Anthem

[MrBrown]

For some reason, DA2 was the Bio game that I ended up playing the most.

 

Not completely sure why. One thing for sure is that I liked that the NPCs had some unique traits so they weren't just copies of possible PCs, and the game structure of 3 acts with free exploring during each meant there was always challenging combat (something DA:O and DAI fail at). So it had a lot of replay value for me.

[rjshae]

For some reason, DA2 was the Bio game that I ended up playing the most.

 

Not completely sure why. One thing for sure is that I liked that the NPCs had some unique traits so they weren't just copies of possible PCs, and the game structure of 3 acts with free exploring during each meant there was always challenging combat (something DA:O and DAI fail at). So it had a lot of replay value for me.

 

I did enjoy the personas in DA2. Most of the DA2 stuff that freaked people out didn't bother me at all. I wouldn't mind seeing a revamped, high-def. release some day that fixed the supposed issues.

[ShadySands]

I hated the combat system and camera in DA2 more than anything else. I liked the ideas they seemed to be striving for even though I thought the execution was the worst of all Bio games excepting maybe Andromeda. I guess it was decent for a JRPG.

 

PS I don't hate JRPGs but the game works better for me in that context

Edited February 27, 2019 by ShadySands

[Boeroer]

Most older gamers (who were around for it all) consider Mass Effect 1-3 the best that Bioware's ever put out.

ROFLMAO!

[Vitalis]

 

Most older gamers (who were around for it all) consider Mass Effect 1-3 the best that Bioware's ever put out.

ROFLMAO!

I agree with this gif.

 

The roleplaying went down hill after 1, but the shooting gameplay went up. They appealed more to the shooter crowd than the roleplaying, and let's not even get started on the Tali debacle that 2 gave us.

Edited February 27, 2019 by Vitalis

[alanschu]

 

Most older gamers (who were around for it all) consider Mass Effect 1-3 the best that Bioware's ever put out.

ROFLMAO!

 

 

Only wrong in the sense that it is "older gamers." Compared to fresh young pups that are just getting into gaming the last 5 years the context is probably accurate.

 

This forum (at least when I was active here) leaned towards even OLDER gamers so for many long time here it was BG2 (and for some, KOTOR) that they felt was our peak. Unsurprisingly those that loved ME Trilogy (or even the first 3 DA games) don't care much for a game like BG2. You probably get KOTOR overlapping the most which would probably make sense given when it was released relative to the others.

 

It's also reflective of what people liked about our games. For example, for a lot of people it was BG1/2's tactical combat aspect was what they loved. Unsurprisingly not much since then has made those people happy. I still had people on the old BSN that said they stuck around being a voice for a return ala "BG3" (or whatever spiritual successor as licensing was probably an issue). For myself it was the narrative and specifically companions which I loved, which I think were more ubiquitous across the breadth of BioWare games (subjective preferences aside).  It meant BG1 was cool but not really my cup of tea (especially as someone that hated low level AD&D), though BG2 pulled me in heavily.  We also have people that literally didn't play one second of single player of ME3, but hundreds of hours of the multiplayer.

[Gromnir]

would argue mdk2 were bioware's best effort, although not our favorite game.  bg2 and me2 would be our two favorites, if for different reasons. da:o, though flawed in may ways and not in any way living up to pre-release developer goals and promises, were not far behind me2 on our list o' most enjoyed bioware games.

 

as for the curious glee experienced by many at the thought o' bio's demise, we do not get it. 

 

perhaps you believe bio is no longer able to make the kinda games you enjoy. bio simple cannot make it through the swamp.

 

 

converse, maybe bio went from being your loyal crpg developer to instead becoming something darker, something sadder.

 

 

in either case, we remember what was and mourn what coulda' been, but take no joy at what is. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Humanoid]

Haven't followed this whole kerfuffle too closely, but it's no surprise. I find myself thinking about what the best BioWare game of the past decade is and - oh god, it's SWTOR isn't it? I find that somewhat telling.

 

Wind back to the decade previous and it's a lot more open. BG2 and ME1 are the jewels in the crown. I guess KoTOR has a shout I suppose but I'm not as hot on it personally. That said, I'm very lukewarm about NWN and DA1 so I won't pretend it was a hit factory even then.

[Boeroer]

 

 

Most older gamers (who were around for it all) consider Mass Effect 1-3 the best that Bioware's ever put out.

ROFLMAO!

Only wrong in the sense that it is "older gamers." Compared to fresh young pups that are just getting into gaming the last 5 years the context is probably accurate.

Only wrong in the sense that it is "older gamers"?

 

That's like saying "Most green bananas are sweeter than yellow ones" - "Wrong" - "Only wrong if sweetness is concerned".

 

The statement as a whole was wrong. Besides that annoying habit of constantly speaking for others and making up "facts" out of the blue - which is also wrong.

 

Nice insights from you though. Thanks for that. I don't get all this "XY is evil because they don't produce what I like anymore" anyway.

[alanschu]

 

 

 

Most older gamers (who were around for it all) consider Mass Effect 1-3 the best that Bioware's ever put out.

ROFLMAO!

Only wrong in the sense that it is "older gamers." Compared to fresh young pups that are just getting into gaming the last 5 years the context is probably accurate.

Only wrong in the sense that it is "older gamers"?

 

That's like saying "Most green bananas are sweeter than yellow ones" - "Wrong" - "Only wrong if sweetness is concerned".

 

 

I mean that what they consider "older gamers" had a gap that overlooked an even older group of gamers. Perspective of one's audience can be off due to inaccurate assumptions and all (e.g. I often prescribe a pronoun based on one's avatar) and it's not really nefarious; it's just gaps in their assumptions.

 

Someone that is 28 is an "older gamer" compared to Fortnite players of today. And I pick Fortnite specifically because it's one of the first games I've felt an obvious "generational gap" in that This Thing Is Definitely Not For Me But Is Definitely Very For A Demographic I'm Not A Part Of. My wife and I went to a restaurant and when the server asked us what we were up to, we said we were going to go home and play some games and his eyes lit up "Oh you play Fortnite!?" hahaha.

 

The idea, though, that it was "all down hill" from the EA purchase is going to be something some people will definitely not agree with. And if we were able to take a particularly randomized poll of the entire gaming community for BioWare's peak, I wouldn't at all be surprised if it came after EA's purchase of BioWare.  With it comes the PC version of the first game, DAO finally being released, and BioWare's best selling games all coming after that period.  Of course it's also a bit of an obvious thought, given that gaming itself has grown.

 

 

EDIT: Even I did it since I bucketed "Fortnite players of today" as being younger players which certainly isn't an entirely accurate generalization hahaha

 

 

 

I don't get all this "XY is evil because they don't produce what I like anymore" anyway.

 

The way I've always looked at it is that a game dev making games that don't interest me anymore is functionally no different than if they had just gone out of business.

Edited February 28, 2019 by alanschu

[GhostofAnakin]

Why did Bio decide it would be a good idea to release essentially a pre-beta stage version of Destiny as a final release for Anthem?  The stuff missing in the game, the overall lack of content, the shortest and least effort they've ever put into a story, are things that you just wouldn't expect from a game in development for 6 years.

 

Did Anthem get scrapped like 10 times over the past 6 years, and the version they released was one they scrambled to put together last summer?

[the_dog_days]

The stuff missing in the game, the overall lack of content, the shortest and least effort they've ever put into a story , are things that you just wouldn't expect from a game in development for 6 years.

 

 

DA2 shipped without a main plot. Don't get me wrong, there were things that happened, but there wasn't a unifying plot (which is why they slapped a cheap frame story onto it).

Edited February 28, 2019 by the_dog_days

[kirottu]

I really hope this will end the "games as service" thing EA and some others are trying to push. They release a broken game and then as a "service" try to patch it to some working state. What really breaks my heart is that some people have bought into it. They think when developer fixes something utterly broken, it is a sign that the system is working. No, just no. The game should have never been released in the state it was.

[Katphood]

The only BioWare games I played were Mass Effect 1-3 and Dragon Age 1, 2, Inquisition.

 

I remember Baldurs Gate and stuff but I was always too busy playing Fallout 1, 2, Arcanum, VTMB...

 

The whole Dungeons & Dragons thing wasn't my cup of tea back in the 90's and early 2000's.

[Amentep]

 

Clearly what this shows us is that we need to have a better classification system when talking about the age of gamers.  I suggest aping D&D's dragon age ranges.

 

 

Category     Age (Years)

 

Wyrmling      0–2

 

Very young   2–5

 

Young           6–9

 

Juvenile       10–15

 

Young adult 16–19

 

Adult            20–28

 

Mature adult 29–36

 

Old               37–42

 

Very old       43–49

 

Ancient        50–60

 

Wyrm          61–80

 

Great wyrm 81 or more

[Chilloutman]

But I am not mature...

[Malcador]

Mature adult 29–36

What Internet are you on ?

[Gfted1]

Oh snap, Im staring Ancient in the face!

[213374U]

[alanschu]

Why did Bio decide it would be a good idea to release essentially a pre-beta stage version of Destiny as a final release for Anthem?  The stuff missing in the game, the overall lack of content, the shortest and least effort they've ever put into a story, are things that you just wouldn't expect from a game in development for 6 years.

 

I haven't played through the narrative itself yet so I'm not sure how long it is. How long did it take you to get through it all? What other stuff did you find missing from the game (lack of content or otherwise)?

 

(I know end game content has been a complaint as seems to be the case for a lot of these games but curious if there was something else)

Edited February 28, 2019 by alanschu

[GhostofAnakin]

 

Why did Bio decide it would be a good idea to release essentially a pre-beta stage version of Destiny as a final release for Anthem?  The stuff missing in the game, the overall lack of content, the shortest and least effort they've ever put into a story, are things that you just wouldn't expect from a game in development for 6 years.

 

I haven't played through the narrative itself yet so I'm not sure how long it is. How long did it take you to get through it all? What other stuff did you find missing from the game (lack of content or otherwise)?

 

(I know end game content has been a complaint as seems to be the case for a lot of these games but curious if there was something else)

 

 

Playing at a friend's place as I didn't buy the game (he's my guinea pig), so I've only played it sporadically.  But things that I've noticed that are lacking, either compared to previous Bio games or games in the loot shooter genre that Anthem is competing with:

 

-Character stats.  I can't tell how strong my character is, or how each piece of gear actually impacts my overall build

-Story.  What exactly is the story?  I think me and my friend are about halfway through the main story (got to the grind part where you have to freestyle to finish challenges to open the 4 tombs) and I honestly couldn't tell you what the main story really is about other than the freelancer doing unconnected tasks for people.

-Loot is terrible.  The guns all look the same, the drops from encounters suck, and the stuff I can craft is terrible.

-It's impossible to find "world events" on the freeplay map.  You almost have to luck into them because there's nothing like in Destiny that indicates a world event is taking place in a certain spot.

-Unable to access inventory and change gear except when you're back at the Forge

-Transitioning between the Forge and Fort Tarsis is a load screen.

 

Those are the main things.  It just seems like the game is in the early stages before all the final touches are put on it.  And the story seems like they didn't even want to add a story, but decided they needed some minor thing just to give you an excuse for doing these various errands.  Even Destiny, whose story I thought was only average, seemed to be telling a more coherent story.

[ShadySands]

I don't mind games as a service and I even think my ideal game would likely be one. I'm thinking of an everexpanding predominantly single player experience where you can group up with others where it makes sense. Not a loot shooter or anything like that, I'd want the main focus to be on the story. Somewhat like what I've heard SWTOR was originally conceived as but without changing protagonists from one story to the next.

[Gromnir]

Clearly what this shows us is that we need to have a better classification system when talking about the age of gamers.  I suggest aping D&D's dragon age ranges.

 

 

Category     Age (Years)

 

Wyrmling      0–2

 

Very young   2–5

 

Young           6–9

 

Juvenile       10–15

 

Young adult 16–19

 

Adult            20–28

 

Mature adult 29–36

 

Old               37–42

 

Very old       43–49

 

Ancient        50–60

 

Wyrm          61–80

 

Great wyrm 81 or more

 

hmm.

 

mere four months 'til am properly ancient.  don't feel ancient.

 

 

HA! Good Fun!

[213374U]

I don't mind games as a service and I even think my ideal game would likely be one. I'm thinking of an everexpanding predominantly single player experience where you can group up with others where it makes sense. Not a loot shooter or anything like that, I'd want the main focus to be on the story. Somewhat like what I've heard SWTOR was originally conceived as but without changing protagonists from one story to the next.

 

Agreed. I am not opposed to the concept of GaaS. However I am opposed to it being code for overmarketed, cookie-cutter products, working on a "release now, fix later" philosophy and a business model strongly reliant on nickel-and-diming.

 

I preordered Rise of the Hutt Cartel and Shadow of Revan. Didn't regret either purchase, or the subscription money I spent throughout the years. I would support more of that, but it was apparently decided that that strategy just isn't profitable enough, so instead we have free expansions of substantially lower quality and the perception that the product is being catered mainly to "whales". Was that Bioware? Was it EA? The distinction is academic because it says it right on the package that Bioware is a division of EA.

 

*screech*

[Gorth]

I guess I'm technically "Ancient" although I really only feel like an Immature Adult