874 réponses à ce sujet

[Terror_K]

Jebel Krong wrote...

mass effect wasn't "part straight shooter" no, but i think it would have been if BW had had the shooter experience. combat is much, much better in me2, whichever way you cut it it.

I dunno... I personally think that's more of a case of the two following factors: A) BioWare listening to the complaints of people who played Mass Effect expecting it to play like Gears of War because it had TPS elements, and BioWare seeing the way the wind is blowing with today's modern gamers and seeing that the $$$'s are in the shooter market and not the RPG one.

[Pocketgb]

Terror_K wrote...

Jebel Krong wrote...

mass effect wasn't "part straight shooter" no, but i think it would have been if BW had had the shooter experience. combat is much, much better in me2, whichever way you cut it it.

I dunno... I personally think that's more of a case of the two following factors: A) BioWare listening to the complaints of people who played Mass Effect expecting it to play like Gears of War because it had TPS elements, and BioWare seeing the way the wind is blowing with today's modern gamers and seeing that the $$$'s are in the shooter market and not the RPG one.

I still stand by what I said: it's hard to market a game to the "shooter fans" when the game A. includes a lot of dialog and B. punishes those who are not careful with their endgame actions. They might be able to skip the dialog but how much game does that leave them? Not very much.

Modifié par Pocketgb, 26 mars 2010 - 11:04 .

[Poison_Berrie]

Terror_K wrote...
I dunno... I personally think that's more of a case of the two following factors: A) BioWare listening to the complaints of people who played Mass Effect expecting it to play like Gears of War because it had TPS elements, and BioWare seeing the way the wind is blowing with today's modern gamers and seeing that the $$$'s are in the shooter market and not the RPG one.

That's written with a rather large bias.
A) I'm more inclined to say, they made the first game a hybrid TPS-RPG and the TPS part wasn't very good. The complaints weren't really about: "I want Gears of War", but more "Combat sucks". And let's be honest shooter combat wasn't really a forte of BioWare.
They are continuing support on Dragon Age (clearly an RPG) so that shows that there is profit to be made with something they do know. ME2 is probably making more, though, so it probably had some influence on the game, but I doubt it's the main selling point.

[Terror_K]

Yes, but DAO was likely popular mostly due to the fact that it caused a whole bunch of RPG fans looking for a deep game to go "Finally!" on one side and was horribly marketed with over-the-top violence, sex and rock music as a bloody hack'n'slasher on the other. In either case, despite DAO's success, it's hardly in Halo, Gears of War or Modern Warfare 2 territory. I bet Bad Company 2 has already outsold it and it's only been out a few weeks.

[Jebel Krong]

Terror_K wrote...

Yes, but DAO was likely popular mostly due to the fact that it caused a whole bunch of RPG fans looking for a deep game to go "Finally!" on one side and was horribly marketed with over-the-top violence, sex and rock music as a bloody hack'n'slasher on the other. In either case, despite DAO's success, it's hardly in Halo, Gears of War or Modern Warfare 2 territory. I bet Bad Company 2 has already outsold it and it's only been out a few weeks.

bad company 2 has probably outsold me2 by now - but hey it's a multiplayer-focused game. DAO hasn't done bad at all for the first game in the series - about the same as me1. me2 of course has pretty much doubled me1, following the rule of sequels... bodes well for DAO2, really. It also shows there is the market for the two approaches: DAOs and me2s.

[Dudeman315]

DAA shows what good could come in DAO2. DAA fixed most of my problems with DAO now if we could just hire voice actors for the main character it would be amazing. I'm only 1/2 through DAA so my opinion could change but so far A+ on every point.

Modifié par Dudeman315, 26 mars 2010 - 12:27 .

[Darth Drago]

An interesting interview someone posted in my topic….

Christina Norman's interview at GDC
Part 1:  http://www.justin.tv/clip/279e1809c57cc535
Part 2 (only a few minutes): http://www.justin.tv/clip/16a8d17118cb04a0

-Her words she says in part 2 pretty much answers the question as to where the inventory went in my opinion....



 
The Abridged Mass Effect 2, a must read. http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/105/index/1777005

Modifié par Darth Drago, 26 mars 2010 - 12:57 .

[Tasker]

Darth Drago wrote...


-Her words she says in part 2 pretty much answers the question as to where the inventory went in my opinion....


 

You couldn't quote a bit of it could you?

I'm at work and can't turn the sound up or i'll get shouted at. 

[Darth Drago]

“taking a look at the game as a whole and how do we make all these other features that will work with our shooter combat instead of working against it.”

[Tasker]

Darth Drago wrote...

“taking a look at the game as a whole and how do we make all these other features that will work with our shooter combat instead of working against it.”

