Support NeoGAF

[Sub_Level]

I'll never get why ME2 is considered a better game than ME3. Anyone here wanna discuss it?

In ME2 you cannot mix and match any weapon with any class. You have to spend time doing bypass minigames. You cannot mod any weapons. There aren't as much enemy variety as ME3. There's no multiplayer. The loyalty missions are all daddy issues or revenge, or a combination of both. And the scanning...oh god the scanning.

The only thing I can give ME2 is that the DLC was there to add value to the game and wasn't that important to the plot, as opposed to ME3 where EA and Bioware insisted that you had to pay extra for really cool stuff.

 

[Count of Monte Sawed-Off]

I'll never get why ME2 is considered a better game than ME3. Anyone here wanna discuss it?

In ME2 you cannot mix and match any weapon with any class. You have to spend time doing bypass minigames. You cannot mod any weapons. There aren't as much enemy variety as ME3. There's no multiplayer. The loyalty missions are all daddy issues or revenge, or a combination of both. And the scanning...oh god the scanning.

The only thing I can give ME2 is that the DLC was there to add value to the game and wasn't that important to the plot, as opposed to ME3 where EA and Bioware insisted that you had to pay extra for really cool stuff.

I'm not sure either. Aside from the ending, I thought ME3 was a much better game.

 

[Lime]

Thanks for the write-up, EatChildren. It's interesting to read about the development of the studio throughout its more rough years during NWN, TOR, ME1, and DA2.

 

[Sou Da]

Shocked that the X-Men RPG didn't happen but Sonic of all things did.

 

[thechristoph]

ME3 "Considered numerous facets of the game as part of the "ending", but realise people weigh on the last 30 seconds or so."

That's always how I saw it but everybody was just like "bloo bloo star child bloo bloo no final boss bloo bloo my choices don't matter" when the consequences of your choices were all over that damn game. Now it was little more than surface level stuff because it makes no sense to create several games worth of content for every possible permutation. ME3 was a fucking masterpiece.

DA2 "- Feel the biggest mistake was reusing environments and pretending that they were different. Poorly handled asset and area reuse, trying to pass off copies as new places. Consider it a very valid criticism."

I'd like for them to take another step toward honesty here and talk about just what the fuck they were thinking here. Did they really expect to fool anyone by reusing the same levels with rocks in the way of paths to funnel you in different directions. The story and character of that game were so cool, at least in my memory, but the games going to have to stay there.

 

[Poodlestrike]

I'll never get why ME2 is considered a better game than ME3. Anyone here wanna discuss it?

In ME2 you cannot mix and match any weapon with any class. You have to spend time doing bypass minigames. You cannot mod any weapons. There aren't as much enemy variety as ME3. There's no multiplayer. The loyalty missions are all daddy issues or revenge, or a combination of both. And the scanning...oh god the scanning.

The only thing I can give ME2 is that the DLC was there to add value to the game and wasn't that important to the plot, as opposed to ME3 where EA and Bioware insisted that you had to pay extra for really cool stuff.

The one (big) legit complaint I've seen was about the autodialogue and reduction in dialogue options. In basically all other ways, ME3 is absolutely an improvement. Damn shame it never gets credit for it.

I will say tho that I loved the loyalty missions. They may have all been daddy issues or revenge (or both), but damned if there wasn't some great writing there.

 

[Hasphat'sAnts]

Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic:
- Were in talks to do an X-Men RPG, Lord of the Rings game, and other major licenses at the time.
- LucasArts suggested doing something set between the movies, but BioWare wanted more creative freedom.
- Once locked in rarely felt constricted by LucasArts in creative freedoms.
- Aimed to make a more cinematic experience than Baldur's Gate, akin to the movies.
- The Sixth Sense and Fight Club influenced the twist.
- Never expected the twist to be as well received as it was, as the internal team reaction was lukewarm.

Hahaha. Blew my 14 year old mind tho.

 

[michaelius]

Dragon Age II:
- Feel the biggest mistake was reusing environments and pretending that they were different. Poorly handled asset and area reuse, trying to pass off copies as new places. Consider it a very valid criticism.
- 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.

Well I'm glad they dropped DA2 was fine logic - if they see why it sucked so badly that gives us some hope for the future.

 

[Heshinsi]

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.

The ending wasn't the only thing I personally felt was wrong with the game. It just amplified it. I think the way they made most non-companion side quests be something you over hear, and then go and scan some random planet to receive an item, had already started to sour me on the game. By the time I got to the ending (after making me max out that Galactic Readiness bullshit meter, because they made it seem like it actually mattered), it just made me go, "well fuck you too Bioware!"

Oh and things like how they redacted certain choices you made in earlier games, made me feel annoyed as hell. "Wait, you killed the last Rachni queen and therefore wiped out their species? Lol Cerberus found another egg!" Speaking of Cerberus, these motherfuckers go from barely mentioned terrorist group in ME1, to a galactic powerhouse that can shadow you everywhere by ME3.

 

[hank_tree]

I'll never get why ME2 is considered a better game than ME3. Anyone here wanna discuss it?

In ME2 you cannot mix and match any weapon with any class. You have to spend time doing bypass minigames. You cannot mod any weapons. There aren't as much enemy variety as ME3. There's no multiplayer. The loyalty missions are all daddy issues or revenge, or a combination of both. And the scanning...oh god the scanning.

The only thing I can give ME2 is that the DLC was there to add value to the game and wasn't that important to the plot, as opposed to ME3 where EA and Bioware insisted that you had to pay extra for really cool stuff.

I'm not even an ME3 ending hater or anything but the story in ME2 is much better than ME3 overall. I think most people agree with that. There are some minor gameplay improvements in 3, as you mentioned, but most people are with Mass Effect for the story first and foremost.

 

[Ushay]

- Mass Effect Andromeda
- Jade Empire 2
- Next Dragon Age
- New Star Wars RPG

Bring back the glory Bioware!

 

[Anoxida]

I'm not sure either. Aside from the ending, I thought ME3 was a much better game.

Agree 100%. ME3 just a better game than ME2. Also The Citdadel is the GOAT of DLCs, not even the old hunters come close. ME3 with extended cut and The Citadel DLC is the experience we all deserved and more but I guess most people never got around to play it.

 

[chrominance]

I'll never get why ME2 is considered a better game than ME3. Anyone here wanna discuss it?

In ME2 you cannot mix and match any weapon with any class. You have to spend time doing bypass minigames. You cannot mod any weapons. There aren't as much enemy variety as ME3. There's no multiplayer. The loyalty missions are all daddy issues or revenge, or a combination of both. And the scanning...oh god the scanning.

The only thing I can give ME2 is that the DLC was there to add value to the game and wasn't that important to the plot, as opposed to ME3 where EA and Bioware insisted that you had to pay extra for really cool stuff.

I think Mass Effect 2 benefits from having fewer expectations. It's the middle part of a trilogy, so if storylines are left unwrapped or certain bits from the first game aren't mentioned, it's easy to handwave off as "well maybe this will be important later." All those expectations then land on Mass Effect 3, which has to find a way to reconcile all the choices you've made over two long games into something that doesn't implode as soon as you poke at it.

For example, the game can't assume that certain characters are going to be alive by the time you get to Mass Effect 3. So various characters and their loyalty missions in ME3 feel really tacked on, because the game has to be able to continue without them. The ME2 characters get particularly short shrift because nearly all of them are expendable, so they each occupy their own bizarre isolated space in the game with very little to do in the main plot.

Also, in terms of "the player controls the ending," Mass Effect 3 doesn't do that well at showing you how this works. I agree with Bioware in seeing the ending as more than that single choice at the end; to me the ending was also the last bit where you essentially say goodbye to all your companions and each one has a unique bit of dialogue for you. But it's easy to miss that all that stuff is in theory tailored to your story, so the only thing you notice is the one actual choice you have to make during the ending.

