So you want Bethesda to time-travel backwards by more than 10 years, learn from a group of people, and then time travel back (to the present)...

Good luck getting that wish fulfilled..

What the hell are you carrying on about? It has nothing to do with any wish of mine, I'm just pointing out that Bioware already knows how it's done. They don't need to learn from anyone in regards to long and indepth story telling, they're already proven they can be good at it. They just choose not to these days. It no doubt has alot to do with being under EA's thumb, they aren't exactly noted for their indepth games.

Oh, I wasn't referring to you in particular, was making a general sarcastic statement.

Just joking around anyway, sorry if I sounded offensive.

No problem, just a misunderstanding obviously. And there's no need for anyone to time travel back, all they have to do is play the game. Story telling to a large extent is not something that can be taught, it's a skill that a person needs to develop on their own. By looking at some of the better games that have been done, they can get ideas they can use in their own productions, without actually having to consult with anyone. It's just a question of inspiration.

I hope you mean learn from the old bioware . Because in essence bioware no longer exists . Now they are part of that crap company dEAd. I write EA like that because thats what usually happens to devs that they buyout. Proof about my statment. And the most notable IMHO is one thats about in the middle of the page the one about Dice in london. Bioware really no longer exists . EA is just using the name to try and keep the fan base thinking that nothings has changed, but trust me it has.

* Original HQ in San Mateo, California, moved to Redwood City in 1998.

* Origin Systems in Austin, Texas founded in 1983, acquired in 1992, closed in 2004.

* Bullfrog Productions in Surrey, England, founded in 1987, acquired in 1995, merged with EA UK and effectively closed in 2001.

* Black Box Games in Vancouver, British Columbia, founded in January 1983, acquired June 2002 merged with EA Canada.

* EA Baltimore in Baltimore, Maryland, established in 1996 as part of Origin, closed in 2000

* EA Seattle in Seattle, Washington, founded in 1982 as Manley & Associates, acquired January 29, 1996, closed in 2002

* Maxis in Walnut Creek, California, founded in 1987, acquired in June 1997, folded into Redwood Shores in 2004

* Westwood Studios in Las Vegas, Nevada, founded in 1987, acquired from Virgin Interactive Entertainment in August 1998, merged into EA Los Angeles in 2003.

* EA Pacific (known for a time as Westwood Pacific) in Irvine, California, formerly part of Virgin Interactive, acquired with Westwood in 1998, closed in 2003

* Kesmai (known also as GameStorm), founded in 1981, acquired in 1999, closed in 2001.

* DICE Canada in London, Ontario, started in 1998, acquired DICE fully 2 October 2006; closed DICE Canada studio hours later.

* EA Japan in Tokyo, Japan, closed due to consolidation; moved under EA Partners model

* EA UK in Chertsey, United Kingdom, moved to EA UK in Guildford

* EA Chicago in Hoffman Estates, Illinois, founded in 1990 as NuFX, acquired in 2004, closed November 6, 2007.

* Pandemic Studios in Los Angeles, California and Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, founded in 1998, acquired October 2007 from Elevation Partners, closed November 17, 2009.

Its like EA is trying to buy the # 1 spot instead of earning it like everyone else have done in the past.

Personally, I don't think EA is bad..

The Medal of Honor, Sims, FIFA, NBA, Fight Night, series' are all excellent..

Those are all mindless games with no depth to them. They develop games that will appeal to the lowest common denominator, and have no interest in putting out anything really worthwhile or memorable. Almost all of their titles are just "game of the month" type releases. I was very disappointed to hear that Bioware had sold out to them. It's probably just a matter of time before they cease to exist completely. It will be the same story as Westwood, another company who used to produce good games. EA will turn their products into pablum until they're no longer relevant or marketable, then they'll shut the whole operation down.

Have you played them all extensively enough to make such a judgement? Just asking, like, I'm not overly familiar with any of them except FIFA but I definitely wouldn't describe that as having 'no depth'.

You wouldn't believe the amount of memories I have from playing the sims

Medal of Honor (the original one) up until Rising Sun were all chart-toppers, and classics. The equivalent of the CoD games in these days.

NFS was the leading street racing series up until Underground 2.

Sims is the best life simulation game series of all time. I still play 1 and 2, despite owning 3.

All FIFA and NBA games are excellent, and the best ones in their respective sports.

The Skate series is also better than Tony Hawk, IMO..

None of the games they're making are exactly "in depth" RPG's with storylines to begin with. Sims can be pretty in-depth, but that's up to the user. The most fun games of all time have no depth. Arcade games, such as Pacman, Tetris, Pong... In-fact, gaming wouldn't be where they are today if those games weren't fun to begin with.

It's an arcade style football simulator, what possible depth could it have ? Those types of games are what EA specializes in, not story related ones like Fallout, or strategy based games like Civilization. If you enjoy that type of thing I'm sure you'd find them to be fairly good games, but there's certainly not alot to them. And any time that EA gets their hands on a decent title that has some meat to it, like the Command & Conquer franchise, they soon reduce it to an arcade level just like all the rest of their products. The same thing will happen to Bioware's products, until they reach the point of being so mundane that no one wants to play them anymore, and the studio will be shut down. EA is nothing more than the MacDonalds of the gaming industry as far as I'm concerned, delivering bland products with limited substance.

And no I haven't played those titles extensively since I'm not going to waste my time with products that I'm just not interested in.

Didn't the Gamebryo first come out in '99? At least that's the date in the opening screens for New Vegas.



bigcrazewolf

Depth is not something that's exclusive to RPGs and strategy games. Learning to actually be good at FIFA (which sadly is a simulation, not an arcade-style footy game, more's the pity), rather than just competent at it, takes a considerable amount of practice on behalf of the player. And that's without even mentioning the tactical considerations, how different formations match up against each other, how player attributes define what role will get the best out of them, etc. and so on. Another example: Street Fighter III takes an incredible amount of dedication to learn the intricacies of, and watching two experienced players going toe-to-toe is a pleasure for anyone with even a cursory knowledge of the game. People dedicate their entire gaming lives to mastering that game. Depth is not the sole preserve of the pointy-hat brigade.



Then you're probably not best-positioned to comment on them, are you?

Sorry, but it's really hard to take your comments seriously when you have a Super Mario avatar. :shakehead:

Why? Super Mario Bros. 3 is one of the greatest games of all time and there isn't a games developer working today who couldn't learn something from it, irrespective of genre.

Oh wait, I get it, you've got a misplaced sense of elitism regarding your hobby, you seem to be labouring under the misconception that D&D-inspired adolescent fantasy guff is somehow a more worthwhile and meaningful way to pass the time. :rolleyes:

I like Bioware games. Does that make me an oogly elitist with poor taste? :rolleyes:

No, I do too, that's reserved for people who presume that only RPGs and strategy games can have depth. And twunts who dismiss someone's opinon because of their avatar.

Oh please, it's a game designed for children. If that's your idea of an indepth game, then obviously we have nothing more to discuss. Especially since you felt the need to resort to name calling like a typical 5 year old. Have fun playing in your sandbox, let me know when you're ready for the big boy stuff.

Sorry Belanos, but you're the guy who took the cheap-shot by bringing someone avatar into it. There isn't only one way of having fun on Earth. You like your way, he likes his, but that doesn't mean you're better than him, or he's better than you.

Depth isn't the first and last thing a game is to be judged on. If it's only depth, reading a book would be a more worthwhile endeavor. I don't mean to sound harsh or anything, just stating the facts.

Both of you chill out, keep the conversation civil. I know Im not a mod, and there's no need for either to listen to me, but think for a moment about what I've written, and it should make sense.

Edit: And if it's avatars you're worried about, I should be the most ridiculed guy on the forum. I mean, whens the last time you saw Keanu Reeves in a Santa hat?

So what?

Here's a hint: anyone posting anything on a videogame forum on the internet probably isn't best-placed to talk about maturity and "big boy stuff".

Games are supposed to be fun. Clue's in the name.

*goes back to play in sandbox*

But depth is what we've been discussing. While games like Mario Bros. might be a fun way to kill an hour or two, you can't possibly put them in the same league as a game like Fallout or Mass Effect, the two titles that are been compared in this thread.

I didn't bring Mario Bros. into the discussion about depth, remember? You did.

(Comparing Mario and Fallout is comparing a bicycle to a jet-ski.)

What's all this talk about fluid animations?

We all know the third person perspective in Bethesda games is inferior to the first person view as Gamebryo makes you look like you're skating everywhere and running in a diagonal direction provides physics defying movement animations. This could be updated with a new engine and we'd all love it but Beth loves Gamebryo for world rendering and night cycles so we're stuck with mods to make everything look Kawaii Uguu~.

As for third person being more fluid then first person, no. No third person game ever released, no matter what settings or how heavily modded looks anywhere near as fluid as mirror's edge. It just so happens devs like to stick with engines they know (gamebryo) or simulate having a load of equipment weighing you down (every war game ever).

No one's putting them in the same league. They are two different genres of video-game. You're the one who brought it into the discussion, up until that point, we were discussing Fallout and Mass Effect.

Now to bring things back to topic; Fallout Universe is much more developed than Mass Effects, as Fallout has more games released. Mass Effect only has 2 (unless Im missing some spin-off or something).

I think you might be confusing depth with immersion. As realism of dialogue options is something that's more immersion-based than actual depth..

No, actually you did: