Bioware has changed... kinda.
- Thread starter robinkom
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Look, just because their last couple of games (developed by separate teams, no less) have had some subjective missteps (some more vocally addressed than others) does not mean "OMG THEY HAVE CHANGED FOR THE WORSE!" or that they have changed at all. Quit being fickle and give them the benefit of a track record before you start jumping down their throats.
Well DA2 was disapointing, but I really have to think DA2 was more to the effect setting the stages of what we will see in DA3. Much like the first in a trilogy isnt quite as good, but you forgive it because it is setting up a story. DA2 seems to be that same vein.
ME2 I thought was superior to ME in story as well as gameplay. However still not a major fan of Mass effect.
Bioware is changing, and I somewhat agree its not for the better. It seems like they are working too hard for widespread appeal and forgetting what grew their popularity in the first place.
ME2 I thought was superior to ME in story as well as gameplay. However still not a major fan of Mass effect.
Bioware is changing, and I somewhat agree its not for the better. It seems like they are working too hard for widespread appeal and forgetting what grew their popularity in the first place.
I've actually begun to wonder if BioWare's fame has gone to their heads.
After playing Dragon Age 2 (waiting until it was on sale for $10 on Impulse), I find myself baffled that they actually thought it would outsell Origins. Not because it was a bad game, it was pretty good.
The problem is that it is clear very little effort went into it.
The story is... well, absent. People keep saying the story is Hawke's "Rise to Power," but that's the problem. The hero's journey from pauper to Hero is an intrinsic part of any Fantasy Story. However, it's supposed to be driven by the main plot, with the main character's arc being a component of that. Origins did this, in fact, they had 6 potential arcs in a single story. Dragon Age 2's story isn't a story, it's a single character arc.
The side characters are also weak. The game does a decent job of fleshing them out eventually, but it comes to slowly. By the time you've learned enough to be interested in them, they've ceased to have any impact. A big thing that bugged me at least is there is no reason for most of them to be following you around. Varric, I understand, at least in the beginning, since he's helping you raise the money to join the expedition. But Merril? Why did she stick around after moving to town? Fenris? He's a fugitive, shouldn't he be laying low, or hunting that mage instead of following a rather well known figure around? Similar with Isabella. And why is the CAPTAIN OF THE GUARD following you?? There is no reason for it, and it makes the characters uninteresting because they're not acting like rational people.
There were things I liked about the game. The combat was actually kind of fun, even if there is way too much of it. The visual style is also much improved over Origins. I just feel that not enough time was spent on the game, and yet BioWare still expected to sell approx 5 million copies.
I honestly think they've fallen in love with their own legend. They've started to think they can do what they want and treat fans how they want and still be a huge deal. The saddest part is they may be right.
They've been one of my favorite developers for a very long time, but it's quickly getting to the point that everything I read about them makes me sad. This whole thing with the Liara statue is just the icing on the cake.
We've had a good run BioWare, but I think maybe it's time we parted ways.
After playing Dragon Age 2 (waiting until it was on sale for $10 on Impulse), I find myself baffled that they actually thought it would outsell Origins. Not because it was a bad game, it was pretty good.
The problem is that it is clear very little effort went into it.
The story is... well, absent. People keep saying the story is Hawke's "Rise to Power," but that's the problem. The hero's journey from pauper to Hero is an intrinsic part of any Fantasy Story. However, it's supposed to be driven by the main plot, with the main character's arc being a component of that. Origins did this, in fact, they had 6 potential arcs in a single story. Dragon Age 2's story isn't a story, it's a single character arc.
The side characters are also weak. The game does a decent job of fleshing them out eventually, but it comes to slowly. By the time you've learned enough to be interested in them, they've ceased to have any impact. A big thing that bugged me at least is there is no reason for most of them to be following you around. Varric, I understand, at least in the beginning, since he's helping you raise the money to join the expedition. But Merril? Why did she stick around after moving to town? Fenris? He's a fugitive, shouldn't he be laying low, or hunting that mage instead of following a rather well known figure around? Similar with Isabella. And why is the CAPTAIN OF THE GUARD following you?? There is no reason for it, and it makes the characters uninteresting because they're not acting like rational people.
There were things I liked about the game. The combat was actually kind of fun, even if there is way too much of it. The visual style is also much improved over Origins. I just feel that not enough time was spent on the game, and yet BioWare still expected to sell approx 5 million copies.
I honestly think they've fallen in love with their own legend. They've started to think they can do what they want and treat fans how they want and still be a huge deal. The saddest part is they may be right.
