243 réponses à ce sujet

[JThompson6577]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...


That doesn't mean ME2 had to suffer the way it did when it comes to character interaction and realism.

This is the tough part, because we are definately arguing a matter of opinion right now and that might be what's tripping this thread and a lot of complaint threads up.

You think they failed on the character interaction, I disagree.  I'll be honest, other than Wrex and Liara, I didn't connect with any of the charecters in the first game.  I feel very connected with nearly all the charecters in ME 2.  During those "four minute conversations" with Jack I learned about a woman who's terrified to care about anything or anyone. 

I learned about the tragedy of a mother whose daughters were doomed to lives of either solitude or monsterous actions.

I learned that Garrus, despite being my least favorite charecter in the first game was actually pretty charming.

I could keep going with every one of your squad but suffice to say I connected with my squad this time.  I'm assuming you didn't so here we are...

[Onyx Jaguar]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

SkullandBonesmember wrote...
With the technology available to us today, there's a lot more we can do. Like I said, the potential for games like Heavy Rain and even Mass Effect are staggering. I don't want a 4 minute convo. I want my character to grow through relationships, romantic or otherwise, not through headshots. And 12 or so 4 minute convos on the Normandy is not building relationships and doing much to further the plot.

I agree, video games can teach us alot and have great artistic potential. But what you are suggesting is a contradiction.  
"I want 12 minute character conversations." Sorry, but we've had this since kotor. And we had it through Jade Empire. And now we've had it for Mass Effect and it's gotten old. Very old. What you suggest has been done for the last seven years at least. ME2 gave us the same great conversations, combined with new, realistic motions to go with it.

Again, how are your character interactions worse in ME2? I recall spending quite a bit of time learning about the Genophage from Mordin while learning about him as a person. This is new and refreshing. In ME, a character either talked about himself or about his culture. There was not very much of both. In ME, I could only interact with my squad members. Everyone said the same old crap. In ME2, my squad is fleshed out and my crew is actually worth my time!

And I'll stilll be wanting that definition of character interaction, if you'd be so kind.

And if you're gonna go for the "read a book" cop out-



3:07-3:26.

Don't feed me this line. I spent a great deal of my life playing Morrowind. You could go hours without combat just reading through books and character conversations. There's nothing wrong with reading in a video game.

I second this, I'm a huge fan of Morrowind and am also a fan of those explodee games like Metroid Prime and Marathon that both use text very effeciently in game.  Morrowind gave a ton of backstory and cultural intrigue this way.  Was it necessary for the plot?  Not really, but it helped. 

Granted this is the ME forums and we see how well the email system has went over.  So I think we are in the minority.

[BaladasDemnevanni]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...
I second this, I'm a huge fan of Morrowind and am also a fan of those explodee games like Metroid Prime and Marathon that both use text very effeciently in game.  Morrowind gave a ton of backstory and cultural intrigue this way.  Was it necessary for the plot?  Not really, but it helped. 

Granted this is the ME forums and we see how well the email system has went over.  So I think we are in the minority.

Holy crap, it's been ages since I played Metroid Prime. That game honestly had a very refreshing method of plot delivery. You learn as Samus learns what went on. You picked up (or left out) as much plot as you wanted to.

But yeah, I wouldn't say ME2 e-mails were a good example for us. But Morrowind proved you don't need huge character interaction to love a good story.

Modifié par BaladasDemnevanni, 21 mars 2010 - 04:08 .

[Karstedt]

Forsakerr wrote...

yeah i feel the same way too in ME2 they went toward FPS and removed RPG from it compared to the first one ,more combat less RPG but oh well, not now i have calibrations to do ...

Watch waht you say. I slipped up and used "FPS" around here once, and it was the one time someone actually got a logical counter point on my dissapointment with several elements of ME2. He pointed out that it was not at all an FPS, it's a third person cover based shooter. So don't make the mistake that I did and have your entire point of view invalidated because you said FPS instead of TPS.

[Onyx Jaguar]

Karstedt wrote...

Forsakerr wrote...

yeah i feel the same way too in ME2 they went toward FPS and removed RPG from it compared to the first one ,more combat less RPG but oh well, not now i have calibrations to do ...

Watch waht you say. I slipped up and used "FPS" around here once, and it was the one time someone actually got a logical counter point on my dissapointment with several elements of ME2. He pointed out that it was not at all an FPS, it's a third person cover based shooter. So don't make the mistake that I did and have your entire point of view invalidated because you said FPS instead of TPS.

*POPS UP*

*Addendum, actually it was mostly some other guy, but I initiated that argument

Modifié par Onyx Jaguar, 21 mars 2010 - 04:14 .

