Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Which game made you give up on Bioware?

The game that made me quit Bioware forever was...


  • Total voters
    596

Talby

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Mar 15, 2008
Messages
5,507
Codex USB, 2014
Shattered Steel. :obviously:
 

Sòren

Arcane
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Messages
2,350
dragon age origins. i still remember how underwhelming it was. i thought they were aiming for something like baldurs gate 1 and 2, lots of content, cities and settlement to explore, nice quests and blabla. instead it was just a mediocre "dungeon" crawler.
 

Sizzle

Arcane
Joined
Feb 17, 2012
Messages
2,471
DA2.

Before that, their games had at least some semblance of care and effort put into them, and there were always at least a couple of elements that positively stood out.

But with DA2, it became apparent that the only way for them was (dumbing) down.
 

Zarniwoop

TESTOSTERONIC As Fuck™
Patron
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
18,651
Shadorwun: Hong Kong
Ass Effect 2 did it for me.

I know for some inexplicable reason the Kodex Konsensus is that it's better than the first one (shittier story, far less of an rpg and more shootan, no exploration, no mako, yeah of course it's better lol).

But that sealed the deal.

Playing Baldurs Gate now on my tablet and even with the shitty Infinity engine interface, it's like a breath of fresh air. Not only are there no intergalactic interracial gay romances, there are NO romances. Like a game should be. If you want a romance simulator play fucking Hatoful Boyfriend.
 

Althorion

Learned
Joined
Apr 22, 2017
Messages
111
far less of an rpg and more shootan, no exploration, no mako
That right here is your reason. First Mass Effect was a failed-from-the-start attempt to marry RPG and FPS, where mechanics didn’t play well together—too complex for a shooter and too simplified for an RPG. Second and third installations didn’t have that problem—they were just shooters. They cut down most of the crap and expanded on what it did well, transformed from mediocre mix into a good shooter. Still there was some crap that should be cut out (romances, yuck), but the less distractions you have from shooting aliens in SPAAAAAAAACE the better. At least you don’t have time to analyze the stupid plot.
 

Zarniwoop

TESTOSTERONIC As Fuck™
Patron
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
18,651
Shadorwun: Hong Kong
That right here is your reason. First Mass Effect was a failed-from-the-start attempt to marry RPG and FPS, where mechanics didn’t play well together—too complex for a shooter and too simplified for an RPG. Second and third installations didn’t have that problem—they were just shooters. They cut down most of the crap and expanded on what it did well, transformed from mediocre mix into a good shooter. Still there was some crap that should be cut out (romances, yuck), but the less distractions you have from shooting aliens in SPAAAAAAAACE the better. At least you don’t have time to analyze the stupid plot.
They were still shitty as shooters. But in addition to that they dropped the only good parts of the first one.
 

Nutria

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Mar 12, 2017
Messages
2,252
Location
한양
Strap Yourselves In
First Mass Effect was a failed-from-the-start attempt to marry RPG and FPS, where mechanics didn’t play well together—too complex for a shooter and too simplified for an RPG.

Maybe they were breaking new ground and they didn't get it perfect on the first try, but a game in the future could get the right balance? In both ME and Alpha Protocol they were close to making something great. If the shooting in those two games was a little more polished, I think they would have gotten a much better reception.
 
Joined
Nov 23, 2017
Messages
4,013
That right here is your reason. First Mass Effect was a failed-from-the-start attempt to marry RPG and FPS, where mechanics didn’t play well together—too complex for a shooter and too simplified for an RPG. Second and third installations didn’t have that problem—they were just shooters. They cut down most of the crap and expanded on what it did well, transformed from mediocre mix into a good shooter. Still there was some crap that should be cut out (romances, yuck), but the less distractions you have from shooting aliens in SPAAAAAAAACE the better. At least you don’t have time to analyze the stupid plot.


How was it too complex for a shooter?
 

Althorion

Learned
Joined
Apr 22, 2017
Messages
111
Maybe they were breaking new ground and they didn't get it perfect on the first try, but a game in the future could get the right balance?
Sure, but the question was why ME2 is regarded as better than ME1. We were comparing two existing games, not an existing game to a potential one. And out of those two, ME2 is much more into my alley—but I like mindless shooters with some epic story. Would I like it better if it was intelligent RPG instead? Possibly. But BioWare doesn’t know how to make those.

How was it too complex for a shooter?
It involved looting and crafting-like mechanics, plus your proficiency with any given weapon wasn’t a function of only your skill, but also your character stats. I personally don’t like that mixture—either give me full control and full responsibility for the effects, like in any arcade game (including shooters), or make it a tactical experience, where I tell what to do and only my character’s stats and luck decide the outcome.
So in terms of character development mechanics I much prefer simpler system from ME2 and ME3, where extra levels gave the player additional stuff to do instead of making the guns more accurate and easier to use. I also found progressive grind towards better gear not really suiting the fast-paced nature of combat in ME1.
 
Self-Ejected

buru5

Very Grumpy Dragon
Patron
Joined
Apr 9, 2017
Messages
2,048
dragon age origins. i still remember how underwhelming it was. i thought they were aiming for something like baldurs gate 1 and 2, lots of content, cities and settlement to explore, nice quests and blabla. instead it was just a mediocre "dungeon" crawler.

Unrealistic expectations usually lead to disappointment. Hopefully you've learned your lesson.
 

Ash

Arcane
Joined
Oct 16, 2015
Messages
6,235
I haven't played all of them, but every one that I did I fucking hated or just found to be mediocre. Why? Garbage gameplay. This was consistent among each of the games, and as a result I assume every Bioware fan (even just middling) is a storyfaggot with little standards and expectations in gameplay.
That said, even the storyfaggotry of the games (the ones I tried) seemed...a bit sub-par. Take Mass Effect: characters often felt like soulless puppets in the way they delivered their lines, with invariability/a lack of range and emotion. Topics discussed weren't always particularly interesting. There's a lack of subject variety: overwhelmingly it's fictional space politics, space politics, and more space politics...with a bit of softcore game porn that only degenerates who cannot get none actually want in their games, and the boring character development leading up to that. I don't recall much variety in storytelling devices either, nor good pacing. I just remember a lot of boring shit, tbh.
It's very possible I'm being unfair on the story aspects and completely missing game writing genius. I absolutely do not consider myself a monocled connoisseur of story, but the gameplay -- hell no. It's garbage.
 

Cael

Arcane
Joined
Nov 1, 2017
Messages
20,294
I haven't played all of them, but every one that I did I fucking hated or just found to be mediocre. Why? Garbage gameplay. This was consistent among each of the games, and as a result I assume every Bioware fan (even just middling) is a storyfaggot with little standards and expectations in gameplay.
That said, even the storyfaggotry of the games (the ones I tried) seemed...a bit sub-par. Take Mass Effect: characters often felt like soulless puppets in the way they delivered their lines, with invariability/a lack of range and emotion. Topics discussed weren't always particularly interesting. There's a lack of subject variety: overwhelmingly it's fictional space politics, space politics, and more space politics...with a bit of softcore game porn that only degenerates who cannot get none actually want in their games, and the boring character development leading up to that. I don't recall much variety in storytelling devices either, nor good pacing. I just remember a lot of boring shit, tbh.
It's very possible I'm being unfair on the story aspects and completely missing game writing genius. I absolutely do not consider myself a monocled connoisseur of story, but the gameplay -- hell no. It's garbage.
The problem is that they want to make anumated heads and voice actors. That highlighted the lack of range and emotion big time, which, to be fair, could be due to machine limitations.

Most games would have been better with better resolution NWN style figures and a text box popup, or even Fallout 2 style of talking heads.
 
Joined
Nov 23, 2017
Messages
4,013
Sure, but the question was why ME2 is regarded as better than ME1. We were comparing two existing games, not an existing game to a potential one. And out of those two, ME2 is much more into my alley—but I like mindless shooters with some epic story. Would I like it better if it was intelligent RPG instead? Possibly. But BioWare doesn’t know how to make those.


It involved looting and crafting-like mechanics, plus your proficiency with any given weapon wasn’t a function of only your skill, but also your character stats. I personally don’t like that mixture—either give me full control and full responsibility for the effects, like in any arcade game (including shooters), or make it a tactical experience, where I tell what to do and only my character’s stats and luck decide the outcome.
So in terms of character development mechanics I much prefer simpler system from ME2 and ME3, where extra levels gave the player additional stuff to do instead of making the guns more accurate and easier to use. I also found progressive grind towards better gear not really suiting the fast-paced nature of combat in ME1.

