sgy0003 said:
As we all know, the original KOTOR was a Bioware game which was beloved by everyone. Since then, Bioware has released series of damn good action RPG Dragon Age and ME series...
I loved KotOR - back in the day. It's aged terribly in some ways, being inferior to most of the IP's that came after it.
(and no, it clearly wasn't beloved by "everyone", because nothing ever is)
Then DA: I and ME: A happened. These two games probably have one of the biggest divisible community I have every seen. Animation fiasco aside, ME: A is a debatable game amongst the gamers.
...gamer culture is kinda moronic though, isn't it? So does that matter? User scores have become a joke these days - the domain of agenda spouting whiners, where score bombing is apparently 'consumer advocacy' or a political statement, as opposed to simple petulance.
I also overreacted, at times quite moronically, to DA:I when it came out, although I had the additional indignity of first playing it 'last gen', on a version they clearly didn't give a single damn about (no warning of DLC support being dropped prior to release, either, of course). But DA:I's like all works; flawed - and that's about it. By most reliable, measured accounts ME:A refines the BS filler it peddled as 'content', and I doubt anyone could say ME:A's core gameplay wasn't superior to DA:I (ergo representing an improvement in a company's output).
So, accounting for both good AND bad games they have released, should BW be in charge of KOTOR remastered if it were to happen? Or have they lost their credibility, and therefore other developers be in charge?
As others have pointed out; it doesn't really matter on a remaster, certainly if it's just a polish. I don't see the point in going back to KotOR, though, because if it is just a polish, the shitty menus, voice acting (some of it's good, some of it's awful), and lots of the iffy writing stays in place. And if it's a remake, then that's a colossal undertaking guaranteed to rile people up for all sorts of reasons.
I suppose 'let sleeping dogs lie' sums up my attitude, regardless of what company would be responsible for it.
BoogieManFL said:
The last games BioWare truly made themselves (for the most part) was Mass Effect and to a lesser degree Dragon Age: Origins. After that, the stink of EA clings to all subsequent titles. That being DLC, more patching required, dumbing down gameplay, console port fever, etc.
So EA's responsible for ME2, then? Let me thank Mr/Mrs EA in person, should I ever meet him/her (added handshakes and gratitude for DAII and ME3). Faults aside, DA:I was a gorgeous looking and sounding game (possibly the finest score of any BioWare game, at least for me), so EA are to thank for that as well (I gather ME:A's stunning as well).
Re DLC and patching: that's not an EA issue, that's an industry wide and/or cultural issue. It's here to stay, too. An industry of patching
also allows stuff like Elite Dangerous to evolve and iterate (ditto No Man's Sky), so this ability to 'fix' or add to games is by no means just a negative.
Re dumbing down: that is largely just a subjective viewpoint, in dire need of being defined on a per case basis. If ME2 dumbed down ME1's systems, then personally, thank feck for that as 1's systems were terrible (ditto the core combat). ME3's weight/cooldown system allowed for a boatload of hybrid builds and specialised playstyles, too, and I gather that's mostly been carried over to ME:A, which bodes very well. By comparison ME1's weapon system design was simplistic as well as restrictive.
/edit
Oh, I voted no, btw - because I'd rather BioWare focused on new games or supporting current ones, not waste time on old games. I'd love a new KotOR, though, but that seems unlikely to happen.
