Will you forgive Bioware if they bomb ME3?
- Thread starter Zack Alklazaris
- Start date
Id be annoyed if they fucked it up. But either way, its just a game and i will just play something else.
Depends on what they have to say about it afterwards. If they argue and make excuses and try to tell us "why it's better this way", then yeah, I'll lose a lot of respect for them.
If they come out and admit they fucked up (like with certain aspects of Dragon Age 2), then it'll be easier to deal with and I'll "forgive" them.
If they come out and admit they fucked up (like with certain aspects of Dragon Age 2), then it'll be easier to deal with and I'll "forgive" them.
I'd be disappointed if it sucked!
That wouldn't effect me buying one of their games though!
Games generally capture my attention on their own merits. Not by who's making them.
That wouldn't effect me buying one of their games though!
Games generally capture my attention on their own merits. Not by who's making them.
NoZack Alklazaris said:
I didn't forgive them for Dragon Age 2 and not even Felicia Day will make me change my mind on that.
No. Because Mass Effect 1 was fucking great and 2 was in my opinion even better. There's absolutely no reason for them to fuck up ME3. There's no need to cash in... the Franchise has name recognition and critical acclaim now which means it's going to sell by the truck load. But since there's still blood in the water from DA2 I hope Bioware knows how their fans react when they try to pass off a half-assed product. They've got all the talent they need in every aspect, they've got all the momentum and story pushing to this moment, and they've got an ocean of people waiting for the end of the story. There's no reason in the world to not make it totally amazing and making a serious attempt to sweep every award show out there and round off your corporate earnings like a pro.
I jumped off the Bioware boat after ME2, I just didn't like anything about it. Then I re-watched Babylon 5 and re-read some Wheel of time and came o the realization that they *really* didn't put a lot of effort into creating the settings for Mass Effect OR Dragon Age.Couple this with DA2 and TOR, and I really don't have much more then a shred of hope for Bioware. It would take them coming back and making a truly excellent rpg for me to want to come back. In the meantime, there are plenty of good older rpgs out there to enjoy,
EA likes to stick its hand in the hornets' nest and then wonders why this or that game bombs or receives poor reviews. I'm not too hot about the inclusion of multiplayer (with an online pass, at that) and I'm always suspicious when I'm told that the single-player and multiplayer elements will be kept separate. More often than not, it means that the MP won't be much more than a tacked-on deathmatch mode or something with half-hearted extra modes thrown in, like Bioshock 2 was.
Considering how that business strategy hasn't work out terribly well in the past, why do they even bother? Are they trying to cater to the idiots who'll spout that "this game is dildos", to quote Skwisgaar if you can't so much as frag your bros? I've said this in another thread, but I just don't understand the point of slapping multiplayer elements on story-driven single-player franchises. It isn't because Shepard uses guns that Mass Effect automatically qualifies for a transition into the field of competitive FPSes.
Barring that, IF the story elements are solid and IF we're not treated to a half-assed cock-tease ending; then yeah. Mass Effect 3 just might be worth it.
I just hope to God they'll ditch the resource-collection minigames... I hated those so much I basically trainer'd my cargo hold full of everything five minutes after being introduced to them.
Considering how that business strategy hasn't work out terribly well in the past, why do they even bother? Are they trying to cater to the idiots who'll spout that "this game is dildos", to quote Skwisgaar if you can't so much as frag your bros? I've said this in another thread, but I just don't understand the point of slapping multiplayer elements on story-driven single-player franchises. It isn't because Shepard uses guns that Mass Effect automatically qualifies for a transition into the field of competitive FPSes.
Barring that, IF the story elements are solid and IF we're not treated to a half-assed cock-tease ending; then yeah. Mass Effect 3 just might be worth it.
I just hope to God they'll ditch the resource-collection minigames... I hated those so much I basically trainer'd my cargo hold full of everything five minutes after being introduced to them.
From what I am told they are keeping it, but they might "tweak it"IamLEAM1983 said:
This is old (2010) so it may have changed drastically by now:
Casey Hudson of BioWare confirms the return of the planet scanning mini-game, where players plunder worlds for resources for their ship.
It will be in Mass Effect 3 - "functionally" has purpose, with feedback saying it was "strangely addictive". Didn't expect fans to strip mine galaxy.
"The feedback we had prior to releasing the game was generally exactly that. It was like, 'It's strangely addictive. It's kind of therapeutic'. But there were different personality types, too," lead producer Hudson tells VideoGamer.com in an interview.
"And one of the personality types that we hadn't encountered was there were a lot of people that when they know that they can go and get resources through something like that, they literally want to mine the entire galaxy that night."
"And then, yeah, when you spend eight hours in a mini-game, it does become? there's only so much too it. And we never expected that it'd be played that way."
"We thought people would noodle in it a bit, get a few resources to get an upgrade, and then go back and do the rest of the game," he continued.
They need the mining min-game for the next sequel - it servers a vital role in feeding the player resources which can then be spent on investing in new technology. Ship upgrades and better weaponry or armour relied on several types of mineral.
"Again, when you look at the feedback, there are things that people liked about it, and functionally it serves a purpose. I don't think there's a problem with any of those."
"I think it's the way people relied on it, and the way we relied on it maybe too much in parts of the story. And also just when you think about the speed of it," noted Hudson.
Depends on whether their subsequent games are good or not. I judge a studio one game at a time; it's kind of dumb to let my feelings for ME3 affect my feelings for some other game they make.
I probably won't play Mass Effect 3 so it doesn't really matter if they botch it as far as I'm concerned. Frankly, I've never found their games to be overly great. Decent sure, most of the time I suppose, but for all of their good looks and visual polish I don't think Bioware is very talented when it comes to making the actual game or writing the story.
It's funny that Hudson says he expected players to just horse around for a while, when the only way to get the optimal ending for ME2 is to fullly upgrade the Normandy... That pretty much implies a strip-mining operation.Zack Alklazaris said:
After Dragon Age 2 and seeing footage of The Old Republic I can safely say I don't have any high expectations of this game whatsoever, so even if it turns out bad I won't give a shit because it would've lived up to my expectations, i.e. Jack shit in the first place.
Yea I must admit I practically raped the galaxy of all its resources.[/quote]IamLEAM1983 said:
I haven't forgiven them for screwing up ME2 so ME3 is a way to earn my trust again. If they bomb it, they are dead to me.
I hope to god they don't, but after Dragon Age II, if Mass Effect 3 turns out that disappointing, I fear that Bioware, due to interference or dwindling spirit, may jump the shark. And prove what I've been fearing ever sense Hawke first opened his/her mouth.