You know what people that play third and first person shooters seem to love? Crafting. Maybe it's because I haven't played the first game in years, but I don't remember the first Mass Effect really having crafting. If anything Mass Effect should have had more crafting and customization; as a series it's had little to none of either, and there's a lot that could have been done with that. I'm also not really sure how looting was a problem. You can hold so much shit in that game, and I don't remember weight capacity being a thing there, that what you do and don't pick up isn't really something you need to think about.

Shooters having things that improve weapon accessories by 15% or whatever wasn't exactly a new thing to shooters when Mass Effect came along. Nor was doing such things through a stat system. It's not like Mass Effect was Morrowind, it's not like you'd aim directly at something and not hit it because of character stats; shooting was still a function of your skill in that game.
 

KevinV12000

Arcane
Joined
Jul 7, 2006
Messages
749
Location
Some Lame-ass International Organization
This poll is yet more evidence, if any is needed, that a company's drive to strike while the iron is hot and seize an opportunity can cause irreparable harm. Nine times out of ten the rush to get something to market RIGHT NOW is a long-term disaster for a company. In the space of nine months, Bioware lost its reputation and standing with gamers and never regained it, and was sold to a faceless corporation shortly thereafter.
 

Cael

Arcane
Joined
Nov 1, 2017
Messages
20,294
But it gave us the Iron Bull! I am sure there were no insinuations made by Bioware using that name. :troll:

Bioware was just ripping off DnD anyway:

200px-Dnd_Gorgon.png
 

Althorion

Learned
Joined
Apr 22, 2017
Messages
111
You know what people that play third and first person shooters seem to love? Crafting.
I don’t. I hate crafting with burning passion (it’s repetitive, boring, detracting—when I play a game, I want to do things I can’t do in real life; and I am fully capable of picking shit up). You know what I love in shooters? Shooting.
 
Joined
Nov 23, 2017
Messages
4,013
You know what people that play third and first person shooters seem to love? Crafting.
I don’t. I hate crafting with burning passion (it’s repetitive, boring, detracting—when I play a game, I want to do things I can’t do in real life; and I am fully capable of picking shit up). You know what I love in shooters? Shooting.

You don't, most do; which is why games are full of letting players modify guns and vehicles and editing your characters appearance and dressing them up however they want. People like customizing shit.

What does picking shit up have to do with crafting? You seem to be confusing having a system that lets you make stuff with the way in which the game has you collect the resources used to make the stuff.

If it was me, I'd of dropped collecting random shit off downed enemies like you're going through their pockets for whatever they have on them. It doesn't really make any sense given your role, and it's not like the need to pick stuff up plays a major role on the ground. Always thought Mass Effect would have been better served with a X-Com type of model where you're getting money for jobs, on the payroll of different organizations you need to keep the favor of by doing jobs for them, and you order weapons and armor and whatever you need to modify them from different corporations on that corporation planet. Then again there's a whole lot I'd of done differently because very little of Mass Effect seems to make sense with the action game they seemingly wanted to make, the skill system they implemented in what they did make, and these super powerful guns with essentially infinite ammo in a cover based system where cover and environments aren't destructible.


This poll is yet more evidence, if any is needed, that a company's drive to strike while the iron is hot and seize an opportunity can cause irreparable harm. Nine times out of ten the rush to get something to market RIGHT NOW is a long-term disaster for a company. In the space of nine months, Bioware lost its reputation and standing with gamers and never regained it, and was sold to a faceless corporation shortly thereafter.

Dragon Age 2 came two years after the original. Two years is enough time to make a sequel, especially one that's specifically designed to be smaller. They just fucked it up. They fucked up their last game too and that was in development for like five years or something.

BioWare was also bought up by EA the same year the first Mass Effect came out, which is a few years before DA2.
 

KevinV12000

Arcane
Joined
Jul 7, 2006
Messages
749
Location
Some Lame-ass International Organization
Thanks for the correction. My memory of events must be seriously faulty. Or perhaps my memory re-arranged the facts to suit my ideology, more likely. I do appreciate the correction.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom