Bioware should listen to Gabe Newell

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

It seems to me that Bioware should listen to these words of wisdom from Gabe Newell :)

Source: http://geekaweek.net/2012/02/legends-of-videogames-gabe-newell/

So...we need more focus-audience crap, as if there is not enough of it already?

Umm, they DO listen to their fans?

ME1:
Mako shit? Mako gone.
Inventory shit? Inventory gone.
Boring characters? Make more character-oriented.
Boring shit combat? Make more action-focused.

ME2:
Planet scanning shit? Gone.
Not enough RPG? More RPG in ME3.
Memes roflol-hilarious? Have memes in sequal.
Want to see more on characters? Add cameos in ME3.

It seems like Bioware listens a lot to their fans. Sure, some people may like the Mako and inventory from ME1, but the general concensus was that it was shit and they should get rid of it, which they did.

Hyper-space:
So...we need more focus-audience crap, as if there is not enough of it already?

You can't have too much of it in my opinion. At the end of the day, customers will or won't buy your product. If you choose not to listen to them then don't be surprised if you start losing money. ;)

SecretNegative:
Umm, they DO listen to their fans?

It can't hurt for them to listen.....

image

SecretNegative:
Umm, they DO listen to their fans?

ME1:
Mako shit? Mako gone.
Inventory shit? Inventory gone.
Boring characters? Make more character-oriented.
Boring shit combat? Make more action-focused.

ME2:
Planet scanning shit? Gone.
Not enough RPG? More RPG in ME3.
Memes roflol-hilarious? Have memes in sequal.
Want to see more on characters? Add cameos in ME3.

It seems like Bioware listens a lot to their fans. Sure, some people may like the Mako and inventory from ME1, but the general concensus was that it was shit and they should get rid of it, which they did.

I don't think the consensus was to "get rid of" the Mako or inventory. I think it was to make them better! Bioware took the "easy" road in that respect. Now, albeit, I have not played ME2 or 3 yet, having not beaten the 1st one, but I've enjoyed the story and characters of the 1st game a lot, and I hear that they changed everything for the sequels, ala Dragon Age 2 (which shat all over the 1st one in their "streamlining mentality and appeasing the general public"). This disappoints me as I would like to get to the end of the "story" of Mass Effect, but I don't want to play through 2 shit games to do it.

They should also take a leaf out of Valve's book and delay releasing a game rather than putting out an unfinished and unpolished product.

Moth_Monk:

Hyper-space:
So...we need more focus-audience crap, as if there is not enough of it already?

You can't have too much of it in my opinion. At the end of the day, customers will or won't buy your product. If you choose not to listen to them then don't be surprised if you start losing money. ;)

You know that a large chunk of why games/movies/music is crap is because of focus-groups and test-audiences? You're basically saying "You can't have too much crap".

But fine, if you want regurgitated, bland pieces of shit, go ahead. You might just crash the motherfucking industry with this "more focus-groups" bullshit.

Hyper-space:
So...we need more focus-audience crap, as if there is not enough of it already?

No kidding. The smart money is in releasing a product that appeals to as few people as possible, whilst infuriating most.

Hyper-space:
You know that a large chunk of why games/movies/music is crap is because of focus-groups and test-audiences? You're basically saying "You can't have too much crap".

Fallacious assumption. "Auteurs" deliver just as much unwatchable garbage as focus groups (not that this applies in Bioware's case, as it's basically design by committee anyway). You're just buying into http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ViewersAreMorons.

Lord_Jaroh:

SecretNegative:
Umm, they DO listen to their fans?

ME1:
Mako shit? Mako gone.
Inventory shit? Inventory gone.
Boring characters? Make more character-oriented.
Boring shit combat? Make more action-focused.

ME2:
Planet scanning shit? Gone.
Not enough RPG? More RPG in ME3.
Memes roflol-hilarious? Have memes in sequal.
Want to see more on characters? Add cameos in ME3.

It seems like Bioware listens a lot to their fans. Sure, some people may like the Mako and inventory from ME1, but the general concensus was that it was shit and they should get rid of it, which they did.

I don't think the consensus was to "get rid of" the Mako or inventory. I think it was to make them better! Bioware took the "easy" road in that respect. Now, albeit, I have not played ME2 or 3 yet, having not beaten the 1st one, but I've enjoyed the story and characters of the 1st game a lot, and I hear that they changed everything for the sequels, ala Dragon Age 2 (which shat all over the 1st one in their "streamlining mentality and appeasing the general public"). This disappoints me as I would like to get to the end of the "story" of Mass Effect, but I don't want to play through 2 shit games to do it.