[SkullandBonesmember]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

Vague comments don't make for good arguments.  Give examples. What characters in your opinion failed to develop? Why? What you are suggesting is a contradiction.  "I want 12 minute character conversations." Sorry, but we've had this since kotor. And we had it through Jade Empire. And now we've had it for Mass Effect and it's gotten old. Very old. What you suggest has been done for the last seven years at least. ME2 gave us the same great conversations, combined with new, realistic motions to go with it.

Again, how are your character interactions worse in ME2? I recall spending quite a bit of time learning about the Genophage from Mordin while learning about him as a person. This is new and refreshing. In ME, a character either talked about himself or about his culture. There was not very much of both. In ME, I could only interact with my squad members. Everyone said the same old crap. In ME2, my squad is fleshed out and my crew is actually worth my time!

And I'll stilll be wanting that definition of character interaction, if you'd be so kind.

And if you're gonna go for the "read a book" cop out-



3:07-3:26.

Don't feed me this line. I spent a great deal of my life playing Morrowind. You could go hours without combat just reading through books and character conversations. There's nothing wrong with reading in a video game.

First of all, you once again fail to grasp where I'm coming from. There are so many that say if you want such a deep plot just go read a book, and what Mr. Crusher was implying was books are a one way service, anything that can expand on stories such as an interactive video game is awesome.

I'll try once more to get you to understand my definition of good character interaction/story development. If you don't get it this time, I have no other way to word it. It should go the ME1 and KOTOR route. Put the emphasis on story, and combat secondary. Not like ME2 where the emphasis was on combat, and story/character interaction/realism was secondary.

[jasonontko]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Karstedt wrote...

Forsakerr wrote...

yeah i feel the same way too in ME2 they went toward FPS and removed RPG from it compared to the first one ,more combat less RPG but oh well, not now i have calibrations to do ...

Watch waht you say. I slipped up and used "FPS" around here once, and it was the one time someone actually got a logical counter point on my dissapointment with several elements of ME2. He pointed out that it was not at all an FPS, it's a third person cover based shooter. So don't make the mistake that I did and have your entire point of view invalidated because you said FPS instead of TPS.

*POPS UP*

Really.  Granted I made a mistake early in thread wich was humously rebudffed by the OPer.  Is there really a great differences between FPS and TPS? 

[Lochfynne]

Seriously...I am a huge fan of Bioware, but people should be allowed to voice their opinions on the forum without name calling. So I take it from its use in this thread, "troll" must be someone who simply disagrees with YOU. I agree with the original post only from maybe the fourth comment on. Until DAO Awakenings came out, I thought Bioware could do no wrong. Now, I know Bioware is only mostly perfect. We need to let them know how we feel about their choices, so they may again work to make us happy. Then we can continue to do our job and buy everything they make. While I don't agree with most of the original post, it was a lot more helpful than "troll" and "fail". I have no problem with the thread title...it woke us up and we all paid attention.

[Onyx Jaguar]

jasonontko wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Karstedt wrote...

Forsakerr wrote...

yeah i feel the same way too in ME2 they went toward FPS and removed RPG from it compared to the first one ,more combat less RPG but oh well, not now i have calibrations to do ...

Watch waht you say. I slipped up and used "FPS" around here once, and it was the one time someone actually got a logical counter point on my dissapointment with several elements of ME2. He pointed out that it was not at all an FPS, it's a third person cover based shooter. So don't make the mistake that I did and have your entire point of view invalidated because you said FPS instead of TPS.

*POPS UP*

Really.  Granted I made a mistake early in thread wich was humously rebudffed by the OPer.  Is there really a great differences between FPS and TPS? 

Mostly that argument was due to modifying the current engine as his old post made it sound like he expected ME 3 to be an FPS, though in reality he just worded it wrong.

There also is a pretty big gameplay difference, but that would take awhile to show the alternatives.

Mostly it has to do with camera perspective and how the enemies react.  The enemies tend to act quite a bit different in 3rd person games because they have to have more animation than in 1st person games.

[JThompson6577]

jasonontko wrote...


Really.  Granted I made a mistake early in thread wich was humously rebudffed by the OPer.  Is there really a great differences between FPS and TPS? 

Guns with Chainsaw bayonets mostly.

[jasonontko]

Lochfynne wrote...

Seriously...I am a huge fan of Bioware, but people should be allowed to voice their opinions on the forum without name calling. So I take it from its use in this thread, "troll" must be someone who simply disagrees with YOU. I agree with the original post only from maybe the fourth comment on. Until DAO Awakenings came out, I thought Bioware could do no wrong. Now, I know Bioware is only mostly perfect. We need to let them know how we feel about their choices, so they may again work to make us happy. Then we can continue to do our job and buy everything they make. While I don't agree with most of the original post, it was a lot more helpful than "troll" and "fail". I have no problem with the thread title...it woke us up and we all paid attention.

