They wouldn't sell if they called them "interactive movies"
Mass Effect is really a poor shooter and a poor rpg.
It's greatness comes from being an interactive movie really but it's almost like the game would improve if you had a "skip action scene" function, like the old Sierra games.
Nothing wrong in that but I dont pay $60 for an interactive movie. Bioware should stop calling them rpgs from on.
They have . . . it's "a genre equivalent of shooter meets RPG" now.
I would say ME1 was a poor shooter and average RPG, while ME2 is a poor RPG and "good" shooter. Not great, but good.
I dunno. I find even ME2 to be quite poor on the shooter department. Even poor shooters such as Black Site Area 51 and TUROK do more things right in comparison.
I do not find any of the shooter mechanics to work well. Well, except for aim and shoot. Movement makes me feel like a rhino. I can just run forward, I cannot jump, not dodge and taking cover is clunky usually ending me up taking cover where I do not want to take cover (the cover and run key are one of the same) and not take cover when I want to take cover.
The weapons have very little variation. They have different damage and fire rate, but they do not feel different which is the key to good FPS'es. The sniper rifle aren't as useful as it is in other games due to the level design and thanks to how health works some weapons primary advantage is lost when they just extended the healthbars to make foes stronger.
The level design brings it down another notch… The game gets very repetitive fast if it wasn't for dialogue, story and cutscenes. You go into a room and opponents pour in, same opponents that you killed the last 30 minutes with very little variation in area design.
There's no physics whatsoever, which really been the main feature in shooters for the last years, neither do the game use light/darkness which have also been a feature in shooters for awhile.
Except for "survive" and "kill em all" there's really not that many tasks to complete in combat either.
Just think; if the original (and best) System Shock were made today, it would likely be a HUGE success!! Pity………Remake anyone.
What I fail to understand is this: Why are they trying to expand the Mass Effect franchise prior to the completion of the trilogy?
What I fail to understand is this: Why are they trying to expand the Mass Effect franchise prior to the completion of the trilogy? If they're going to expand it, expand it with a spin-off or similar - they're not going to capture a bunch of new fans at this point; most buyers of ME3 have already bought and played ME1 and 2.
If you spend any time at all on Bioware forums their developers make their motivations quite clear. They want to avoid the fate of Black Isle and Troika at all cost and they want to sell millions of copies. To do that you need to make mainstream games, period.
Not sure I'd fully agree. They really danced around issues with DA2, ducking, dodging and weaving. The worst were the sins of omission. To their credit they didn't outright lie when they did say something, but they sure played with generally accepted definitions, stretching them a fair bit.
I was misrepresented in an article recently, which made it sound like I
wanted to remove RPG elements and stats from combat. What I actually
said was, I wanted RPG progression to have a more meaningful impact on
combat, but that was misrepresented as "cutting rpg stats" we actually
have more stats in me3 that affect combat, and the overall impact of rpg
progress on combat is greater. Anyway sorry for the longish tweet but I
just wanted ot clear that up, and a few people were asking me what was
up!
-Christina Norman, Lead Gameplay Designer of Mass Effect 3
Twitter / @Christina Norman: I was misrepresented in an …
I think the "tank" feel is on purpose, not a flaw. You are a bulked up and armored soldier after all. As for other stuff I think the various powers and the real need for tactics on insane difficulty make it rise far above the average shooters you mentioned.
Opinions will, of course, differ.
we actually have more stats in me3 that affect combat, and the overall impact of rpg
progress on combat is greater.
They should stick with concepts like combat stats. That would allow a more sensical speech: focusing on how to make combat stats more relevant to combat.
You've got to love when she stated that the RPG stats have to get more impact on combat. RPG stats having impact on RP parts? No, not enough sophisticated.
Not sure I'd fully agree. They really danced around issues with DA2, ducking, dodging and weaving. The worst were the sins of omission. To their credit they didn't outright lie when they did say something, but they sure played with generally accepted definitions, stretching them a fair bit.