Yes, Bioware took the easy route on the MAKO and inventory, but it's still an improvement, and because they actually did an improvent, it proves that they listen to their fans.

And believe me, ME2 and 3 are not "shit games", imo, they're almost incompatible with the first. Replaying the first made me experience, and without the glasses of nostalgia, I saw that the game was boring as hell. Boring characters (aside from Wrex), badly written (except for Virmire, but the Benezia encounter is just plain horrid), had some huge plotholes (the whole thing with the conduit was a red herring, since all it did was allowing Saren access to a place he already had access to)and the gameplay is just...broken.

Of course, this is all my opinion, but you should definetly give them a look.

And Moth_Monk, in what matter should've Bioware listened to their fans, exactly?

SecretNegative:

Lord_Jaroh:

SecretNegative:
Umm, they DO listen to their fans?

ME1:
Mako shit? Mako gone.
Inventory shit? Inventory gone.
Boring characters? Make more character-oriented.
Boring shit combat? Make more action-focused.

ME2:
Planet scanning shit? Gone.
Not enough RPG? More RPG in ME3.
Memes roflol-hilarious? Have memes in sequal.
Want to see more on characters? Add cameos in ME3.

It seems like Bioware listens a lot to their fans. Sure, some people may like the Mako and inventory from ME1, but the general concensus was that it was shit and they should get rid of it, which they did.

I don't think the consensus was to "get rid of" the Mako or inventory. I think it was to make them better! Bioware took the "easy" road in that respect. Now, albeit, I have not played ME2 or 3 yet, having not beaten the 1st one, but I've enjoyed the story and characters of the 1st game a lot, and I hear that they changed everything for the sequels, ala Dragon Age 2 (which shat all over the 1st one in their "streamlining mentality and appeasing the general public"). This disappoints me as I would like to get to the end of the "story" of Mass Effect, but I don't want to play through 2 shit games to do it.

Yes, Bioware took the easy route on the MAKO and inventory, but it's still an improvement, and because they actually did an improvent, it proves that they listen to their fans.

I liked the Mako gameplay a lot more than planet scanning, but maybe i'm just weird.

SecretNegative:

And Moth_Monk, in what matter should've Bioware listened to their fans, exactly?

Just in general. ;) The advice is good for any game developer really.

Sorry, but no. I think that advice was aimed at startups.

Valve does not make RPGs. Not yet. I don't think any of that criticism can be applied to BioWare in that context.

SecretNegative:
Umm, they DO listen to their fans?

ME1:
Mako shit? Mako gone.
Inventory shit? Inventory gone.
Boring characters? Make more character-oriented.
Boring shit combat? Make more action-focused.

ME2:
Planet scanning shit? Gone.
Not enough RPG? More RPG in ME3.
Memes roflol-hilarious? Have memes in sequal.
Want to see more on characters? Add cameos in ME3.

It seems like Bioware listens a lot to their fans. Sure, some people may like the Mako and inventory from ME1, but the general concensus was that it was shit and they should get rid of it, which they did.

Yea they did listen, but IDK... sometimes it just seems unfair. I miss the Mako. The ME universe just seemed so much larger when you could drop down onto a sandbox world.

Focus testing is good to a point but you dont want to do to much of it if you try and appeal to everybody you will just end up appealing to nobody.

If you make a game exactly as you want without any focus testing (proper focus testing) odds are it will get a very small hardcore audience who will absolutely love it (unless its absolutely atrocious) while everyone else will either ignore it or hate it, focus test it too much and you will end up with a game that dosent know what it is it will likely be consumable by most people but will inevitably be quickly forgotten or forever hated if its a sequel to a game that had a niche audience as they see it as selling out usually.

As for Bioware listening to its fans well yeah they do but so does every developer they are not special here but I would say they are likely to listen to what EA and their own employees say more.

the problem wasnt really the mako it was the planets they dropped you on. the missions like noveria, feros for example showed how to use the mako properly in the game. the fractal landscapes.. not so much (bioware landscape designer.. see that button there yeah that one.. its the smooth terrain button)

nikki191:
the problem wasnt really the mako it was the planets they dropped you on. the missions like noveria, feros for example showed how to use the mako properly in the game. the fractal landscapes.. not so much (bioware landscape designer.. see that button there yeah that one.. its the smooth terrain button)

To be fair, sculpting landscape in the Unreal Engine is a huge pain in the ass, it's a hell of a lot worse than a lot of other Dev kits that I've used in the past.

