EA: Mass Effect 3 to be dumbed down

[Schadenfroh]

Dialog involves decisions, replace interactive dialog with cut scenes.
Stats / levels require math, replace them with auto-aim.
Quests (especially side-quests) require lists of objectives, too complex, streamline to one objective at a time given to you on the fly (like by a talking voice inside your helmet that tells you where to go and what to do)
Equipment customization requires decisions, limit customization to a choice between a rifle, pistol, shotgun or rocket launcher with only one suit of armor.

this armor...

 

[Powermoloch]

wow....

if they're going to dumb it down, all hope is lost for bioware.

 

[gothamhunter]

Do you not realize what "address a much larger market opportunity than Mass Effect 1 and Mass Effect 2 began to approach" means?

Yeah, it means making a game that will appeal to a broader audience, i.e making it more FPS for the FPS crowd and more RPG for the RPG crowd.

Oh, was I supposed to automatically infer that it meant they were going to dumb it down so 5 year olds can play? Sorry that I have faith in this game instead and trust their decisions for the ME universe.

and ME2 wasn't dumbed down. They just stripped out all the useless fluff. Or did you want to pick up 40 billion pieces of the same useless equipment again?

 

[Red Storm]

He didn't say the game is going to sell well. He said it's aiming to appeal to a broader audience, which can only be done by simplifying the game further. You can't appeal to a broader audience by specializing, you do the opposite (this is true for every product, not just games). I'm not quite sure why you think this isn't so, it's not like it hasn't been going on forever.

Edit: You can't make it both "more RPG" and "more FPS" at the same time. They are not the same type of game play, going one way obviously detracts from the other.

 

[gothamhunter]

He didn't say the game is going to sell well. He said it's aiming to appeal to a broader audience, which can only be done by simplifying the game further. You can't appeal to a broader audience by specializing, you do the opposite (this is true for every product, not just games). I'm not quite sure why you think this isn't so, it's not like it hasn't been going on forever.

You make it appealing to a broader audience by making it more things. ME2 was the segway from RPG to shooter; I'm guessing they're trying to expand on that so it will appeal to more of the shooter crowd since the RPG crowd is already drawn in from the franchise.

 

[Red Hawk]

He didn't say the game is going to sell well. He said it's aiming to appeal to a broader audience, which can only be done by simplifying the game further. You can't appeal to a broader audience by specializing, you do the opposite (this is true for every product, not just games). I'm not quite sure why you think this isn't so, it's not like it hasn't been going on forever.

Appealing to a broader audience implies better sales. And it doesn't imply losing the original audience. Improvements across the board can attract more people.

Edit: You can't make it both "more RPG" and "more FPS" at the same time, they are not the same type of genre, so going one way obviously detracts from the other.

Why not? Let's say the game adds class-specific melee moves and adds mechanics like rolling and climbing ladders, while expanding the amount of skills you can customize. (all of which the developers have said they are doing) Both the shooter side and the RPG side are being improved. How does that hurt the other?

 

[gothamhunter]

I like Red Hawk

 

[Red Hawk]

I like Red Hawk

Thanks.

 

[SMOGZINN]

Appealing to a broader audience implies better sales. And it doesn't imply losing the original audience. Improvements across the board can attract more people.

It is generally assumed in this sort of situation that your original audience will buy the game on name recognition alone. Add in some money for marketing to buy a few good reviews, and you can make it into a copy of The Sims and you will keep a significant portion your original audience, because of:
"Stop being paranoid. Christina Norman, gameplay designer for ME3, tweeted on no uncertain terms that they are improving both the RPG gameplay and the shooter gameplay. " "idc itll be a day 1 purchase for me " "I don't see anything in there saying it'll be dumbed down or simplified. To me it sounds like they're trying to better bridge the gap between FPS and RPG. Ya'll need to calm down."

A lot of gamers will buy it no matter how bad it is and EA knows this.

Why not? Let's say the game adds class-specific melee moves and adds mechanics like rolling and climbing ladders, while expanding the amount of skills you can customize. (all of which the developers have said they are doing) Both the shooter side and the RPG side are being improved. How does that hurt the other?

FPS players want to jump into and out of the action with out having to read any dialog or make any choices, they want twitch control with large explosions.
RPG players want to take their time and be told a story, they want to make decisions that effect that story, they want the opertunity to geek out on the numbers.
These things are mutually exclusive.

 

[Robert Munch]

 

[AstroManLuca]

pretty sad to see EA ruining Bioware

still have Valve and Blizzard at least

Blizzard is owned by Activision and they've been going downhill since WoW came out.

Valve is no longer a game developer, they are a digital hat company.

 

[Fenixgoon]

I'll wait and see how it turns out before making any pre-judgements. I thought ME2 was perfect. I hope they don't change the mechanics too much.

i could have used a little more loot and customization. otherwise, it was much improved from ME1.