They've been one of my favorite developers for a very long time, but it's quickly getting to the point that everything I read about them makes me sad. This whole thing with the Liara statue is just the icing on the cake.
We've had a good run BioWare, but I think maybe it's time we parted ways.
I thought ME2 was almost as big a disappointment as DA2. All the huge ambition of ME1, not to mention the mystery and discovery related to the ancient civilizations and universe-destroying threats, is replaced by "go to a bunch of planetary hubs, find a few people, and do the end missions." Seriously disappointing...finding people was just a tiny part of ME1. ME2 had better combat, but that's all I can say for it.
DA2 has had enough hate, but I'll just say it was disappointingly mediocre, not something I'd expect from Bioware.
With developers like CDProjekt and Eidos Montreal making incredible games recently, Bioware might have to be removed from my "get any games this developer releases ASAP" list to my "get its games if they're on sale and if you have extra time"
DA2 has had enough hate, but I'll just say it was disappointingly mediocre, not something I'd expect from Bioware.
With developers like CDProjekt and Eidos Montreal making incredible games recently, Bioware might have to be removed from my "get any games this developer releases ASAP" list to my "get its games if they're on sale and if you have extra time"
well i dunno about bioware changing. i liked ME2 although not as much as ME1, because of combat, loot and skills but i see why they did what they did. With DAII yeah it was not good, it was just mediocre, but i had fun with it anyway because of the way bioware do characters, character interactions. Bioware doing good in my book.
Thank you for being the most in-depth with your analysis thus far. I have to agree with you on all points except for the combat. That level of button-mashing is rarely engaging in what is supposed to be a story-driven Action-RPG. It works in something like Dynasty Warriors, but not here. Just my take on it.Krantos said:
I mean, yeah, I had some fun with the game, I really did. After I was done and reflected on what I just experienced though, I was let down with the mediocre quality that we don't see from a developer that keeps higher standards.
This is what I'm thinking has happened. I think EA gives them more freedom than the other studios they've assimilated but not by much. There was a time when "Electronic Arts" meant something.kman123 said:
Lets start off with the necessary 'Not this thread again' comment.
Now, I personally don't like DA2 or ME2. ME2, on my first playthrough, I actually found more engaging than ME1. Every attempt at a playthrough after that however I found it a massive disappointment, and it occurs to me that the only reason I liked it the first time was because I wanted to know where the story went. After that was all spoiled, there was no reason to play it. It was boring compared to ME1. In ME1, you had to think a lot more, you had more interesting moral choices (Sure, they still meant crap, but pulling out someone's life support or leaving it in, even after they are technically dead? That's heavier than anything ME2 offered). The combat was pathetic hide behind wall, pop up, shoot and became monotonous and horrible very quickly. The fact that you could only take about 5 bullets was a load of cripe as well. I want my ME1 combat systems back; Alpha strikes with multiple abilities, allies and enemies that actually have reasonable health, and the ability to semi-safely run around a battlefield rather than having to stay behind cover. Vermire was one of my favourite ME1 missions as it felt like a power mission: I just ran through it, not letting anything stop me. I never hid in cover, I never ran away, I died a few times doing this, but it was FUN. ME2's equivalent is run forward, duck into cover, shoot at things for a bit, run forward, duck into cover, shoot things for a bit, and what is with the 1 ability use thing? Why can't I use all my abilities consecutively? It is horrible from a design and gameplay perspective IMO as it basically forces the player to pick one ability and level it. From there, the other abilities have very little point as after the attack from that good ability, they will be in cooldown, and once that cooldown is over, I'll just use my good ability again. As I said earlier, I have had one successful playthrough of ME2, then many more that failed due to boredom. I have had about 10 playthroughs of ME1. guess which one I prefer.
As for Dragon Age, I'm not even going to get started on DA2, this post is long enough as is. Suffice to say, it was worse than the ME1 vs ME2 thing for me, and DA:O definitely wins out of the two.
Now, I personally don't like DA2 or ME2. ME2, on my first playthrough, I actually found more engaging than ME1. Every attempt at a playthrough after that however I found it a massive disappointment, and it occurs to me that the only reason I liked it the first time was because I wanted to know where the story went. After that was all spoiled, there was no reason to play it. It was boring compared to ME1. In ME1, you had to think a lot more, you had more interesting moral choices (Sure, they still meant crap, but pulling out someone's life support or leaving it in, even after they are technically dead? That's heavier than anything ME2 offered). The combat was pathetic hide behind wall, pop up, shoot and became monotonous and horrible very quickly. The fact that you could only take about 5 bullets was a load of cripe as well. I want my ME1 combat systems back; Alpha strikes with multiple abilities, allies and enemies that actually have reasonable health, and the ability to semi-safely run around a battlefield rather than having to stay behind cover. Vermire was one of my favourite ME1 missions as it felt like a power mission: I just ran through it, not letting anything stop me. I never hid in cover, I never ran away, I died a few times doing this, but it was FUN. ME2's equivalent is run forward, duck into cover, shoot at things for a bit, run forward, duck into cover, shoot things for a bit, and what is with the 1 ability use thing? Why can't I use all my abilities consecutively? It is horrible from a design and gameplay perspective IMO as it basically forces the player to pick one ability and level it. From there, the other abilities have very little point as after the attack from that good ability, they will be in cooldown, and once that cooldown is over, I'll just use my good ability again. As I said earlier, I have had one successful playthrough of ME2, then many more that failed due to boredom. I have had about 10 playthroughs of ME1. guess which one I prefer.
As for Dragon Age, I'm not even going to get started on DA2, this post is long enough as is. Suffice to say, it was worse than the ME1 vs ME2 thing for me, and DA:O definitely wins out of the two.
This is where I hit a roadblock, myself. There were enough variables in the mechanics and abilities in the first game to let you live long enough to actually do something without getting a face full of bullets. ME2 was too much shooter, not enough RPG.Joccaren said:
On the console, I agree. Played the demo on the 360 and hated it. I ended up getting it for the PC, though. Not bad that way. The faster combat is kind of fun when you can sit back and direct it rather than trying to direct it and take part, simultaneously.robinkom said:
I still don't think it's as rewarding as Origins, and the cool-down timers are too long. It's like they sped the combat up 2X-3X but left the timers set for Origins. I tried playing on Hard at first and got frustrated shortly after I got to Kirkwall. Origins was hard, but you always felt that you had the means at your disposal to overcome the challenge. I didn't get that feeling with DA2.
Rejoice: they've said over and over that they realise they took out too many RPG elements from ME2 and DA2 and that the third installment in each will strike a much better balance.
Hopefully this pans out - I think this has been happening a lot with major RPG studios right now. It's exactly how I felt about Oblivion after Morrowind and with Fallout 3, but Skyrim looks to be headed back into a more creative middle ground between better mechanics and better content and New Vegas was a wonderful example of figuring out what went wrong and fixing it in this regard.
Hopefully this pans out - I think this has been happening a lot with major RPG studios right now. It's exactly how I felt about Oblivion after Morrowind and with Fallout 3, but Skyrim looks to be headed back into a more creative middle ground between better mechanics and better content and New Vegas was a wonderful example of figuring out what went wrong and fixing it in this regard.
I'm glad you at least realise that this is the paranoid side of you. All indications point to this being a move by Bioware, not some sort of directive to make games differently than they'd like to (aside from maybe release timing, but I haven't really seen anything to suggest that's EAs fault either).robinkom said:
Mass Effect 2 was over-simplified compared to the first game perhaps, but as a game it was still good. What I find has been Bioware's biggest problems in both Mass Effect 2 and Dragon Age 2 is that the storyline and narrative has been atrocious.
Mass Effect 2 has plot holes so large that the Destiny Ascension could slide right through and still have plenty of manouvering space. Not to mention that the plot iself is only advanced in about 2 hours at the beginning, 2 hours in the middle and an hour at the end. The rest of the "main storyline" is just padding, where you pick up the crew and get loads of crew exposition. Exposition that it seems will be largely moot as it seems at least half the crew members won't be making a return.
Dragon Age 2 consisted of some kind of life story for Hawke that was very disjointed, skipping over potentially interesting parts (the mercenaries/thieves you join in the early game for example) and putting way too much focus on others, all the while lacking a coherent story other than "This is your life, Hawke". As such, you just do things because you are told to do them and only realize how it all fits together at the end, an end which is abrupt and leaves at least half the plot threads hanging.
Dragon Age 2 also had many issues with its' gameplay, but the things I mentioned above are the most glaring to me. Mass Effect and Dragon Age: Origins both had great storytelling and story, so it is noticeable how far ME2 and DA2 fell compared to their predecessors.
Mass Effect 2 has plot holes so large that the Destiny Ascension could slide right through and still have plenty of manouvering space. Not to mention that the plot iself is only advanced in about 2 hours at the beginning, 2 hours in the middle and an hour at the end. The rest of the "main storyline" is just padding, where you pick up the crew and get loads of crew exposition. Exposition that it seems will be largely moot as it seems at least half the crew members won't be making a return.
Dragon Age 2 consisted of some kind of life story for Hawke that was very disjointed, skipping over potentially interesting parts (the mercenaries/thieves you join in the early game for example) and putting way too much focus on others, all the while lacking a coherent story other than "This is your life, Hawke". As such, you just do things because you are told to do them and only realize how it all fits together at the end, an end which is abrupt and leaves at least half the plot threads hanging.
Dragon Age 2 also had many issues with its' gameplay, but the things I mentioned above are the most glaring to me. Mass Effect and Dragon Age: Origins both had great storytelling and story, so it is noticeable how far ME2 and DA2 fell compared to their predecessors.
For some reason I always feel compelled to defend Bioware in these threads.
I must be turning into a fanboy. Urrg.
...
Anyway, to answer your actual question, no, I was not disappointed in those games. Far from it.
Mass Effect 2 is easily my favourite Bioware game to date and one of my all-time favourites. I found it superior to ME1 in just about every single way. When I go back and replay ME1 I often find myself thinking, "Gee, I wish I were playing ME2 instead." Now, that's not to say ME2 is perfect. It most definitely is not. The planet-scanning is stupid, the combat lacks variety, the overarching plot is lacking in substance and some of the visual designs annoy me (Samara... really!?). But I think the good far outweighs the bad.
Dragon Age 2 is a somewhat different beast. At least with this one I understand where a lot of the complaints are coming from. Yes, the recycled maps were crap. Yes, the narrative was a bit of a mess. Personally, I was ambivalent about the game. I loved the characters and dialogue, but was lukewarm about pretty much everything else. I felt the same way about DA1 and enjoyed the two equally.
Oh, and to make my position clear regarding Bioware's older games, I think KOTOR was an outright bad game, although with occasional high points. I tried to play Jade Empire twice, but gave up within ten minutes because the dialogue was embarrassingly bad. Maybe at some point I'll give it another go and just grit my teeth and hopes that it gets better.
...
EDIT:
Bioware do not owe their old fans. They are not obligated to make games that appeal to their old fans. When you buy a game from a company, you are paying for a product, nothing more. You are not buying some sort of privileged "priority" position.
I must be turning into a fanboy. Urrg.
...
Anyway, to answer your actual question, no, I was not disappointed in those games. Far from it.
Mass Effect 2 is easily my favourite Bioware game to date and one of my all-time favourites. I found it superior to ME1 in just about every single way. When I go back and replay ME1 I often find myself thinking, "Gee, I wish I were playing ME2 instead." Now, that's not to say ME2 is perfect. It most definitely is not. The planet-scanning is stupid, the combat lacks variety, the overarching plot is lacking in substance and some of the visual designs annoy me (Samara... really!?). But I think the good far outweighs the bad.
Dragon Age 2 is a somewhat different beast. At least with this one I understand where a lot of the complaints are coming from. Yes, the recycled maps were crap. Yes, the narrative was a bit of a mess. Personally, I was ambivalent about the game. I loved the characters and dialogue, but was lukewarm about pretty much everything else. I felt the same way about DA1 and enjoyed the two equally.
Oh, and to make my position clear regarding Bioware's older games, I think KOTOR was an outright bad game, although with occasional high points. I tried to play Jade Empire twice, but gave up within ten minutes because the dialogue was embarrassingly bad. Maybe at some point I'll give it another go and just grit my teeth and hopes that it gets better.
...
EDIT:
Okay, this is where I'm calling bullshit. See, that bolded bit? That is what we call entitlement, plain and simple.robinkom said:
Bioware do not owe their old fans. They are not obligated to make games that appeal to their old fans. When you buy a game from a company, you are paying for a product, nothing more. You are not buying some sort of privileged "priority" position.
Honestly I didn't enjoy ME2 much in comparison to ME1. For me it was the drop in rpg elements. I mean really, I liked the new improved combat system but i couldnt help but wonder why they couldnt just keep the rpg elements and constant loot gathering and add this new combat system.
Same complaint for Dragon age 2. Also I'm sorry but as fun as the dragon age 2's gameplay is I have one major complaint....
Copy pasting dungeons? REALLY? You are trying to tell me you didnt get a huge amount of money to work with for this sequel so you could make ORIGINAL dungeons? WOW. Whats wrong? Did they spend all their budget hioring felicia day to make a show which has yet to appear?
Same complaint for Dragon age 2. Also I'm sorry but as fun as the dragon age 2's gameplay is I have one major complaint....
Copy pasting dungeons? REALLY? You are trying to tell me you didnt get a huge amount of money to work with for this sequel so you could make ORIGINAL dungeons? WOW. Whats wrong? Did they spend all their budget hioring felicia day to make a show which has yet to appear?