AnotherDayAnotherDollar
Banned
They are making a new Star Wars RPG game, right?
They are making a new Star Wars RPG game, right?
Not to reopen old wombs but I honestly have no idea how Bioware could act like Deer in Headlights over the backlash after spending years hyping up how choice matters and how the player would totally get a conclusive "Golden Ending."
I wonder about what perspectives we will have later on about Andromeda's development. 5 years is a long time of development and the marketing of the game has been incredibly rocky, so I could imagine development has at least hit some snags here and there.
You tend to become pretty blind to your own product in development, especially closer to the end you get (which is why Naughty Dog for example thought tLoU might tank completely). There's a lot factors that make it a reality, but seeing a product transform completely, whilst never being able to view in any close form to how players would see it, to making millions of gut decisions during the project contribute to the effect dramatically.Not to reopen old wombs but I honestly have no idea how Bioware could act like Deer in Headlights over the backlash after spending years hyping up how choice matters and how the player would totally get a conclusive "Golden Ending."
Gonna take a wild guess that the two main ones will be:
Similar complaints about open world as Inquisition though will probably still be considered an improvement in comparison.
Safe, generic, and boring story.
They are making a new Star Wars RPG game, right?
Never read that before, but I always just assumed it was "organic software", and it would always make me envision a cyborg.
This always really irked me. I never really understood the massive backlash and crying over the last few minutes of the game. Yeah, the outtro was pretty bad, but it's like I've said before: the ending didn't somehow negate the enjoyment someone had that led up to that point, and I also felt like there were multiple points in the game where it could have simply ended already. But it just kept going, for better or worse.
Why did this irk you? The best analogy for the ending ever was said by someone else and I still remember it. Imagine you have a bowl of cereal. It is the best tasting cereal. It brings back memories of the past, it is sugary and the milk tastes good and you are enjoying yourself. Then at the end, you see a giant turd just as the cereal is done. You've already eaten the cereal, you didn't see the turd nor taste it and yet, it is there, you can't not think about the turd, no longer is this the best cereal you've had, but a turd filled cereal that makes you ill and queasy etc.
This was someone else analogy but it made sense. The ending was complete garbage. It did negate everything you did. Years spent, multiple playthroughs of hours, all for some ham fisted cookie cutter ending that made little sense. Went against everything they made about the game. They acknowledge it above. A series made around choice and world building and whatnot and yet they remove it all at the end.
and it wasn't "just" the ending. Tuchanka was cool, the quarian/geth was ok though way too convenient but a lot of the other stuff really wasn't well written story wise. The "superweapon" plot point, Earth and the kid, the ridiculous cyber ninja that had no introduction, the council and citadel, ect.
As an epic conclusion it fell kind of flat and they often ignored their own established lore. I liked ME3 overall but in terms of narrative it was pretty weak.
Dragon Age II:
- Admit they tried to streamline it too far, in part to meet the tight production timeline. Failed to deliver on variety, a strong plot and premise. Over focus on action in the new combat system.
Dragon Age: Inquisition:
- Most successful game launch at BioWare.
Was there a reason for this? It seems that ME3 had completely different writers than ME1 & 2.
Well, Andromeda is meant to have a story that largely concludes itself within one game (not to say it won't leave any room for sequels). So if it bombs then at least we won't be left hanging. That counts for something.
The chances that Andromeda bombs(despite the hate on ME3 ending and the weird marketing going on right now) is almost near zero, so I don't think we have to worry about this being the last ME game lol.
They are making a new Star Wars RPG game, right?
It is zero? are you sure?
The marketing has been AWFUL so far.
I don't really have it in me right now to forge another essay on why ME2 is the #5 of all time game for me but ME3 is #4, but needless to say I absolutely adore them both. That said, ME2 is considerably more cohesively designed and its deltas are far less noticeable. ME3's peaks, however, are higher than anything in 2. ME3 is also just plain more flawed overall; conversation options can be spartan, auto-dialogue is a plague, Shepard is more or less separate shades of the same person like never before.
And yet...? 3 still narrowly, narrowly tops 2 for me. It delivers on so much that I wanted. Its critical path is far more urgent and "epic" of scope. These are obviously just personal preference things and I've seen it said time and again that the smaller scale of 2 is one of its major reasons for success. And I get that, even. But building up to the war across the first two games and then scrambling to mount a historic alliance last-ditch defense against an ancient unyielding evil is just great.
It is zero? are you sure?
The marketing has been AWFUL so far.
Wow, great write up. Might buy the digital issue to read it all. FFVII influencing BG2? First I hear about that.
When has Bioware's marketing ever been good?
Why did this irk you? The best analogy for the ending ever was said by someone else and I still remember it. Imagine you have a bowl of cereal. It is the best tasting cereal. It brings back memories of the past, it is sugary and the milk tastes good and you are enjoying yourself. Then at the end, you see a giant turd just as the cereal is done. You've already eaten the cereal, you didn't see the turd nor taste it and yet, it is there, you can't not think about the turd, no longer is this the best cereal you've had, but a turd filled cereal that makes you ill and queasy etc.
This was someone else analogy but it made sense. The ending was complete garbage. It did negate everything you did. Years spent, multiple playthroughs of hours, all for some ham fisted cookie cutter ending that made little sense. Went against everything they made about the game. They acknowledge it above. A series made around choice and world building and whatnot and yet they remove it all at the end.
Well, I enjoyed Inquisition..not sure what was so wrong with it, besides a weak 3rd act. The plot was fun for those already invested in the series (my case). Hopefully ME:A enjoys similar levels of success (likely more, being a more popular series and all) and is a good return to form too (though ME2 and ME3 were pretty damn good games already, all things considered).
They felt a lot of competitiveness, apparently, as FFVII was critically acclaimed for its strong cast of characters. Hence whey they really double downed on the companion dialogue, quests, and romances in Baldur's Gate II.
It's kinda funny to think that FFVII in turn impacted a lot of what BioWare heavily focuses on to this day.
It is zero? are you sure?
The marketing has been AWFUL so far.
It's not zero, but we haven't seen a lot from the game, what we've seen hasn't been great, and yet it still won the Golden Joystick for most anticipated game. I think it'll sell fine.
I really loved The Old Republic marketing ;_;
The chances that Andromeda bombs(despite the hate on ME3 ending and the weird marketing going on right now) is almost near zero, so I don't think we have to worry about this being the last ME game lol.
Some fans get tribal about it, I guess, but I can't think of any key development figures who do. All those 90's/early 00's cRPGs were very heavily influenced by Square RPGs. Planescape: Torment overtly so.
Interviews with Black Isle/Bioware staff from those days and today often point this out.