 

[Red Hawk]

It is generally assumed in this sort of situation that your original audience will buy the game on name recognition alone. Add in some money for marketing to buy a few good reviews, and you can make it into a copy of The Sims and you will keep a significant portion your original audience, because of:
"Stop being paranoid. Christina Norman, gameplay designer for ME3, tweeted on no uncertain terms that they are improving both the RPG gameplay and the shooter gameplay. " "idc itll be a day 1 purchase for me " "I don't see anything in there saying it'll be dumbed down or simplified. To me it sounds like they're trying to better bridge the gap between FPS and RPG. Ya'll need to calm down."

A lot of gamers will buy it no matter how bad it is and EA knows this.

Because we have no reason to think it will be bad. All I've read can be taken as the game will be better than the other two. In fact, Ricitiello didn't specify just what broader audience it is going for. It could be expanding upon both the shooter audience and RPG audience. You're being paranoid and reading too much into this.

The one sign that the RPG experience might be compromised is if multiplayer was added. BioWare has categorically denied that. That's a sign that they are not, in fact, abandoning the RPG side for more sales.

FPS players want to jump into and out of the action with out having to read any dialog or make any choices, they want twitch control with large explosions.
RPG players want to take their time and be told a story, they want to make decisions that effect that story, they want the opertunity to geek out on the numbers.
These things are mutually exclusive.

FPS players can breeze through the dialog and auto-level up. Again, things that improve one side of the experience don't necessarily need to detract from the other side.

 

[frozentundra123456]

pretty sad to see EA ruining Bioware

still have Valve and Blizzard at least

I dont like the direction any of bioware's games are going either, but I think that you have to hold Bioware at least partially responsible too. Nobody put a gun to their head and made them sell out (literally and figuratively) to EA.

I have had a serious grudge against Bioware since they turned KOTOR into an MMO.

 

[zerocool84]

I dont like the direction any of bioware's games are going either, but I think that you have to hold Bioware at least partially responsible too. Nobody put a gun to their head and made them sell out (literally and figuratively) to EA.

I have had a serious grudge against Bioware since they turned KOTOR into an MMO.

They either make the games EA wants or be out of a job. They basically have to dumb them down.

 

[Dumac]

This is about the same thing that they said about DA2, and we all see how that turned out

 

[Dumac]

Dialog involves decisions, replace interactive dialog with cut scenes.
Stats / levels require math, replace them with auto-aim.
Quests (especially side-quests) require lists of objectives, too complex, streamline to one objective at a time given to you on the fly (like by a talking voice inside your helmet that tells you where to go and what to do)
Equipment customization requires decisions, limit customization to a choice between a rifle, pistol, shotgun or rocket launcher with only one suit of armor.

this armor...

Sounds like DA2

 

[Red Hawk]

This is about the same thing that they said about DA2, and we all see how that turned out

Actually, what happened with DA2 is more like what happened with Mass Effect 2. The problem there is that BioWare didn't realize what works for one series doesn't necessarily work for the other. Seeing how Mass Effect 2 already forged the path that DA2 followed and was met with success, I don't think Mass Effect 3 is in danger of similar failure.

 

[Raduque]

FPS players want to jump into and out of the action with out having to read any dialog or make any choices, they want twitch control with large explosions.
RPG players want to take their time and be told a story, they want to make decisions that effect that story, they want the opertunity to geek out on the numbers.
These things are mutually exclusive.

No, not really.

A game can have the FPS element (lots of shooting and 'splosions) while "On mission", but it can ALSO have the RPG element (dialog trees, storylines, far-reaching decisions, stats, levels and skills) while "off mission"

The "missions/quests" are the FPS while the "not mission/quest" is the RPG. Basically, just like ME2, but maybe with both moar pewpew/splosions AND deeper character development (stats/levels/skills).

 

[coloumb]

Civilization V tried to appeal to a broader audience too....gone are the days of complex PC RPG games by big time developers...

 

[SergeC]

I'm not surprised being DA2 was also dumbed down ,it seems anything EA touches is ruined in some way.

It doesn't seem that. It IS that.

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

Lots of speculation and frothy-mouthed basement-dwelling PC gamers in this thread.

 

[smartpatrol]

Actually, what happened with DA2 is more like what happened with Mass Effect 2. The problem there is that BioWare didn't realize what works for one series doesn't necessarily work for the other. Seeing how Mass Effect 2 already forged the path that DA2 followed and was met with success, I don't think Mass Effect 3 is in danger of similar failure.

I don't agree with this at all. What ruined DA2 was:
- recycled environments
- Unlike DA:O, which was an epic journey, DA2 takes place almost entirely inside one boring & lifeless city
- Most of the game consists of doing generic, boring sidequests

DA2 was like an experiment to see how little effort and content they could put into a game.

Anyway Red Hawk, I really hope you're right about ME3, but I'm not getting my hopes up. We've seen countless examples of great gaming studios that got ruined by EA. And, we've seen a surprisingly low-quality game from Bioware. The odds do not look good.

 

[H54]

How can they dumb down ME2 anymore? Will not buy if this is true.

 

[llee]

tl;dr: me3 is going to be a scifi borderlands.