Thanks for that.

Makes you wonder what she's been smoking though. 


There's nothing like getting your priorities back to front.

Surely they should have seen how the shooter combat features worked with rather than against, everything else instead?

[Darth Drago]

Yea, I even was dumbfounded by her comment there (not a fan of ME2 due to all the changes). The combat shouldn’t be your main focus of the game it should be something used to enhance it along with all the other parts to make a great game.

[Jebel Krong]

i think you two are missing the point somewhat: me2 is a TPS shooter as much as an rpg - mass effect games were always meant to be. just because you don't agree with it, doesn't mean BW have their priorities in the wrong place, for the majority of us they gave us exaclty what we wanted: better combat to accompany the story/rpg/character elements etc.

[TJSolo]

Jebel Krong wrote...

i think you two are missing the point somewhat: me2 is a TPS shooter as much as an rpg - mass effect games were always meant to be. just because you don't agree with it, doesn't mean BW have their priorities in the wrong place, for the majority of us they gave us exaclty what we wanted: better combat to accompany the story/rpg/character elements etc.

ME was always supposed to be a RPG and a shooter.The priorities BW had in ME2 reduced the RPG too much. It is not something Darth or anyone in this thread is making up. You can go to the first page and look at the slides. 
The fact is BW makes RPGs and after Kotor they wanted to make another sci-fi RPG, that is what ME is, their sci-fi RPG with shooter combat.

[Jebel Krong]

TJSolo wrote...

Jebel Krong wrote...

i think you two are missing the point somewhat: me2 is a TPS shooter as much as an rpg - mass effect games were always meant to be. just because you don't agree with it, doesn't mean BW have their priorities in the wrong place, for the majority of us they gave us exaclty what we wanted: better combat to accompany the story/rpg/character elements etc.

ME was always supposed to be a RPG and a shooter.The priorities BW had in ME2 reduced the RPG too much. It is not something Darth or anyone in this thread is making up. You can go to the first page and look at the slides. 
The fact is BW makes RPGs and after Kotor they wanted to make another sci-fi RPG, that is what ME is, their sci-fi RPG with shooter combat.

yes both, in concert: a balance achieved far better in the sequel. this entire thread has been about that - in your opinion they  "reduced" the rpg elements too much, i'd argue back that they refined and changed said elements - some for the better, some for the worse, as much as (in general) they improved combat.

the slides are taken out of context of the actual presentation, as you well know. it's a pictorial form of quote-mining, not proof of anything.

[Chaoswind]

That makes sense... Giving gear and weapons to 12 guys would be HELL...



However, taking Ammo out of the picture didn't improve anything and actually made it lacking...

[EternalWolfe]

Chaoswind wrote...

That makes sense... Giving gear and weapons to 12 guys would be HELL...

However, taking Ammo out of the picture didn't improve anything and actually made it lacking...

Depends on how you do it - I favor automation over diminution for simplification.  Allow them to mod one weapon and apply the exact same mods to all of that weapon across all characters, or to all weapons of that type across all characters - now  you have only to mod one weapon, instead of 204(12*17).  Same thing for squaddie armor - depening on how you do it, make a button to automize it, rather then drop the idea alltogether.  Allows people who want to mess with their entire squads setup to be able to, and those who don't, to not.

[PSRdirector]

ill wait till ME3 is in the bargin bin to get it, I really felt I was ripped off by 2, I enjoyed the first to much, and got a game I shoudlnt have.

[kregano]

EternalWolfe wrote...

Chaoswind wrote...

That makes sense... Giving gear and weapons to 12 guys would be HELL...

However, taking Ammo out of the picture didn't improve anything and actually made it lacking...

Depends on how you do it - I favor automation over diminution for simplification.  Allow them to mod one weapon and apply the exact same mods to all of that weapon across all characters, or to all weapons of that type across all characters - now  you have only to mod one weapon, instead of 204(12*17).  Same thing for squaddie armor - depening on how you do it, make a button to automize it, rather then drop the idea alltogether.  Allows people who want to mess with their entire squads setup to be able to, and those who don't, to not.

I wouldn't mind this as long as it gives me an option to not customize squad weapons exactly like mine. Squadmembers don't have some of the disadvantages the player has, like worrying about ammo, so ammo capacity mods wouldn't do anything for them and if I choose to make Shepard the ultimate close combat warrior, having everrybody else be the same way would reduce my tactical options. I'm fine with an automate button that hooks up squad members with the best mods/whatever and having a choice to set everyone else up exactly like Shepard is along with going in and manually fiddling around with everything.

[EternalWolfe]

kregano wrote...

I wouldn't mind this as long as it gives me an option to not customize squad weapons exactly like mine. Squadmembers don't have some of the disadvantages the player has, like worrying about ammo, so ammo capacity mods wouldn't do anything for them and if I choose to make Shepard the ultimate close combat warrior, having everrybody else be the same way would reduce my tactical options. I'm fine with an automate button that hooks up squad members with the best mods/whatever and having a choice to set everyone else up exactly like Shepard is along with going in and manually fiddling around with everything.

Yeah, that's what I meant - not just direct automazation, but buttons that allows you to automize the selection of multiple characters at once.  Like Optimize buttons you find in some RPGs - except this would allow you mod multiple weapons and characters at once(you could, if the time was given, even set it up so you could mod certain characters instead of just all of them).  Even an 'Optimize' button that set up the chosen character's weapon/armor with the best defined by their personality(Grunt, would build for power and toughness, for example) could work.

I find it far better choice then taking away options to simplify something.

[Daeion]

Darth Drago wrote...

“taking a look at the game as a whole and how do we make all these other features that will work with our shooter combat instead of working against it.”

So if I understand that quote, she feels that inventory works against combat?  Someone should tell that to Borderlands.

[Daeion]

Jebel Krong wrote...

i think you two are missing the point somewhat: me2 is a TPS shooter as much as an rpg - mass effect games were always meant to be. just because you don't agree with it, doesn't mean BW have their priorities in the wrong place, for the majority of us they gave us exaclty what we wanted: better combat to accompany the story/rpg/character elements etc.

Actually ME was meant to be a RPG, they just wanted to take combat in a different direction from the typical RPG so they made it look like a shooter.  The comment I keep seeing thrown around is that ME was a game that looked like a shooter, but didn't play like a shooter and that upset a lot of people so that's why they changed things.  That to me says that they didn't set out to make a RPG/Shooter hybrid but that the game evolved in that direction.  However, that still doesn't really explain why they had to do away with things like inventory considering Borderlands has a bazillion guns and other items yet I never hear people complaining about it.

[exxxed]

Jebel Krong wrote...

TJSolo wrote...

Jebel Krong wrote...

i think you two are missing the point somewhat: me2 is a TPS shooter as much as an rpg - mass effect games were always meant to be. just because you don't agree with it, doesn't mean BW have their priorities in the wrong place, for the majority of us they gave us exaclty what we wanted: better combat to accompany the story/rpg/character elements etc.

ME was always supposed to be a RPG and a shooter.The priorities BW had in ME2 reduced the RPG too much. It is not something Darth or anyone in this thread is making up. You can go to the first page and look at the slides. 
The fact is BW makes RPGs and after Kotor they wanted to make another sci-fi RPG, that is what ME is, their sci-fi RPG with shooter combat.

yes both, in concert: a balance achieved far better in the sequel. this entire thread has been about that - in your opinion they  "reduced" the rpg elements too much, i'd argue back that they refined and changed said elements - some for the better, some for the worse, as much as (in general) they improved combat.

the slides are taken out of context of the actual presentation, as you well know. it's a pictorial form of quote-mining, not proof of anything.

Excuse my language but, THE WHOLE GAME SI FOCKING LINEAR, no choices what so ever during the missions, and the bloody N7 quests as divers as they were, they were too short and too few, and most consisted in BOOM BAM POW press the god damn key to end the mission, where's the RPG in that?

[Phel Shepard]

El_Chala_Legalizado wrote...

I didn't see this in the forums,  and I think is interesting to waste a little time reading this:
prezi.com/6xe1ucvy8egf/where-did-my-inventory-go/

...

This is exactly why I like Bioware. Even if I was disappointed with a few things, this is total redemption. How can you not be happy when their team cares enough to communicate with their fans? 

All is forgiven! Keep up the good work Bioware and thanks for listening.

[Raphael diSanto]

Daeion wrote...

Darth Drago wrote...

“taking a look at the game as a whole and how do we make all these other features that will work with our shooter combat instead of working against it.”

So if I understand that quote, she feels that inventory works against combat?  Someone should tell that to Borderlands.

Inventory juggling gets in the way of any good game/story. That's why the first thing I always do in DA:O is bump my inventory space up to around 250, so I don't have to worry about messing around with juggling it.

[Darth Drago]

Daeion wrote...

Darth Drago wrote...

“taking a look at the game as a whole and how do we make all these other features that will work with our shooter combat instead of working against it.”

So if I understand that quote, she feels that inventory works against combat?  Someone should tell that to Borderlands.

I took it to mean that the game centered around the combat and everything else like inventory, all missions and side quests, level design, ammo system,  rpg elements, skills/powers and so on all were catered to fit in their not so almighty combat system.

Modifié par Darth Drago, 26 mars 2010 - 05:45 .