I miss Mako even if it was horrible to control.

Nhenfrey:
I miss Mako even if it was horrible to control.

It was kinda like the Halo CE Warthog. Frustrating to drive, but with undeniable charm.

Fans: Hey isn't it about time for, I dunno, Episode 3? Wasn't it about time, like, years ago? Didn't you promise those episodic games would be, like, here really quickly? Wasn't that, correct me if I'm wrong, the point?
Gabe: I CAN'T HEAR YOU LALALALALALALA By the way, developers should totally listen to their fans.

That doesn't mean bending down willy-nilly as soon as they kick up a fuss.

Valve quite famously make use of biometrics during development so they can test player responses to various things, but that's not the same as granting players creative control. They also seem to have struck a balance which the majority of other developers simply can't handle.

BloatedGuppy:

Hyper-space:
So...we need more focus-audience crap, as if there is not enough of it already?

No kidding. The smart money is in releasing a product that appeals to as few people as possible, whilst infuriating most.

Let the publishers worry about money, let us worry about getting games that are creative and comfortable in being what they are.

If you want the very best then sometimes things have to go wrong, or not be to your taste, or fuck up before they're even out of the starting gate. Unless you want 100 games that all start bleeding into one another, that's how things work.

SecretNegative:
Umm, they DO listen to their fans?

ME1:
Mako shit? Mako gone.
Inventory shit? Inventory gone.
Boring characters? Make more character-oriented.
Boring shit combat? Make more action-focused.

ME2:
Planet scanning shit? Gone.
Not enough RPG? More RPG in ME3.
Memes roflol-hilarious? Have memes in sequal.
Want to see more on characters? Add cameos in ME3.

It seems like Bioware listens a lot to their fans. Sure, some people may like the Mako and inventory from ME1, but the general concensus was that it was shit and they should get rid of it, which they did.

In regards to the inventory, I think they took a step in the right direction with ME3, in terms of weapons. I would like to have seen more modifications and such, maybe a tad of customization. But over all, it was much better than ME2. I would like to see a return of the light/medium/heavy armor in any possible future games, while keeping the modular armor customization in ME2 & 3.

Also, as shit as the Mako was, at least it was there. It took the firewalker pack to get another vehical in ME2, and it was only five damn missions (havent gotten Overlord.) I wish they would have had vehical segments with the Hammerhead in ME3. Also, Im glad they added the memes in a kind of *sniker* subtle way, it was a funny bit that really added some fun to ME3.

Erm... no?

Focus testing has become the bane of modern entertainment.

Remember I Am Legend? Remember how shit the ending was, and how it completely ignored everything that the story had implied thus far about the nature of the infected, in favour of a completely hollow piece of melodramatic crap? Yeah, that was because test audiences didn't like the original ending that was filmed.

Focus testing is the bane of good storytelling. Audiences like predictable, typical, formulaic plots and heroes. Great stories, on the other hand, come about by challenging expectations. If you present an audience with a novel, innovative story that deviates from narrative norms, they may well enjoy it. If, however, you give them executive decision over that story, then they will simply reduce all the non-formulaic points down to narrative cliche, simply because this is more familiar and comforting to them.

As a member of the audience, you sole input comes from looking at the piece of art, and generating your reaction to it. Anything more, and you risk bringing the whole thing down to serve the lowest common denominator.

Hyper-space:

Moth_Monk:

Hyper-space:
So...we need more focus-audience crap, as if there is not enough of it already?

You can't have too much of it in my opinion. At the end of the day, customers will or won't buy your product. If you choose not to listen to them then don't be surprised if you start losing money. ;)

You know that a large chunk of why games/movies/music is crap is because of focus-groups and test-audiences? You're basically saying "You can't have too much crap".

But fine, if you want regurgitated, bland pieces of shit, go ahead. You might just crash the motherfucking industry with this "more focus-groups" bullshit.

You're conflating two totally different things. Focus groups who try to cram a product into as many demographics as possible (Michael Bay is a perfect example) are very, very different from gathering feedback and improving your audience's experience.

