one, using a fast gun with little damage or a slow one with a lot of damage. Loot is just one kind of choice. (Which weapon do i use, which armor do i equip.)

And what people are bemoaning is: that Bioware got rid of choice. There are no choices when it comes to weapons - they are either class-locked or there is a best one.
 
There is not even choice when it comes to the storyline. You play a good guy and thus always use the (obvious) good dialog or you pretend to be a badass and use the (obvious) renegade dialogue. There are no two good options or a game-changing option. Example: Shepard can not refuse to work with Cerberus. Shepard can not say: I do not want Jacob and Miranda on my ship - I do not trust them. He can not even turn off the AI. Good RPG-design would have been: yes, you can deactivate the AI but the game becomes harder since some things will not be possible anymore.
Same with the choices of the first game. The "import your choices from the first game" is nothing but a marketing gag - it has no real meaning in this game. Was there anyone who could not do Grunts loyalty mission because Wrex was gone? Did something change gameplay-wise between people who saved the council in the first game and those that did not? Does being reinstated as spectre do anything apart from one minor dialogue? These should have been things that completely change your game-experience. But they do not.

It is not even a good shooter. Its a box-hugging contest with Squadmate-AI that is so retarded that it is often hugging the wrong side of the box. With an AI that has no routine for self-preservation. Like Tali going to melee a Krogan or a Geth Prime. The Weapons have no distinct feel to them. Biotics are almost useless. (And why does Overload,a tech-attack, share a cooldown with warp, a biotic attack?) And apart from box-hugging, the levels feel as if Bioware had skipped all new ideas in shooter design in the last 10 years. (Btw: box-hugging isn't even cool because in a real shooter you can crouch.) The shooter part is something that would have been nice in 1999 but since then games like DeusEx have set a different standard. Like being able to shoot AND sneak my way through the level. Multiple solutions to a problem. At which point we come back to choice. Or lack thereof.

[A Fhaol Bhig]

Okay?

I love to see you complain about everything like that. Turning of EDI, not working with Cerberus...I mean if they had listened to people like you, they would have had to make basicly two games. If you can do that in little more than two years with a game the size of ME2, good for you.

whooo, crouching. I'm a huge FPS fan, and while not being able to crouch was weird, it wasn't game breaking.

It's called global cooldown, if you use ONE power you can't use the OTHER powers. If that wasn't obvious, your remaning two brain cells probably weren't functioning.

If you think biotics are useless, watch TheAverageGatsbys video "adepting insanity"

class locks on weapons is something that hundreds of games do, RPG or otherwise.

Yeah what weapon do I use, what armor do I equip! Sounds alot like other games!

Whats wrong with obvious dialouge? Your the first ever person I've read to ever complain about that.
If all the responses were
"shoot!"
"shoot first!"
"wait to shoot!"
People would have a hard time choosing what they believe to be the correct anwser, or the anwser that they would prefer. Thats why dialouge is obviously paragon or renegade.

Modifié par A Fhaol Bhig, 10 mars 2010 - 01:32 .

[Jaysonie]

AOPotter wrote...

Jaysonie wrote...
The have over 14 years of criticly aclaimed hardcore rpgs. They can cater to who they want to at this point seeing as how the have been catering to the Rpg crowd for so long. Anytime they try to release a game that isnt heavy on loot or dialouge(sp?) they get flamed by the Rpg gamers who then hale the end of bioware as a hardcore rpg company(jade empire comes to mind). It gets old after a while.

Which is exactly the point. After 14 years of producing a certain product the company becomes a brand name for exactly that kind of product. If a well-known softdrink-company suddenly started to fill their cans with cheese instead of soda - what would the consumer-reaction be? "Mmmm - cheese!" or "Cheese just isn't as refreshing as soda!"

RPGs are about choice. The player can tailor his experience to his morals, ideas and preferences. Being a good guy or a bad one, using a fast gun with little damage or a slow one with a lot of damage. Loot is just one kind of choice. (Which weapon do i use, which armor do i equip.)

And what people are bemoaning is: that Bioware got rid of choice. There are no choices when it comes to weapons - they are either class-locked or there is a best one.
 
