Critical Miss: Max Payne

 Pages PREV 1 2
 

Warachia:

I agree with you on Bethesda and Obsidian, They are two developers whose finished products can be really good, but they are also the first two I'd eliminate the first chance I had simply because of their work ethic.

I'd rather have people who occasionally touch upon fleeting moments of greatness than those who are content to wallow in mediocrity personally.

BrotherRool:

Warachia:

I wouldn't say I'm Factually wrong on the first point as the AI still more ore less follows after the illusive man and she is the one with the code, sure she tells you almost everything about cerberus, but doesn't tell you anything that could be used to destroy them (aside from political ramifications).

Your second point I'll agree it is stupid to not give shepard a kill switch, I could make up arguments defending this but I'm not so much a fanboy that I can't see a plothole (funny how shamus never brought that one up though), it would be a neat sidequest getting the killswitch removed in some way. To be fair to cerberus, only about three to six of their projects have gone rogue, and while half of your employees dying isn't a good track record, I can see why they thought it would be worth it, and don't worry, I never hold up a flimsy argument by justifying it with something lesser, the crew capture was badly done, and your idea does sound better.

About that point that ME2 didn't so much have a story, I disagree, but I can see your point, most of it feels like build up, and the ending might as well have been the third game's trailer, but the fact that they focus on the story is what I like about Bioware so much, not to mention they do a much better job at making somebody else feel like you, take Obsidian for example, you don't really play as yourself, when you start you are somebody else with their own memories, backstory, people that recognize them, and the plot is set up to follow them, not you, which can work perfectly well (in Alpha Protocol it worked even if the gameplay was shit) but they need to focus on you making a character or shaping a character, you can't do both.

I can see why you didn't like the implementation though, I accepted it as there are actual situations where you wouldn't have a choice, and here's more where it comes down to opinion, you are right when you say that dynamic companions would be good, except the game has no way of implementing them aside from what they have, you can't shoot civilians, and you can't steal. Your crew disapproves when you choose renegade options that don't fit with what they like but they stick with you and I'm glad that is the case otherwise you would be forced to cut down on the roleplay if you wanted everyone happy, although these companions do open up to you the more you talk to them and help them out, I see it as more than talking to them at the end of every mission, because under that catalogue, I could say the same about KOTOR2 the difference being bring them along, do what they want, THEN talk to them when you're back on your ship, which as I've said messed the roleplaying a bit for me, my favourite system was in Dragon age two, where they swapped out the standard love hate meter for something new, and how they'd brush up on each other and would question what you did, changing the new meter.

On your minor point, I guess you never really put Tali in different armours in the first game, some have he fog so low you can see the whole face (The silhouette I mean) which tipped me off to the glowing eyes, also, how would her eyes reflect off the helmet if they didn't glow?

I agree with you on Bethesda and Obsidian, They are two developers whose finished products can be really good, but they are also the first two I'd eliminate the first chance I had simply because of their work ethic.

On another side note, let me give you a preview if the Duex Ex 1 experience: "you enter through a window, your buddy is dying and some people are trying to kill him, you kill the enemies, he says he's good now, so you leave back through the window because you think it's closest to your next objective, only to find your buddy dies." This is because it doesn't matter whether or not you save him, it only matters which door you leave through, window, he dies, front door, he lives. Easily the most overrated game I've ever played.

I only said you were factually wrong because you said I hadn't thought about the Illusive Man would react :D I had factually thought about it. just maybe not drawn the right conclusion!

I even agree that AI would probably still be under the Man's control just I feel that that won't turn out to be the case in ME3. I'm actually quite interested to see if they go for another reset mechanic in ME3. I was impressed how the justified the change in character for 2 but I don't know if it would work for 3.

It's an interesting criticism of Obsidian, I often play my games detached so I guess I didn't pick up on it but I guess you're right, in the end they try to shuffle you into pre-defined characters rather than really letting you play your own but the set-up makes it feel like you're meant to do the latter. I suppose I didn't mind because I was happy with the characters they made and I actually enjoyed the way they'd reveal information in your dialogue as well as other peoples.

And I guess I do think Bioware are better at solving that problem in most games. But in all honesty, for all my complaints about ME2, the truth was I'd gone into the game with the idea of a character in mind and then the game wouldn't let me do it. In ME2 you can be a ruthless solider or a self-sacrificing soldier and I just didn't want to be a soldier. Not in profession but attitude. In ME2 you can choose what kinda badass you want to be (and they really fun badasses) but I didn't want to be a badass. If you try out the red/blue dialogue options, half the time they're actually the same sort of lines and sometimes exactly the same lines.

I'm not sure if I didn't come across it, but when they disapprove of renegade options it doesn't actually mean anything in terms of your relationship with them does it? Because they felt a bit arbitary (the worst one being Mordin recommending you save the tech because he's a pragmatist and then telling you off if you do exactly that). I can see what you mean about sacrificing roleplay to get good relationships with them but ideally they wouldn't leave you but it would change how they talked to you and reacted with you. To be blunt someone who is sickened by your every action shouldn't want to have sex with you and someone who hasn't seen you do anything praisworthy shouldn't be willing to share their secrets with you. It does limit choice and it will stop you getting a perfect game but it encourages you to build a bond with people by being more aware of them and how they react on a mission and I think good roleplay involves playing in a world that reacts to you and the ME relationship system doesn't react to you at all. It felt like I was roleplaying in spite of the game because they game wasn't balancing in my actions.

And on Tali I just meant that her design is better with no eyes at all. An one-way reflective sheet of glass looked so much cooler than having those emoting eyes. I can see why they thought they needed it, because it allows them to show Talis emotion but it didn't work with me and when I wasn't aware of it, part of the fun was trying to imagine how she was reacting.

I'm sad to here that about Deus Ex, I haven't finished the HR yet so I hope they managed to stop doing that kinda stuff

I have to say it was a lot of fun having these debates, and I think we can come to an agreement, I can agree with the companions in ME2, I disagree on the ME dialogue though, it seems less about role playing whoever you want, and more about role playing a very specific soldier, which I applaud, it lets them explore into the variations one can be within that soldier as opposed to spreading themselves too thin.
I disagree on Tali's eyes, but that comes down to opinion.

Ghengis John:

I'd rather have people who occasionally touch upon fleeting moments of greatness than those who are content to wallow in mediocrity personally.

That's an interesting argument, and it gave me a lot of thought, I guess I'd have to choose the mediocrity, simply because those who only choose fleeting moments of greatness are also content to stay there, without releasing great games on their own.

Warachia:

Ghengis John:

I'd rather have people who occasionally touch upon fleeting moments of greatness than those who are content to wallow in mediocrity personally.

That's an interesting argument, and it gave me a lot of thought, I guess I'd have to choose the mediocrity, simply because those who only choose fleeting moments of greatness are also content to stay there, without releasing great games on their own.

Heck I'm happy you thought about it, I honestly am. But nobody said they choose only fleeting moments of greatness. Only that that's all that they attain. Which is a far sight more than you can obtain if you never try to do something great. But that's enough for me to be happy and to give me a glimmer of hope in where the industry could go. In comparison to studios that put out a product on time, and under budget but that I have no interest at all in playing there really is no contest for me which studios I'd rather have making games.

I don't know what great games you think they're not producing but I've probably spent 80% of my gaming time in the last decade playing one of the two mentioned studios titles. Fallout 2, Neverwinter Nights, NWN 2, Knights of the Old Republic, Kotor 2, Jade Empire, Mass Effect, Dragon Age, Mass Effect 2, Fallout: New Vegas. And these are the first two studios you would give the axe to? To each their own I guess, I'm just happy you're not in charge.

Ghengis John:

Warachia:

Ghengis John:

I'd rather have people who occasionally touch upon fleeting moments of greatness than those who are content to wallow in mediocrity personally.

That's an interesting argument, and it gave me a lot of thought, I guess I'd have to choose the mediocrity, simply because those who only choose fleeting moments of greatness are also content to stay there, without releasing great games on their own.

Heck I'm happy you thought about it, I honestly am. But nobody said they choose only fleeting moments of greatness. Only that that's all that they attain. Which is a far sight more than you can obtain if you never try to do something great. But that's enough for me to be happy and to give me a glimmer of hope in where the industry could go. In comparison to studios that put out a product on time, and under budget but that I have no interest at all in playing there really is no contest for me which studios I'd rather have making games.

I don't know what great games you think they're not producing but I've probably spent 80% of my gaming time in the last decade playing one of the two mentioned studios titles. Fallout 2, Neverwinter Nights, NWN 2, Knights of the Old Republic, Kotor 2, Jade Empire, Mass Effect, Dragon Age, Mass Effect 2, Fallout: New Vegas. And these are the first two studios you would give the axe to? To each their own I guess, I'm just happy you're not in charge.

I should say that when I mean they choose, is they choose to make only fleeting moments in the same way others choose mediocrity, nobody believes they aren't making a great game, what's sad about these choices is they both lead to exactly where I hope they industry doesn't go, which is why it gave me a lot of thought.

Oh, and Fallout 2, Neverwinter Nights, Knights of the Old Republic, Jade Empire, Mass Effect, Dragon Age, and Mass Effect 2 weren't made by Obsidian or Bethesda, the only ones on your list that were was: NWN 2, Kotor 2, and Fallout: New Vegas.

Incidentally, if I was in charge, and could control what they put out and when, they wouldn't be closed down, their games would be delayed until they were finished, bug tested, and could be used with little to no bugs in game.

Warachia:
Incidentally, if I was in charge, and could control what they put out and when, they wouldn't be closed down, their games would be delayed until they were finished, bug tested, and could be used with little to no bugs in game.

Ah now that I can get behind. Cheers to you sir.

reachforthesky:

And for the record, not everyone has the luxury of building a career around playing video games, some of us have to judge games without buying them.

Then you're not judging a game, you're judging marketing.

Warachia:

I have to say it was a lot of fun having these debates, and I think we can come to an agreement, I can agree with the companions in ME2, I disagree on the ME dialogue though, it seems less about role playing whoever you want, and more about role playing a very specific soldier, which I applaud, it lets them explore into the variations one can be within that soldier as opposed to spreading themselves too thin.
I disagree on Tali's eyes, but that comes down to opinion.

Well I'm happy to leave it there, thanks for all that. Next time I play ME2 I'll play it with the idea that Shepard is a specific character written by Bioware and I may enjoy it more thanks to you! Next time you look at Tali though, imagine those eyes were just lens flare (it's hard :( ) but she really does look cool like that

 Pages PREV 1 2

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here