Do you think a Hollywood focus group would have come up with a comedic puzzle game that stars a British voice actor, contains no love interests, sex appeal, hit songs, or fancy cars?

I rest my case.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:
Erm... no?

Focus testing has become the bane of modern entertainment.

Remember I Am Legend? Remember how shit the ending was, and how it completely ignored everything that the story had implied thus far about the nature of the infected, in favour of a completely hollow piece of melodramatic crap? Yeah, that was because test audiences didn't like the original ending that was filmed.

Focus testing is the bane of good storytelling. Audiences like predictable, typical, formulaic plots and heroes. Great stories, on the other hand, come about by challenging expectations. If you present an audience with a novel, innovative story that deviates from narrative norms, they may well enjoy it. If, however, you give them executive decision over that story, then they will simply reduce all the non-formulaic points down to narrative cliche, simply because this is more familiar and comforting to them.

As a member of the audience, you sole input comes from looking at the piece of art, and generating your reaction to it. Anything more, and you risk bringing the whole thing down to serve the lowest common denominator.

I'm with you. The I Am Legend fiasco proves the fucking idiotic things businessmen will do to a product once they start listening to the audience's opinions. Shit like that happens all the time and it makes me sick.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:
Erm... no?

Focus testing has become the bane of modern entertainment.

Remember I Am Legend? Remember how shit the ending was, and how it completely ignored everything that the story had implied thus far about the nature of the infected, in favour of a completely hollow piece of melodramatic crap? Yeah, that was because test audiences didn't like the original ending that was filmed.

Focus testing is the bane of good storytelling. Audiences like predictable, typical, formulaic plots and heroes. Great stories, on the other hand, come about by challenging expectations. If you present an audience with a novel, innovative story that deviates from narrative norms, they may well enjoy it. If, however, you give them executive decision over that story, then they will simply reduce all the non-formulaic points down to narrative cliche, simply because this is more familiar and comforting to them.

As a member of the audience, you sole input comes from looking at the piece of art, and generating your reaction to it. Anything more, and you risk bringing the whole thing down to serve the lowest common denominator.

I remain unconvinced that showing your stuff to focus groups is all that bad. I mean, yes, it is pretty bad, when used the wrong way. But when used the right way (which is not very often, but does happen), it can make a good game into a great game. Getting feedback on gameplay, for instance, is key. There are other examples where it could work. If you show someone a scene from the game and they do not understand what you are going for, you can go back and say "okay, why did they not see/get that, and what can we do to change it so they do?" Of course, focus testing is not the end all-be all and should be used sparingly, but it can be a very useful tool when used properly.

The whole fucking industry should listen to Gabe and take a good example how to work with your customers. Those guy shit money by just making the things they like.

Soviet Heavy:

Nhenfrey:
I miss Mako even if it was horrible to control.

It was kinda like the Halo CE Warthog. Frustrating to drive, but with undeniable charm.

Nothing like launching the Mako off a cliff and watching it somersault it's way down. And the beast could take a pounding. It just handled like a drunk rhino. The Hammerhead from the Firewalker DLC was just terrible though. It handled ok, but was just so much tissue paper. I would rather have a drunk rhino that can take more than a couple shots than an agile gazelle that dies if you look at it funny.

Caramel Frappe:

I had a good laughing reading this. Thank you sir. :}

OT: Developers should listen to their fans, no matter how massive the criticism is. Which Bioware failed to do for ME3 feedback. Sure, they did well listening for ME1 and ME2.. but when it came down to ME3 the director (Casey Hudson) merely replied, "It's art, you have to accept what it is." despite that art has no rules, it can be changed for purposes rendered.

I'd really like to know when this idea that 'art has no rules' became common parlance. Because I'm sure I'm not the only artist confused by this.

Art has rules. It has to, in order to be defined as art. If art were truly without rules, it would be nigh on impossible to actually create, sue to the fact that anything can be art. For art to be, it has to exist in a form and function that we can recognise as being art. In order to do this, it has to follow at least basic rules about the nature of an artistic statement, and the requirement of an audience to react to it.

I'm a musician. I went to college and studied music. Music is an artform, and I don't think anyone here would disagree with it. But music also has a set of rules. Well, perhaps not rules. More like guidelines. Quite an extensive set of guidelines. It's called music theory. And without it, music as we know it wouldn't exist.

I'm sure the same is true for film. I'm sure directors don't spend years at film school simply learning about how there are no rules when it comes to making films.