There is not even choice when it comes to the storyline. You play a good guy and thus always use the (obvious) good dialog or you pretend to be a badass and use the (obvious) renegade dialogue. There are no two good options or a game-changing option. Example: Shepard can not refuse to work with Cerberus. Shepard can not say: I do not want Jacob and Miranda on my ship - I do not trust them. He can not even turn off the AI. Good RPG-design would have been: yes, you can deactivate the AI but the game becomes harder since some things will not be possible anymore.
Same with the choices of the first game. The "import your choices from the first game" is nothing but a marketing gag - it has no real meaning in this game. Was there anyone who could not do Grunts loyalty mission because Wrex was gone? Did something change gameplay-wise between people who saved the council in the first game and those that did not? Does being reinstated as spectre do anything apart from one minor dialogue? These should have been things that completely change your game-experience. But they do not.

It is not even a good shooter. Its a box-hugging contest with Squadmate-AI that is so retarded that it is often hugging the wrong side of the box. With an AI that has no routine for self-preservation. Like Tali going to melee a Krogan or a Geth Prime. The Weapons have no distinct feel to them. Biotics are almost useless. (And why does Overload,a tech-attack, share a cooldown with warp, a biotic attack?) And apart from box-hugging, the levels feel as if Bioware had skipped all new ideas in shooter design in the last 10 years. (Btw: box-hugging isn't even cool because in a real shooter you can crouch.) The shooter part is something that would have been nice in 1999 but since then games like DeusEx have set a different standard. Like being able to shoot AND sneak my way through the level. Multiple solutions to a problem. At which point we come back to choice. Or lack thereof.

If your trying to argue that ME2 is bad, then dont bother because i loved it and you wont convince me otherwise. My point bieng, why loose faith in a company that has made great rpgs and are still making great rpgs. There current project might not be your cup of tea, but go play one of there older games and wait for the next hardcore rpg they release. Dont give up on bioware because they tried something diffrent, even if you dont like it i guarntee you there will be another bioware game that you'll probably love in the future(dragon age 2 in this case). This always happens, as i said the hardcore rpg fanatics hated Jade Empire and had similar reactions to whats going on now with ME2.

Modifié par Jaysonie, 10 mars 2010 - 01:34 .

[A Fhaol Bhig]

*shrugs*

above post.

[Jaysonie]

A Fhaol Bhig wrote...

*shrugs*
above post.

eh?

[Acero Azul]

http://social.biowar...index/1377589/1



stop complaining please

[Fluffeh Kitteh]

AOPotter wrote...

After 14 years of producing a certain product the company becomes a brand name for exactly that kind of product.

That doesn't mean they can't do other things though. Usually it's the fans who're the ones having the "if it ain't broke don't fix it" mentality, In fact it's that sort of mindset which caused genres like RTS to stagnate for years without any innovation or development beyond typical graphics/engine improvements. Any time a fan spots something he doesn't like, he accuses the developers of trying to do different things "at the expense of the game".

Modifié par Fluffeh Kitteh, 10 mars 2010 - 01:44 .

[A Fhaol Bhig]

Jaysonie wrote...

A Fhaol Bhig wrote...

*shrugs*
above post.

eh?

I was refering to your post, because I was going to say something else similar to what you posted, so instead of posting a page long response, I just refered to you because I agreed with you.

Acero Azul wrote...

http://social.biowar...index/1377589/1

stop complaining please

I just got referered too!

[A Fhaol Bhig]

slimgrin wrote...

Dinkamus_Littlelog wrote...

DarthReavus wrote...

Dead horse ring any bells?

Yeah, its the level of intellect possessed by the Bioware apologists.

LOL! love it. Sorry boys, this topic isn't going away because it's a point worth discussing.

It sure tops "same sex romances" and " what does Tali's face really look like?"

To some on this forum, it seems the only things we should bring up are compliments to team Bioware.

And to some, it seems we should bring up only insults to team Bioware.

It works both ways. What we need is constructive critique and analysis, but this is the internet, it isn't going to happen.

[Jaysonie]

A Fhaol Bhig wrote...

Jaysonie wrote...

A Fhaol Bhig wrote...

*shrugs*
above post.

eh?

I was refering to your post, because I was going to say something else similar to what you posted, so instead of posting a page long response, I just refered to you because I agreed with you.

Oh, than thank you. I have a hard time with internet lingo and such.

[A Fhaol Bhig]

Arcian wrote...

ThePatriot101 wrote...

I consider the loyalty missions in ME2 to be part of the main plot.

Wow, consider? I thought it was pretty much a given they are part of the main plot. The whole point of ME2 is to build a team and make them strong enough, gear-wise and mentally, to take on a fortress situated smack in the middle of enemy territory. Whereas buying upgrades and finding new weapons fulfil the gear-wise part, the loyalty mission fulfil the mental part, bonding with your teammates and helping them overcome issues that's holding their potential back.

And who was the *ss who said main quests can't be optional? Like, for example, Fallout 3. Half of the main quests can be skipped in that game, which makes them oh-so-very optional.

Meh, the fan dumb just never dies. Gorram it to hell.

me and you should be big goddamn heroes and save this thread from itself

[inversevideo]

AOPotter wrote...

Jaysonie wrote...
The have over 14 years of criticly aclaimed hardcore rpgs. They can cater to who they want to at this point seeing as how the have been catering to the Rpg crowd for so long. Anytime they try to release a game that isnt heavy on loot or dialouge(sp?) they get flamed by the Rpg gamers who then hale the end of bioware as a hardcore rpg company(jade empire comes to mind). It gets old after a while.

Which is exactly the point. After 14 years of producing a certain product the company becomes a brand name for exactly that kind of product. If a well-known softdrink-company suddenly started to fill their cans with cheese instead of soda - what would the consumer-reaction be? "Mmmm - cheese!" or "Cheese just isn't as refreshing as soda!"

RPGs are about choice. The player can tailor his experience to his morals, ideas and preferences. Being a good guy or a bad one, using a fast gun with little damage or a slow one with a lot of damage. Loot is just one kind of choice. (Which weapon do i use, which armor do i equip.)

And what people are bemoaning is: that Bioware got rid of choice. There are no choices when it comes to weapons - they are either class-locked or there is a best one.
 
There is not even choice when it comes to the storyline. You play a good guy and thus always use the (obvious) good dialog or you pretend to be a badass and use the (obvious) renegade dialogue. There are no two good options or a game-changing option. Example: Shepard can not refuse to work with Cerberus. Shepard can not say: I do not want Jacob and Miranda on my ship - I do not trust them. He can not even turn off the AI. Good RPG-design would have been: yes, you can deactivate the AI but the game becomes harder since some things will not be possible anymore.
Same with the choices of the first game. The "import your choices from the first game" is nothing but a marketing gag - it has no real meaning in this game. Was there anyone who could not do Grunts loyalty mission because Wrex was gone? Did something change gameplay-wise between people who saved the council in the first game and those that did not? Does being reinstated as spectre do anything apart from one minor dialogue? These should have been things that completely change your game-experience. But they do not.

It is not even a good shooter. Its a box-hugging contest with Squadmate-AI that is so retarded that it is often hugging the wrong side of the box. With an AI that has no routine for self-preservation. Like Tali going to melee a Krogan or a Geth Prime. The Weapons have no distinct feel to them. Biotics are almost useless. (And why does Overload,a tech-attack, share a cooldown with warp, a biotic attack?) And apart from box-hugging, the levels feel as if Bioware had skipped all new ideas in shooter design in the last 10 years. (Btw: box-hugging isn't even cool because in a real shooter you can crouch.) The shooter part is something that would have been nice in 1999 but since then games like DeusEx have set a different standard. Like being able to shoot AND sneak my way through the level. Multiple solutions to a problem. At which point we come back to choice. Or lack thereof.

Very well said!

I like this game, but I want to love the game.
'Box hugging' and endless waves of something to shoot get old after awhile.

Oblivion IV got it right. So right, that I still fire it up and start a new character every few months.
I could slug it out with enemies, or sneak through a level, or a combination, and I could actually crouch; something I used to be able to do in ME1.  Something only my AI squadmates can do in ME2

I loved ME1, and was hoping for more story and immersion during act2.
But I am willing to wait and see what DLC comes out, between now and ME3.

And no, I do not hate shooters. I play quite a few.
But there just are not that many good RPGs out, and given a preference, I like a good RPG , like Oblivion or ME1, where I can lose myself, in the story, explore the world and disccover things, and feel like I'm a part of that world, and not stuck in an arcade. i.e. while I don't mind having to shoot at everything some of the time, I also like to be challenged in ways other than having to shoot at everything all the time.