That wouldn't be so bad except that Mass Effect 2 is the exact opposite: its ending is almost completely constructed out of choices you make just before the ending. Certain things influence this beforehand, of course--did you finish character X's loyalty mission, for example--but it works in an obviously deterministic way. Also, the consequences are more varied and more personal, so there's a greater illusion of choice and a deeper impact to those choices. On some level, that's always going to hit ME3 hard; when the choice you have to make is about the entire universe, it's always going to feel abstract by comparison to ME2.

I like ME3, and think that game is at least ME2's equal until the very end, but I see why people think it's worse.

 

[Dalibor68]

I'll never get why ME2 is considered a better game than ME3. Anyone here wanna discuss it?

In ME2 you cannot mix and match any weapon with any class. You have to spend time doing bypass minigames. You cannot mod any weapons. There aren't as much enemy variety as ME3. There's no multiplayer. The loyalty missions are all daddy issues or revenge, or a combination of both. And the scanning...oh god the scanning.

The only thing I can give ME2 is that the DLC was there to add value to the game and wasn't that important to the plot, as opposed to ME3 where EA and Bioware insisted that you had to pay extra for really cool stuff.

Sidequest quality, writing, more focused and personal story

 

[Springy]

Great summary, thanks. Only one thing I don't get:

Dragon Age II
- Were working on the concept that would later become Dragon Age: Inquisition at the time, but were asked to turn it around quicker in part due to The Old Republic not doing as well as expected.

DAII came out quite a while before TOR, so how could the former be rushed because the latter wasn't performing well?

 

[JeffZero]

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.

 

[Gully State]

Can't say I'm surprised that JE's lore of Chinese mythology was based on Kung fu movies and what seems to be a Japanese themed western fantasy role playing game in five rings...if they're going to revisit the IP, hopefully they do it right this time ..

 

[ObsidianG]

Poor DAII "Left mental scars" . I see how it was a huge shift from the DAO roots, but the action pace combat was so satisfying! I get that the reused assets for a story spanning over 10 years, but I was able to rationalize it as Hawke's influence helps him tise to prominence.

Weird how the more linear nature of DA2 and ME2 made them my favorites of their respective trilogies, but I'm weird like that

Thanks for the great summary OP!

 

[A-V-B]

Can't say I'm surprised that JE's lore of Chinese mythology was based on Kung fu movies and what seems to be a Japanese themed western fantasy role playing game in five rings...if they're going to revisit the IP, hopefully they do it right this time ..

Some more accuracy would be nice. But I hope they keep the game world fun.

 

[valouris]

Can somebody elaborate on the doctors bits? Totally out of left field for me.

 

[Metroidvania]

- Feel that because the whole game is about making choices and controlling the character, losing that agency damages the premise, and that was a fundamental issue with the ending more than just the dialogue. People want to pick their own ending.
- Were only just getting used to social media, had issue handling the ending criticism being a hot topic.

Gee, ya think? I still remember them trying to scramble to put out the fires on Twitter, only to have it completely backfire in their face with their CMs at the time.

I also entirely fail to see how they bypassed the ending issue with the premise of 'well, the whole game is you closing off the story!'

That's such a silly argument in the context of the love people had for the franchise - people don't ONLY care about the Quarians/Geth, the Asari, or whatever...they care about the damn characters, lol. And then having it all rendered moot from a literal (cyber) deus ex machina showing up....and having the implication of the rest of your crew crash land on an abandoned world....

Fuck Casey Hudson and Mac Walters.

Spoiler

I'll never stop being bitter about this game, lol

 

[Sub_Level]

Spoiler

I'll never stop being bitter about this game, lol

I felt the same, but on a recent playthrough I used a couple pc mods to modify the ending.

All is well for me now. GOAT trilogy.

 

[ObsidianG]

Can somebody elaborate on the doctors bits? Totally out of left field for me.

If memory serves me, the founders of Bioware studios met back in medical school and both had a passion for gaming, became friends, and they decided to actually pursue it as a side hobby while practicing as physicians!

 

[jayu26]

Mass Effect 3:
- Feel that because the whole game is about making choices and controlling the character, losing that agency damages the premise, and that was a fundamental issue with the ending more than just the dialogue. People want to pick their own ending.

No no. You guys learned the wrong lesson. We want meaningful consequences (or at least perception of consequences) of our choices.

 

[golem]

No no. You guys learned the wrong lesson. We want meaningful consequences (or at least perception of consequences) of our choices.

The Bioware way: listen to criticisms, learn the wrong lessons. Expecting more of this fuckery from Andromeda

 

[nel e nel]

I'll never get why ME2 is considered a better game than ME3. Anyone here wanna discuss it?

In ME2 you cannot mix and match any weapon with any class. You have to spend time doing bypass minigames. You cannot mod any weapons. There aren't as much enemy variety as ME3. There's no multiplayer. The loyalty missions are all daddy issues or revenge, or a combination of both. And the scanning...oh god the scanning.

The only thing I can give ME2 is that the DLC was there to add value to the game and wasn't that important to the plot, as opposed to ME3 where EA and Bioware insisted that you had to pay extra for really cool stuff.

Noah Caldwell Gervais has an excellent deep dive in the entire series. One thing I found interesting is the idea that the trilogy isn't a trilogy, and that ME2 & 3 are essentially two halves of one game.

https://youtu.be/hct5WeBmsUM

It's long, but worth it.

Personally speaking, I was less bothered by the ending, and more bothered by the overall lack of urgency in the whole game. Reapers are tearing the galaxy a new one, and Shepherd is all "Hey! I found these dog tags for you."

 

[TheUnsunghero26]

They talk about it humorously, how Microsoft didn't "get it", and kept offering suggestions to distance if from Halo.

Reading the article now, it's pretty funny to think Microsoft was the one pushing for more a "non-confrontational" approach. I think most of us would think a big publisher would want more action. If I recall, Mass Effect was pitched and picked up by MS in late 2003-early 2004,which would have been before Halo 2 even released.

When they say they changed the combat and UI 2 months before launch, I think the thing they added was the weapon and power wheel. I went back and watched a demo of the game from GameSpot during E3 2007, and all the powers and weapon changes were mapped to the dpad and buttons on the 360 controller, with no pausing the combat. It's funny to think how one of the series staples was added last minute. Though it sounds like Andromeda is dropping the power wheel for something more inline with what ME1 originally had.

 

[Poodlestrike]

Noah Caldwell Gervais has an excellent deep dive in the entire series. One thing I found interesting is the idea that the trilogy isn't a trilogy, and that ME2 & 3 are essentially two halves of one game.

https://youtu.be/hct5WeBmsUM

It's long, but worth it.

Personally speaking, I was less bothered by the ending, and more bothered by the overall lack of urgency in the whole game. Reapers are tearing the galaxy a new one, and Shepherd is all "Hey! I found these dog tags for you."

Honestly, the only reason this interpretation works is because ME2's plot is basically a side story. Don't get me wrong, I loved the game, but it punts literally everything from ME1 forward onto ME3, while doing very little actual prepwork of its own.

 

[nel e nel]

Honestly, the only reason this interpretation works is because ME2's plot is basically a side story. Don't get me wrong, I loved the game, but it punts literally everything from ME1 forward onto ME3, while doing very little actual prepwork of its own.

Not sure if you watched, but was coming more from a mechanics perspective than narrative. His reasoning is that the gameplay changes from 1->2 were much more drastic than from 2->3, which were more of a refinement than an overhaul. Having Shepherd die at the beginning was a way for them to effectively hit the reset button and introduce the new mechanics. Your Shepherd also starts ME3 with the level and stats you end with in ME2.

 

[EmCeeGramr]

I actually mostly disliked Mass Effect 3 from beginning to end. Every mission is either Cerberus attacking a base or husks on a rubble planet (except for the geth missions on Rannoch, the best part of the game) which makes everything feel far more samey than ME2, the side mission system is nonsense, the ME2 character side missions are almost all very forgettable, Kai Leng is an embarrassment, character arcs wrap up in very abrupt and convenient ways, and once again the status quo of the universe (what the Reapers are motivated by, what Cerberus is exactly, the geth and Legion just completely changing their very unique philosophy and lifestyle just 'cause they felt like it - and EDI then saying that that was the objectively right thing to do) changes on a whim to fit the main story, which feels super unnatural from the rushed beginning to the sputtering end. The multiplayer was the best thing about it.

 

[A-V-B]

I actually mostly disliked Mass Effect 3 from beginning to end. Every mission is either Cerberus attacking a base or husks on a rubble planet (except for the geth missions on Rannoch, the best part of the game) which makes everything feel far more samey than ME2, the side mission system is nonsense, the ME2 character side missions are almost all very forgettable, Kai Leng is an embarrassment, character arcs wrap up in very abrupt and convenient ways, and once again the status quo of the universe (what the Reapers are motivated by, what Cerberus is exactly, the geth and Legion just completely changing their very unique philosophy and lifestyle just 'cause they felt like it - and EDI then saying that that was the objectively right thing to do) changes on a whim to fit the main story, which feels super unnatural from the rushed beginning to the sputtering end. The multiplayer was the best thing about it.

That about sums it up. Rannoch was good. I kinda liked Tuchanka, especially anything to do with Mordin.

 

[Crankshaft]

Tuchanka was the peak of the game for me, everything after that was not as exciting so I felt like the story just coasted it's way down to the end.

 

[TheRed]

I really disliked DA: Inquistion it was one of my biggest regretted purchases, but it was their most successful. I hope they fix the criticisms of that game going forward and don't just copy that formula to everything else.

 

[fargofallout]

I really disliked DA: Inquistion it was one of my biggest regretted purchases, but it was their most successful. I hope they fix the criticisms of that game going forward and don't just copy that formula to everything else.

Yeah. I'm bummed the game did well because I thought it was pretty bad. In an abstract sense, it wouldn't take many changes to make it into a good game, but those changes would take a LOT of work (make combat more engaging, streamline inventory management, make sidequests not the worst thing in the universe, and make the world interesting to just explore). I hope they take the time to make those changes.

Something I wish would have been addressed in the interview (maybe it was, but it isn't in the summary) is how they handled DLC with the Mass Effect trilogy. I'd forgotten how some of the Mass Effect 3 DLC makes the game better and makes a lot of stuff make more sense. I don't yet know if I have any interest in Andromeda, but I really hope any DLC they release is just side content - not directly related to the main story.

 

[EatChildren]

I actually mostly disliked Mass Effect 3 from beginning to end. Every mission is either Cerberus attacking a base or husks on a rubble planet (except for the geth missions on Rannoch, the best part of the game) which makes everything feel far more samey than ME2, the side mission system is nonsense, the ME2 character side missions are almost all very forgettable, Kai Leng is an embarrassment, character arcs wrap up in very abrupt and convenient ways, and once again the status quo of the universe (what the Reapers are motivated by, what Cerberus is exactly, the geth and Legion just completely changing their very unique philosophy and lifestyle just 'cause they felt like it - and EDI then saying that that was the objectively right thing to do) changes on a whim to fit the main story, which feels super unnatural from the rushed beginning to the sputtering end. The multiplayer was the best thing about it.

Subjectively I don't feel the extent of disappointment and dislike that you do, but I empathise entirely with all of this, as it resonates perfectly with the root of most of my criticisms.

 

[Yabberwocky]

Poor DAII "Left mental scars" . I see how it was a huge shift from the DAO roots, but the action pace combat was so satisfying! I get that the reused assets for a story spanning over 10 years, but I was able to rationalize it as Hawke's influence helps him tise to prominence.

Weird how the more linear nature of DA2 and ME2 made them my favorites of their respective trilogies, but I'm weird like that

Thanks for the great summary OP!

I enjoyed DA2's combat, too. DA:O's combat was a lot better on PC, but really, really rough on console. It touches my cold, dead heart to see some DA2 love in this thread! (Well, love might a strong word, more in the vicinity of 'like'/'mild tolerance'. I'll still take it!)

 

[Taruranto]

I actually mostly disliked Mass Effect 3 from beginning to end. Every mission is either Cerberus attacking a base or husks on a rubble planet (except for the geth missions on Rannoch, the best part of the game) which makes everything feel far more samey than ME2, the side mission system is nonsense, the ME2 character side missions are almost all very forgettable, Kai Leng is an embarrassment, character arcs wrap up in very abrupt and convenient ways, and once again the status quo of the universe (what the Reapers are motivated by, what Cerberus is exactly, the geth and Legion just completely changing their very unique philosophy and lifestyle just 'cause they felt like it - and EDI then saying that that was the objectively right thing to do) changes on a whim to fit the main story, which feels super unnatural from the rushed beginning to the sputtering end. The multiplayer was the best thing about it.

I think ME3 story is stupid and borderline nonsensical, but at least it's entertaining, which it's more than I can say about all of ME2. Heck, it even had some nice moments here and there (Mostly stuff removed from Cerberus and the Reaper conflicts as far as possible)


Also ME3 didn't betray my expectation as ME2, in a sense that I expected nothing out of ME3. I genuinely enjoyed ME1 (6/10, it's OK), so I was excited about ME2 since I thought it was going to fix ME1 mistakes and improve it, instead I got fucking space corridors and the franchise got murdered.

 

[JeffZero]

For what it's worth, fidelio, I kind of like Dragon Age 2. It's my least favorite BioWare game I've sampled but I am a huge, huge fan of their output and there's some stuff even in Hawke's quest which clicks with me. Here's an excerpt from a review I wrote a ways back:

Dragon Age 2 could have been glorious. With the right development phase it would have been tremendous. BioWare clearly has it in mind to subvert expectations and tell an "in-between" tale in its dark fantasy universe with a lot of heart. The cast is mostly great and every big idea here is refreshing. It's just that almost none of these things are executed as well as they needed. Enemies arrive as if from outer space and fall beneath my blade in rapid strings of samey mashy strikes. Pivotal plot points feel cramped, confined, and too thin in number. The time skips aren't properly reflected in a city which genuinely feels lived-in and altered by the passage of years.

Every one of these problems -- and all sorts of others -- show that the team had the right idea in mind but were cut off at the seams by rough scheduling. And yet, I was almost prepared to forgive it all as I eagerly entered the game's third act, excited to see how it all comes together for the finale. Because I play BioWare to find the answer to these questions. Because I care. But then, quite fittingly, I came to discover that the third act felt rushed. Over in a flash. I should have seen it coming.

I like Dragon Age 2. But I have to struggle to express why. Everything that might have been glorious is subpar. There are moments here, down-to-earth human moments between characters of every made-up little fantasy race, that I will never forget. But I can't give a game with moments of excellence hurdled between long stretches of disappointment a higher score than a 6.

 

[EatChildren]

Going by the interview I do wonder if the ultimate direction of Dragon Age II, the more intimate story set within a city, was maybe a curious benefit from the restricted production schedule. Sometimes being forced to work within strict limitations ignites creative juices. That they note a very general concept of Inquisition was born from the original intentions for Dragon Age II makes me think what we got was very much a specific phenomena.

But 14 months is definitely far, far too short to make these kinds of games and the impact is evident. BioWare aren't coy at all about this.

 

[TheYanger]

Jade Empire 2 still makes me quiver with anticipation. Even fi there's nothing to anticipate. The first game was a fucking gem that gets far too little love even today.

DA2...what can you say. That short dev time really shows. Like EatChildren said above I suspect that was largely why we got the whole Kirkwall thing, which I actually quite aprpeciate for what it was, but it can't save a game that just is not fun at all. A bigger investment of time and money into a more personal feeling game like that would be awesome and could be done very well, but I suspect isn't going to happen any time soon.

 

[Wonderllama]

Bioware is my favorite developer. I love all their games, even Dragon Age 2 (obvious flaws aside, sarcastic/jerk Hawke was massively entertaining. I adored the rest of the cast too).

Still, I worry about their future. The video game industry is so damn cutthroat now. Unless you make huge blockbusters, you're in danger of getting shut down. How many companies have we seen fall lately? I don't want Bioware to suffer like that, but their production seems slow for the last couple years. Maybe too slow for EA's liking? I'm betting there's a lot at stake with the new Mass Effect.

 

[Sub_Level]

Bioware is my favorite developer. I love all their games, even Dragon Age 2 (obvious flaws aside, sarcastic/jerk Hawke was massively entertaining. I adored the rest of the cast too).

Still, I worry about their future. The video game industry is so damn cutthroat now. Unless you make huge blockbusters, you're in danger of getting shut down. How many companies have we seen fall lately? I don't want Bioware to suffer like that, but their production seems slow for the last couple years. Maybe too slow for EA's liking? I'm betting there's a lot at stake with the new Mass Effect.

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.

 

[jonjonaug]

It wasn't implemented "not perfectly", it was an utter shit mmo grindfest. Until they finally acknowledge that honestly instead of these cookiecutter "it wasn't done perfectly" or "there were some lessons to be learned" they won't win me back. And I don't see how they can claim "reassert an aspect of world exploration" when there was nothing to explore other than mmo filler crap.

ME3 "Considered numerous facets of the game as part of the "ending", but realise people weigh on the last 30 seconds or so."

That's always how I saw it but everybody was just like "bloo bloo star child bloo bloo no final boss bloo bloo my choices don't matter" when the consequences of your choices were all over that damn game. Now it was little more than surface level stuff because it makes no sense to create several games worth of content for every possible permutation. ME3 was a fucking masterpiece.

DA2 "- Feel the biggest mistake was reusing environments and pretending that they were different. Poorly handled asset and area reuse, trying to pass off copies as new places. Consider it a very valid criticism."

I'd like for them to take another step toward honesty here and talk about just what the fuck they were thinking here. Did they really expect to fool anyone by reusing the same levels with rocks in the way of paths to funnel you in different directions. The story and character of that game were so cool, at least in my memory, but the games going to have to stay there.

No one's going to say in an interview "yeah our game that's still available for sale everywhere had some dogshit parts to it", especially when the people giving the interview might not have worked on those teams and made those decisions.

 

[Jibbajabbawockky]

This is what I originally thought too (EA needing a fast turnaround on payout for DA's original delays), but the interview states it was more for making up fiscal softness on SWTOR.

It's interesting that they gave them tons of time for DAI then. I would imagine they got that due to a number of factors - Skyrim success (showing market potential), DAO sales perspective (showing the drop off ffrom DAO, Bioware's bestselling game at the time, and DA2), converting over to Frostbite, generational transition, etc. Not that DAI is amazing or anything, but the amount of time granted was nice to see from the pub side.

I always got the impression that at least a big reason for the big delay and time given to DAI was in no small part so that BioWare could get some heavy lifting done on retrofitting Frostbite to work with all the RPG systems BioWare would need within one of their games. Things like the cinematic cameras and dialogue systems and so forth that flat out didn't exist in Frostbite before and they can likely pass all that knowledge on to other BioWare teams using Frostbite in the future.

I really disliked DA: Inquistion it was one of my biggest regretted purchases, but it was their most successful. I hope they fix the criticisms of that game going forward and don't just copy that formula to everything else.

Mind you, its supposedly BioWare's biggest launch. I distinctly remember some EA/BioWare press release around DA2's launch saying a similar thing how at the time it was their most successful launch. Games like Inquisition have the benefit of launching on every platform, even 360 and PS3, so naturally you'd expect it to be their biggest launch when its launching on everything. Its probably done well in any event but who knows how well it lasted beyond its launch period.

I'm still super skeptical of Modern BioWare's ability to smartly respond to criticism without just having some kneejerk reaction in the opposite way creating a dozen more issues. Seems like they fail to iterate on their sequels and instead try to "fix" problems by simply removing features they saw as problematic and in the process create more issues. I just want a BioWare sequel that takes their approach like BG2- just create content. Don't try to reinvent the wheel, just take what works and make engaging content.

That's what I don't get about DA2. Maybe the rug was pulled out from under them but if they had any inkling they were working on a super short development window why didn't they just leave things like the engine from Origins and just pump out content like they did with BG2? I know its not the same but BG1 to BG2's launch was about 20 months between games.

BioWare has made some of my very favorite games ever but the last one I really loved was probably Dragon Age: Origins or ME2. I love some of the characters and world of DA but damn if Inquisition didn't go really sour real fast after finishing it. I am just super skeptical as to where their overall goals as a studio are right now since I feel like the bigger their games get, the less personality they have. I would love to see BioWare build a smaller Infinity Engine style DA game but that's never going to happen so long as EA is in control. Add in so many of the old school developers of the BG era having left BioWare and I don't know how much of the BioWare that made BG2 or KOTOR or DA:Origins is really even left at this point.

 

[RDreamer]

No one's going to say in an interview "yeah our game that's still available for sale everywhere had some dogshit parts to it", especially when the people giving the interview might not have worked on those teams and made those decisions.

Not only that, but Bioware knows they have a ton of fans that really love the games that Neogaf likes to shit on. Even DA2 has quite a lot of fans within the Bioware fandom as a whole. And while I'm sure most of them would understand some criticism from the developer on their favorite games, I'm not sure they could ever outright say the things that would make GAF actually say "Yeah they get it!"

ME3 "Considered numerous facets of the game as part of the "ending", but realise people weigh on the last 30 seconds or so."

That's always how I saw it but everybody was just like "bloo bloo star child bloo bloo no final boss bloo bloo my choices don't matter" when the consequences of your choices were all over that damn game. Now it was little more than surface level stuff because it makes no sense to create several games worth of content for every possible permutation. ME3 was a fucking masterpiece.

Same here. I loved ME3, and never really got the extent of the hate the ending got. To me ME3 itself was the ending, not just the last 5 minutes.

 

[Speely]

If BioWare doesn't revisit the Jade Empire setting before I die, then no matter how great my life becomes between now and my personal end of days, there will still be one lamentation with which I will go into my grave.

 

[jmood88]

I will forever want Jade Empire 2.

 

[Obliterator]

Really interesting how FFVII had a big influence on them, and they looked at Sqaresoft as a rival. Never would have known that before.

 

[Crimson_Echidna]

Mass Effect 3:
- Oblivious to the criticism of the ending as it was being developed, and just after launch, due to critical acclaim. Suddenly a wave of criticism.
- Considered numerous facets of the game as part of the "ending", but realise people weigh on the last 30 seconds or so.
- Feel that because the whole game is about making choices and controlling the character, losing that agency damages the premise, and that was a fundamental issue with the ending more than just the dialogue. People want to pick their own ending.
- Were only just getting used to social media, had issue handling the ending criticism being a hot topic.
- A lot of support from other developers for BioWare's accomplishments in seeing the game through, but some of that support turned against them when they announced the Extended Cut would patch in extra content.
- Clarified they were not aiming to add a new ending or anything like that, but instead add clarity, as feedback from fans was that they wanted to know more as to what happened.

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."

 

[spleenpoker]

Thinking about playing jade empire soon but this part has me concerned:

Rough development, feel a lot of content didn't work out as well as it could, complex character stories hidden that they feel most players probably didn't discover

How hard will they be to discover?