This idea that 'art has no rules' seems to be a mindset peddled by those who want to be seen as being into the artistic scene, without having to actually do any of the hard work that being an artist entails. Art is a craft, just like anything else, and a good artist will have made sure that they damn well know their craft.

BreakfastMan:

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:
Erm... no?

Focus testing has become the bane of modern entertainment.

Remember I Am Legend? Remember how shit the ending was, and how it completely ignored everything that the story had implied thus far about the nature of the infected, in favour of a completely hollow piece of melodramatic crap? Yeah, that was because test audiences didn't like the original ending that was filmed.

Focus testing is the bane of good storytelling. Audiences like predictable, typical, formulaic plots and heroes. Great stories, on the other hand, come about by challenging expectations. If you present an audience with a novel, innovative story that deviates from narrative norms, they may well enjoy it. If, however, you give them executive decision over that story, then they will simply reduce all the non-formulaic points down to narrative cliche, simply because this is more familiar and comforting to them.

As a member of the audience, you sole input comes from looking at the piece of art, and generating your reaction to it. Anything more, and you risk bringing the whole thing down to serve the lowest common denominator.

I remain unconvinced that showing your stuff to focus groups is all that bad. I mean, yes, it is pretty bad, when used the wrong way. But when used the right way (which is not very often, but does happen), it can make a good game into a great game. Getting feedback on gameplay, for instance, is key. There are other examples where it could work. If you show someone a scene from the game and they do not understand what you are going for, you can go back and say "okay, why did they not see/get that, and what can we do to change it so they do?" Of course, focus testing is not the end all-be all and should be used sparingly, but it can be a very useful tool when used properly.

That's fair enough, but I think ultimately what you're talking about isn't focus testing, it's constructive criticism. And frankly, I see no constructive criticism offered by a test audience that couldn't have been offered by a knowledgeable editor or producer on the set of the film. Criticism doesn't need an audience of thirty film goers to be made heard. Any director worth his salt will look at and, if needs be, take on board the suggestions and criticisms made by his producers, editors, screenwriters, etc. Making films, after all, is a collaborative process. As is making games, come to think of it. Even authors usually have suggestions made to them by their editor.

Very little art is made in a vacuum. Most of it is created with suggestions made by other members of the artistic process, be they editors, publishers, producers, etc. And when that makes for a better piece of art, that's fine. I simply fail to see why we need to bring the audience, who's primary function is to react to the piece of art, in on the creative process shared by the likes of those people I've already mentioned.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:
I'm a musician. I went to college and studied music. Music is an artform, and I don't think anyone here would disagree with it. But music also has a set of rules. Well, perhaps not rules. More like guidelines. Quite an extensive set of guidelines. It's called music theory. And without it, music as we know it wouldn't exist.

On the other hand, there's outsider music. It quite often ignores some/many/all of the rules (largely because the people involved aren't even aware there are any), but it's still music. A lot of it is crap, and it's not necessarily "music as we know it", but some of it is pretty interesting. There's a similar concept of outsider art for other media too.

Of course, I'm just being pedantic/silly. I've been playing music for a few decades now and spent my share of time studying music theory and know exactly what you mean. And really I just can't pass up an excuse to mention My Pal Foot Foot. Heh.

Lord_Jaroh:

SecretNegative:
Umm, they DO listen to their fans?

ME1:
Mako shit? Mako gone.
Inventory shit? Inventory gone.
Boring characters? Make more character-oriented.
Boring shit combat? Make more action-focused.

ME2:
Planet scanning shit? Gone.
Not enough RPG? More RPG in ME3.
Memes roflol-hilarious? Have memes in sequal.
Want to see more on characters? Add cameos in ME3.

It seems like Bioware listens a lot to their fans. Sure, some people may like the Mako and inventory from ME1, but the general concensus was that it was shit and they should get rid of it, which they did.

I don't think the consensus was to "get rid of" the Mako or inventory. I think it was to make them better! Bioware took the "easy" road in that respect. Now, albeit, I have not played ME2 or 3 yet, having not beaten the 1st one, but I've enjoyed the story and characters of the 1st game a lot, and I hear that they changed everything for the sequels, ala Dragon Age 2 (which shat all over the 1st one in their "streamlining mentality and appeasing the general public"). This disappoints me as I would like to get to the end of the "story" of Mass Effect, but I don't want to play through 2 shit games to do it.

