Xaositect said:
Doesnt to me. Sounds, looks and feels like a cheap TPS that is only an RPG in the barest, subjective sense, and mainly is just called one because of developer BS.
It was a Gears clone first and foremost. Anyone who says otherwise is in denial.
It was a Gears clone because it had cover-based shooting? You know, exactly like the first Mass Effect did, but improved? Wow. I never knew that this was all it took! Some slight similarities in the way combat is handled utterly invalidate the rest of the game; the storyline (the game's main appeal), the RPG elements, all those choices you make over the course of the game. None of that stuff matters, because the game is clearly just a Gears clone! Jesus...
Xaositect said:
Im currently replaying ME2 and Im really having a lot of time to reflect on what a dumbed down mass appeal piece of shit it is.
Careful now, you're starting to sound like one of those "I hate everything popular!" guys...
Xaositect said:
Biowhore admitted it themselves anyway. The marketing was full to the brim with shooter fan cock sucking (come and play our game Modern Warfare fans, we want sales like MW2), and the lead gameplay designer owned up to the fact that ME2 was build as a shooter first before anything else. That should show where their priorities lay.
With making the best game they could? Gasp! My shock knows no bounds. I am literally reeling. What were the two biggest complaints about the first game? Boring combat and lengthly elevators. So for the second game, what did BioWare do? They re-vamped combat and removed the elevators. They'll have to be careful, or people will start suspecting they actually listen to the fans!
Xaositect said:
Thats why the game is so loosely connected and centred almost entirely around combat. Its why they added ammo, shooter health regen, and made sure even the power based characters had to play the game like a cover based TPS.
I'd say the game is based almost entirely around the story. It's an RPG, it's
about the story! The game
play is centred largely around combat, but how is that any different from the original? If you recall, a hell of a lot of time was spent in combat in the first game too. Except you also had those awkward, unpopular Mako sections which - surprise surprise! - have also been removed. Once again, it looks like BioWare have been listening to the fans. Tsk. They'll never get anywhere like that.
Xaositect said:
Like ME2 all you want, but dont try and suggest people are wrong for calling it out for the dumbed down, blatant shooter pandering trash that it is.
Yeah, OK, I take it back. You
are sounding like those "I hate everything popular!" guys. Is your biggest issue that the game didn't pander to
your exact preferences, or that it didn't pander to your exact preferences but
everyone loved it anyway?
I feel fully justified in disagreeing with your opinion. I'm an RPG man. Love 'em. Loved Mass Effect for the RPG factors - levelling, storyline, choices. Loved Mass Effect 2 even more for the RPG factors - levelling, storyline, especially my previous choices being carried over
PLUS vastly improved combat. If you're going to spend the majority of the game doing something, it might as well work properly.
Xaositect said:
If ME3 is going to be as "streamlined", Biowhore can kiss goodbye to my purchase, thats for sure.
I'm sure the patronage of someone who uses the word 'Biowhore' unironically is no great loss.