Thank you, you said what I wanted to say.

Modifié par jasonontko, 21 mars 2010 - 04:22 .

[BaladasDemnevanni]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...
First of all, you once again fail to grasp where I'm coming from. There are so many that say if you want such a deep plot just go read a book, and what Mr. Crusher was implying was books are a one way service, anything that can expand on stories such as an interactive video game is awesome.

I'll try once more to get you to understand my definition of good character interaction/story development. If you don't get it this time, I have no other way to word it. It should go the ME1 and KOTOR route. Put the emphasis on story, and combat secondary. Not like ME2 where the emphasis was on combat, and story/character interaction/realism was secondary.

1. Example of good character interactions in ME1.
2. Example of bad character interactions in ME1.
3. Example of good character interactions in ME2.
4. Example of bad character interactions in ME2.

This isn't difficult to do. You keep saying 'ME2 is all about combat. Story and character interactions suffered.' This is vague. And usually when you make an argument,  you provide evidence. What examples do you have of any of the above 4? Then we can talk about it to our jolly hearts' content.

Modifié par BaladasDemnevanni, 21 mars 2010 - 04:22 .

[Mr.BlazenGlazen]

So your saying the game fails as a rpg, but you like playing it, therefore you complain about it?

[SkullandBonesmember]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

3. Example of good character interactions in ME2.
4. Example of bad character interactions in ME2.

This isn't difficult to do. You keep saying 'ME2 is all about combat. Story and character interactions suffered.' This is vague. And usually when you make an argument,  you provide evidence. What examples do you have of any of the above 4? Then we can talk about it to our jolly hearts' content.

OK stand alone dialogue from ME2 is no more or less better than stand alone dialogue from ME1. But the fact that you can run the mill dry even when you have 2 main missions left to go sucks. The only way to advance a story of a character is through dialogue, whether internal or audible, and interactions with others, not headshots. ME2 had more headshots as opposed to Shepard growing as a character. And even then, a good portion of the cutscenes didn't allow you to choose what to say.

[Karstedt]

[quote]Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Really.  Granted I made a mistake early in thread wich was humously rebudffed by the OPer.  Is there really a great differences between FPS and TPS? [/quote]

Mostly that argument was due to modifying the current engine as his old post made it sound like he expected ME 3 to be an FPS, though in reality he just worded it wrong.

There also is a pretty big gameplay difference, but that would take awhile to show the alternatives.

Mostly it has to do with camera perspective and how the enemies react.  The enemies tend to act quite a bit different in 3rd person games because they have to have more animation than in 1st person games.
[/quote]

Given that I was being feceitous about the invalidation based on a terminiology slip. FPS's do 'play' fairly differently. But the overall mechanics and design elements are very simillar (it's not like the differance between RTS and TBS for instance, or TPSRPG and FPS). So Onyx was correct when he pointed out that ME3 was not going to be a FPS after I declared that if it continues developing as it has from ME1->2, that it would become one in 3 (when I meant to say TPS).

Most of the other rebuttals about dissapoint have been limited to, "deal with it", "shut up h8er", and the ever popular variation on pretending that the criticiizer wants to "return to awful gameplay moment X", when in fact the critizer neither mentions nor wants anything of the sort. I was just trying to plug the FPS gap in yours staement, because it actually has merit.

Modifié par Karstedt, 21 mars 2010 - 04:47 .

[SkullandBonesmember]

Mr.BlazenGlazen wrote...

So your saying the game fails as a rpg, but you like playing it, therefore you complain about it?

I complain about the excessive 'SPLOSHUNS. You're acting as if I have a plethora of other games to choose from. How many games allow you, even in minute ways, to chose what your character says?

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Said it before, but...

Look.
Shooter fans have all these games that cater to their tastes released every year. How many story driven games are released for RPG fans every year? Not many. But it's not enough that you guys have Halo, Resident Evil, Gears Of War, Grand Theft Auto, Dead Or Alive, among countless other 'SPLOSHUN games. You had to whine, moan, and bi*** until you got your way and the result was ME2. I'm not saying YOU PERSONALLY were one of the ones who complained, I don't know. But there were A LOT who saw the trailer for ME1, thought 'SPLOSHUNS, and weren't happy with the product, despite the fact the RPG fans were happy with the product.
Yes, SPLOSHUNS are what makes money, but it's not like there isn't a market
or story driven fans. We'd welcome a 40 hour hybrid of ME1, Alan Wake, and Heavy Rain with open arms.

Modifié par SkullandBonesmember, 21 mars 2010 - 04:53 .

[smudboy]

JThompson6577 wrote...

SkullandBonesmember wrote...


That doesn't mean ME2 had to suffer the way it did when it comes to character interaction and realism.

This is the tough part, because we are definately arguing a matter of opinion right now and that might be what's tripping this thread and a lot of complaint threads up.

You think they failed on the character interaction, I disagree.  I'll be honest, other than Wrex and Liara, I didn't connect with any of the charecters in the first game.  I feel very connected with nearly all the charecters in ME 2.  During those "four minute conversations" with Jack I learned about a woman who's terrified to care about anything or anyone. 

I learned about the tragedy of a mother whose daughters were doomed to lives of either solitude or monsterous actions.

I learned that Garrus, despite being my least favorite charecter in the first game was actually pretty charming.

I could keep going with every one of your squad but suffice to say I connected with my squad this time.  I'm assuming you didn't so here we are...

I would not deny that there 11 or so side characters that have quite a bit of development.  This is obvious.  BioWare is doing some beautiful storytelling here.

I can also relate in saying I don't generally care for them, since they aren't related to the main plot.  If their motivations and reason for existing in the main story aren't intertwined with that, let alone their acceptance into the protagonists journey explained believably, why should I care why they're there if they themselves don't?  Compound this by the sheer number of them and the redundant manner upon which you make them "loyal," when it becomes revealed on arrival to be nothing more than over-shopping for ingredients to a nonsensical recipe of unknown origin.  (i.e. Tali was the most potent ingredient, and most pleasing to acquire, of said mystery dish made of popcorn, hubcaps, nachos, violins, etc.)

Though the story of a mother and her daughters was tragic, what the deuce is it to me, when my focus is Fighting the Collectors?  These stories aren't intertwined with the main one: these are completely seperate.  I think that's what SkullandBonesmember is getting at.

However, I could also be thinking too much.

Modifié par smudboy, 21 mars 2010 - 04:50 .

[SkullandBonesmember]

smudboy wrote...

Though the story of a mother and her daughters was tragic, what the deuce is it to me, when my focus is Fighting the Collectors?  These stories aren't intertwined with the main one: these are completely seperate.  I think that's what SkullandBonesmember is getting at.

However, I could also be thinking too much.

LOL, not really but I appreciate you're at least trying to understand what I'm saying. Read my quote about the shooter fans whining that they wanted 'SPLOSHUNS and that kind of sums it up. Yeah, yeah. Pot calling the kettle black.

[Karstedt]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

SkullandBonesmember wrote...
First of all, you once again fail to grasp where I'm coming from. There are so many that say if you want such a deep plot just go read a book, and what Mr. Crusher was implying was books are a one way service, anything that can expand on stories such as an interactive video game is awesome.

I'll try once more to get you to understand my definition of good character interaction/story development. If you don't get it this time, I have no other way to word it. It should go the ME1 and KOTOR route. Put the emphasis on story, and combat secondary. Not like ME2 where the emphasis was on combat, and story/character interaction/realism was secondary.

1. Example of good character interactions in ME1.
2. Example of bad character interactions in ME1.
3. Example of good character interactions in ME2.
4. Example of bad character interactions in ME2.

This isn't difficult to do. You keep saying 'ME2 is all about combat. Story and character interactions suffered.' This is vague. And usually when you make an argument,  you provide evidence. What examples do you have of any of the above 4? Then we can talk about it to our jolly hearts' content.

Baladas is right, you're being vague. Try something like this.

ME1 Good: Banter. While some peeople seem to overlook it, it's extremely useful in creating a sense of character interaction and relationship development.

ME2 Bad: A few conversation triggers scattered about simple failed to, in any way, equal the banter in ME1.

Rebuttal: Yeah, but you had to endure those long elevators to hear most of the banter, so that sucked.

Counter-rebuttal: I said the banter was great and important, not the hour long elevator rides. Banter can be implemented without long ass elevator rides, it has been done once or twice before you idiot!

Note: I normally avoid directly calling people idots on the forum, but since I was playing the part of idiotic responder, I took the liberty of be being honest about my behavior in that role.

[jasonontko]

[quote]Karstedt wrote...

[quote]Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Really.  Granted I made a mistake early in thread wich was humously rebudffed by the OPer.  Is there really a great differences between FPS and TPS? [/quote]

Mostly that argument was due to modifying the current engine as his old post made it sound like he expected ME 3 to be an FPS, though in reality he just worded it wrong.

There also is a pretty big gameplay difference, but that would take awhile to show the alternatives.

Mostly it has to do with camera perspective and how the enemies react.  The enemies tend to act quite a bit different in 3rd person games because they have to have more animation than in 1st person games.
[/quote]

Given that I was being feceitous about the invalidation based on a terminiology slip. FPS's do 'play' fairly differently. But the overall mechanics and design elements are very simillar (it's not like the differance between RTS and TBS for instance, or TPSRPG and FPS). So Onyx was correct when he pointed out that ME3 was not going to be a FPS after I declared that if it continues developing as it has from ME1->2, that it would become one in 3 (when I meant to say TPS).

Most of the other rebuttals about dissapoint have been limited to, "deal with it", "shut up h8er", and the ever popular variation on pretending that the criticiizer wants to "return to awful gameplay moment X", when in fact the critizer neither mentions nor wants anything of the sort. I was just trying to plug the FPS gap in yours staement, because it actually has merit.
[/quote]
[/quote]


jasontko wrote:

In Oblivion it was easier to aim in FPS than TPS but it really did not have an impact on how you view the story,  So I cant agree with your statment.?  Whether its TPS or FPS its the same story.

Dont know why this will not quote correctly.

Modifié par jasonontko, 21 mars 2010 - 05:11 .

[KainrycKarr]

Hello, i am a bird, FAPFAPFAP

[BaladasDemnevanni]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

OK stand alone dialogue from ME2 is no more or less better than stand alone dialogue from ME1. 1. But the fact that you can run the mill dry even when you have 2 main missions left to go sucks. 2. The only way to advance a story of a character is through dialogue, whether internal or audible, and interactions with others, not headshots. 3. ME2 had more headshots as opposed to Shepard growing as a character. 4. And even then, a good portion of the cutscenes didn't allow you to choose what to say.

1. True, but this happened to me in ME1 and other Bioware games. Characters run out of dialogue options. But you before said it was an issue of 'depth' and 'quality over quantity'. I would say talking with Thane revealed more about his past, species, and Drell Culture than Tali did, with much better animations. Is this not quality over quantity? If it's an issue, spread it out more. I did it in Kotor and ME1 (instead of milking them), and the result was much more enjoyable.

2. You just admitted that the dialogue is about the same quality between one and two. Shiny head shots  
just add to the goodnesss.

3. How does Shepard grow as a character in ME1? Examples. I played him as a ruthless renegade throughout. I didn't feel too much growth from him upon becoming a Spectre. Hell, the beacon imbibed him with the Prothean Culture yet he seems unaffected most of the time.

4. Are we really going to start with this? Neither game captures fully the range of options you can express in words. There are times even in ME1 where I would select a dialogue option and it wouldn't capture the exact expression I wanted from Shepard. That's the problem when you are given a dialogue wheel instead of a set list of responses to choose from.

[Reptilian Rob]

epoch_ wrote...

Amazing, simply amazing. +20

[Karstedt]

Mr.BlazenGlazen wrote...

So your saying the game fails as a rpg, but you like playing it, therefore you complain about it?

That's missing an important part of the equation. He complains because he wishes a good game in a series he likes would reclaim it's lost RPGness. We dissapointed, want to be heard; so at the very least, BW won't go into ME3 thinking, "Why bother with depth at all, clearly everyone prefers a simple well executed TPS with good writing and cinematics to an involved RPG with a TPS combat system". Us RPGers feel like we're losing a jewel to the realm of mindless action. We are very lucky if we see 2 good RPG's per year. Good action shooter's are a dime a dozen in comparison. So it's understandable that we want to keep ME on our side. And yes, we will ****** and moan and kick and scream when we see it crossing the line out of our genre.

[Sigma Tauri]

Karstedt wrote...
That's missing an important part of the equation. He complains because he wishes a good game in a series he likes would reclaim it's lost RPGness. We dissapointed, want to be heard; so at the very least, BW won't go into ME3 thinking, "Why bother with depth at all, clearly everyone prefers a simple well executed TPS with good writing and cinematics to an involved RPG with a TPS combat system". Us RPGers feel like we're losing a jewel to the realm of mindless action. We are very lucky if we see 2 good RPG's per year. Good action shooter's are a dime a dozen in comparison. So it's understandable that we want to keep ME on our side. And yes, we will ****** and moan and kick and scream when we see it crossing the line out of our genre.

Hahahahahahaha! That's exactly the same sentiments a particularly notorious elitist RPG community feels about Mass Effect.

Modifié par monkeycamoran, 21 mars 2010 - 05:22 .