2 and 3 don't exactly do what DA2 does. It revamps everything, but it's far from a casualization. It's very jarring to go suddenly from 1 to 2 though. Play the demo if you're unsure. I, personally, think it's much better, but it's an opinion thing. 3 is really just an improvement of 2. If there's anything I miss from the original, it's the planetary exploration. I loved that I could land on a planet that had practically nothing on it and dune buggy around it in my bouncy jalopy.

If there's anything you should be wary of in your venture, it's ME3's ending. It's very unsatisfying no matter what angle from which you look at it. Fortunately, they're expanding on it this summer. Yes, EXPANDING. Not CHANGING. It's a wonderful compromise because it gives us fans closure while keeping their "artistic vision." I just wish it was available from launch...

Zack Alklazaris:

Yea they did listen, but IDK... sometimes it just seems unfair. I miss the Mako. The ME universe just seemed so much larger when you could drop down onto a sandbox world.

to bad there was not a single one of those worlds that had anything in them.

Just flat nothingness or impassible mountain nothingness.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:
Erm... no?

Focus testing has become the bane of modern entertainment.

Remember I Am Legend? Remember how shit the ending was, and how it completely ignored everything that the story had implied thus far about the nature of the infected, in favour of a completely hollow piece of melodramatic crap? Yeah, that was because test audiences didn't like the original ending that was filmed.

Focus testing is the bane of good storytelling. Audiences like predictable, typical, formulaic plots and heroes. Great stories, on the other hand, come about by challenging expectations. If you present an audience with a novel, innovative story that deviates from narrative norms, they may well enjoy it. If, however, you give them executive decision over that story, then they will simply reduce all the non-formulaic points down to narrative cliche, simply because this is more familiar and comforting to them.

As a member of the audience, you sole input comes from looking at the piece of art, and generating your reaction to it. Anything more, and you risk bringing the whole thing down to serve the lowest common denominator.

I quite agree. I've brought up the point about I am Legend, myself. I was actually shown the film first, and never gave the movie any thought after I had seen it. But, when I heard about the book being almost worlds apart (and with what I'd heard not even giving spoilers), giving descriptions about how intelligent it was, I was very determined to read it. When I got to the end... My word... One of the greatest endings I have ever come across. This kind of makes me think of Conker's Bad Fur Day. It goes on and on with comedy nonsense action to get your attention and keep your attention, when, suddenly, you've got this very deep, rather depressing ending and completely turns everything over on it's head. And I wouldn't have it any other way.

I admire intelligence... and quality over quantity. "We want a larger audience" really sickens me. When you're going that route, you're sacrificing important aspects of what has been created, just because you want a fatter wallet. But, the fact of the matter is "if you try to please everyone, you'll lose your heiny." Compress it strong, rather than stretch it thin. I'd rather have ten people excited for my work and enjoying it, than 10,000 just looking at it.

It's good advice for people starting game development. Good feedback can help you a lot in becoming better at games development and other things. Of course it's sometimes hard to distinguish good from bad feedback.
But I don't think that this fully applies to a big and experienced dev like Bioware, well Gabe's advice was for people who want to start making games and not for people already heavily involved in some games company.

SecretNegative:
Umm, they DO listen to their fans?

ME1:
Mako shit? Mako gone.
Inventory shit? Inventory gone.
Boring characters? Make more character-oriented.
Boring shit combat? Make more action-focused.

ME2:
Planet scanning shit? Gone.
Not enough RPG? More RPG in ME3.
Memes roflol-hilarious? Have memes in sequal.
Want to see more on characters? Add cameos in ME3.

It seems like Bioware listens a lot to their fans. Sure, some people may like the Mako and inventory from ME1, but the general concensus was that it was shit and they should get rid of it, which they did.

I don't think anyone wanted to get rid of the Mako and inventory. I certainly didn't want the loot system to go, it just needed to be cleaned up. Having good equipment you can salvage from quests is half the fun of being in a roleplay game.
As for more rpg in ME3...Seing as they gutted out the dialogue system by removing extra speech options and you don't get to choose as frequently anymore (conversations are often long and drawn out, leaving you to either drop the controller or tab out from boredom) that's hard to agree on. Having a broken quest system and getting most the quests from overhearing conversations rather than actually talking to people and getting involved firsthand....Yeah, I'd go with the assumption that ME3 was rushed out in order to meet EA's quarterly deadlines.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked