Bioware- AAA studio who can't do gameplay well?

Now that I think about it, Bioware is like the only 'Big Name' game company that can't really get the gameplay down.

With kotor as a starting point (wasn't really into pc gaming so never played their older titles so no expertise on those), hasn't all their games have less than stellar gameplay behind their awesome characters and environments?

I guess this just shows how compelling their stories are, that reviewers do seem to be a bit more lenient on scores. For AAA studio it's weird how their games systems seem more broken than the average eastern european rpg o_O.

I'm really curious how ME3 will do though. After playing a large part of Duke Nukem Forever, I'm sad to say the gameplay aspect is better than ME2 >.>" But that's 'kinda' apples and oranges so I digress.

Any other 'celeb' studios that don't bank on solid gameplay?

Bethesda

I really don't see how you can possibly say DNF had better gameplay than ME2. 
 
I'll grant you that ME1 was a bit broken and shit gameplay wise, but ME2 was more than serviceable. The control and fluidity was fine. It worked well as a shooter. I'm not really sure what could have been done to make it any better in that regard. 
 
Completely disagree with you that ME2 lacked solid gameplay.

@100_Hertz said:

Bethesda

I like the combat in both Bioware and Bethesda games.

Quickly, I must strategically retreat from this thread before I feel bad about myself. Or at least worse.

Wait, how the hell does that work?

I loved Mass Effect 2's gameplay through and through. Meanwhile, most of their gameplay design is pretty solid, it's only their combat that seems to suffer.

Also, Fox Team (the Metal Gear Solid guys?) I liked the gameplay in those first three games, but MGS1 and 2 weren't exactly "good" gameplay, and since MGS3 they've had a lot more trouble. (Though I haven't played Peace Walker, which people like.)

I really don't see how you can possibly say DNF had better gameplay than ME2. 

They are off and on for me. I loved the game play in Baldur's Gate 2, KOTOR, and Dragon Age: Origins, but I really dislike the game play of the Mass Effect series increasingly with each new instalment of the series. Dragon Age 2 was just out right awful all around game play wise. I just think it comes down to them usually being able to tell a decent story with fun characters that you learn to care about, and passable game play.

bioware's games play great, except for jade empire

No.

/end topic.

Rockstar. 
Pretty much everything before Red Dead had pretty terrible gameplay systems.

Rockstar, I mean they make excellent games.  But the driving, the walking, the shooting, the horse riding, and cover systems, are very clunky and can be alot better if they really devoted some time to improving it (i'm mainly talking about GTA, RDR, open world games they make).   What they do well is making game worlds and environments and creating a high quality story around it.

@face15 said:

Rockstar. Pretty much everything before Red Dead had pretty terrible gameplay systems.

Word. Except maybe Bully.

The only Bioware game I can think of that I thought had bad combat was Dragon Age: Origins. Everything else is fine.

I disagree.  Dragon Age Origins, Dragon Age 2, Mass Effect 2 (And even though a lot of people didn't, I even liked ME1's combat), and Baldur's Gate all had very satisfying combat in my opinion.

Their gameplay is better than Square's could ever dream of.

@face15 said:

Rockstar. Pretty much everything before Red Dead had pretty terrible gameplay systems.

Red Dead was the fucking worst what are you talking about

@Pinworm45 said:

I really don't see how you can possibly say DNF had better gameplay than ME2. I'll grant you that ME1 was a bit broken and shit gameplay wise, but ME2 was more than serviceable. The control and fluidity was fine. It worked well as a shooter. I'm not really sure what could have been done to make it any better in that regard. Completely disagree with you that ME2 lacked solid gameplay.

ME2 was fine, but there was no deviation at all from one gameplay concept. Every level was linear path with nothing besides cover and shoot probably less than 10 variations of enemy types. This would be fine for 5-10 hour game, but 20-30hrs?

Duke at least has some platforming, puzzling, driving, random interactions, etc. Not really a good game but I enjoyed the "gameplay" parts more. At least ME3 seems to be addressing these issues with... turret sequences. YAY!

Rockstar. Pretty much everything before Red Dead had pretty terrible gameplay systems.

BioWare is an American-owned Canadianvideo game developer founded in February 1995 by Ray Muzyka, Greg Zeschuk, and Augustine Yip, and currently owned by Electronic Arts. BioWare specializes in role-playing video games, and became famous for launching highly praised and successful licensed franchises, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, and Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic. They later made several successful games based on original IP: Jade Empire, Mass Effect,Dragon Age: Origins, Mass Effect 2 and Dragon Age II. They are currently working on two projects: Star Wars: The Old Republic and Mass Effect 3, both scheduled for release in 2011. Dragon Age III has also been announced.

The BioWare Group of studios is now four studios (BioWare Edmonton, BioWare Austin, BioWare Mythic, and BioWare Montreal) comprising the RPG/MMO Group within Electronic Arts, with Muzyka, EA Senior VP and the Group General Manager and Zeschuk EA VP and Group Creative Officer of the BioWare Group; Yip left in early 1997 to return to medicine. Other senior leaders in the BioWare Group (RPG/MMO Group) of Electronic Arts are Rob Denton (EA VP and Group Operations Officer of the BioWare Group), Patrick Buechner (EA VP and Group Marketing Officer of the BioWare Group), Gordon Walton and Rich Vogel (EA VPs and co-General Managers of BioWare Austin), Aaryn Flynn (EA VP and General Manager of BioWare Edmonton), Eugene Evans (EA VP and General Manager of BioWare Mythic, in Fairfax, Virginia), and Yanick Roy (Studio Director of BioWare Montreal).

No no, gameplay is always excellent, its Bioware's sequels that suck.

@Pinworm45 said:

I really don't see how you can possibly say DNF had better gameplay than ME2. I'll grant you that ME1 was a bit broken and shit gameplay wise, but ME2 was more than serviceable. The control and fluidity was fine. It worked well as a shooter. I'm not really sure what could have been done to make it any better in that regard. Completely disagree with you that ME2 lacked solid gameplay.

ME2 was fine, but there was no deviation at all from one gameplay concept. Every level was linear path with nothing besides cover and shoot probably less than 10 variations of enemy types. This would be fine for 5-10 hour game, but 20-30hrs?

Duke at least has some platforming, puzzling, driving, random interactions, etc. Not really a good game but I enjoyed the "gameplay" parts more. At least ME3 seems to be addressing these issues with... turret sequences. YAY!

oh yea, I don't think Bioware has ever done a fun boss fight o_O.

I still don't understand the massive backlash Bioware seems to be getting these days... 
 
A year ago everyone loved them, now they're apparently one of the most hated developers on the internet. 

@Laketown said:

@face15 said:

Rockstar. Pretty much everything before Red Dead had pretty terrible gameplay systems.

Red Dead was the fucking worst what are you talking about

It was great. That's what are he talking about.

Opinions are like assholes.

Everyone has one.

I wish ME would try to be more of and RPG and less of a shooter otherwise it just becomes a ok shooter. Give me some loot and make the dialog not as transparent. Dragon Age Origins did a lot of things right. Make the crew intereact out side of battle. Don't make turret sequences.

As a person who has played from complete crap fests  to god send gameplay I can be sure that Bioware games plays extremely well (including DA2 >:3) , I think you are just trolling ma boy

The only Bioware game I can think of that I thought had bad combat was Dragon Age: Origins. Everything else is fine.

I still don't understand the massive backlash Bioware seems to be getting these days...  A year ago everyone loved them, now they're apparently one of the most hated developers on the internet. 

@Chop said:

I still don't understand the massive backlash Bioware seems to be getting these days... A year ago everyone loved them, now they're apparently one of the most hated developers on the internet.

Can't say it really has surprised me considering how quickly people continue to flippity flop on other developers like Bungie and Infinity Ward.

@Doctorchimp said:

@chickdigger802 said:

@Pinworm45 said:

I really don't see how you can possibly say DNF had better gameplay than ME2. I'll grant you that ME1 was a bit broken and shit gameplay wise, but ME2 was more than serviceable. The control and fluidity was fine. It worked well as a shooter. I'm not really sure what could have been done to make it any better in that regard. Completely disagree with you that ME2 lacked solid gameplay.

ME2 was fine, but there was no deviation at all from one gameplay concept. Every level was linear path with nothing besides cover and shoot probably less than 10 variations of enemy types. This would be fine for 5-10 hour game, but 20-30hrs?

Duke at least has some platforming, puzzling, driving, random interactions, etc. Not really a good game but I enjoyed the "gameplay" parts more. At least ME3 seems to be addressing these issues with... turret sequences. YAY!

Oh so now you're just going to cherry pick Mass Effect 2 apart to make it just look like a linear shooter? So you're really gonna exclude every other story interaction and times when you had to explore levels where you just walk and talk and guide your way through? mighty unfair....

well the gameplay parts are just that aren't they? When you enter a 'mission' you pretty much have only 1 path to go. The game even acknowledges that with it's big arrow when your in 'tactics' mode, but that's not what I'm complaining about. I'm more against how there were probably only a handful of unique encounters that felt somewhat different (half of those are dlc). Most are just enter map with assorted cover, and fight krogans (rarely), collectors, or misc mercs, with slightly different environment textures and skybox.

But go back on topic, I can argue ME2 gameplay all day in another thread ;)

Bethesda

I disagree.  Dragon Age Origins, Dragon Age 2, Mass Effect 2 (And even though a lot of people didn't, I even liked ME1's combat), and Baldur's Gate all had very satisfying combat in my opinion.

@carlthenimrod said:

@Chop said:

I still don't understand the massive backlash Bioware seems to be getting these days... A year ago everyone loved them, now they're apparently one of the most hated developers on the internet.

Can't say it really has surprised me considering how quickly people continue to flippity flop on other developers like Bungie and Infinity Ward.

Really? I felt that all bioware games are, ' hurry up with the gameplay bits to go back to the character and story bits'. Not really hating Bioware, besides some justfied reasons for DA2.

Their gameplay is better than Square's could ever dream of.

I still don't understand the massive backlash Bioware seems to be getting these days...  A year ago everyone loved them, now they're apparently one of the most hated developers on the internet. 

@HerbieBug said:

@Chop said:

I still don't understand the massive backlash Bioware seems to be getting these days... A year ago everyone loved them, now they're apparently one of the most hated developers on the internet.

It's a boil over of held in check frustration about the changes made in Mass Effect 2 triggered by Dragon Age 2. Mass Effect 2 was fine on it's own, but DA2 confirmed a clear change of direction in focus to their games. Fans feel disenfranchised. It feels on some level like a betrayal to see a developer of games you used to like take those games and retool them into something you don't, all for purpose of pandering to a separate larger group in hopes of selling more copy. I think the changes in Mass Effect 2 were tolerated by the RPG hardcore partly because of the existence of Dragon Age: Origins. DA:O thoroughly scratched the itch that the shooterized de-rpg'd ME2 left. Then to see Bioware turn the bastion of hardcore RPGness that was DA:O into another "streamlined" moron focused action game... it doesn't sit right. Especially right now after the one bit of ME3 they decide to show off at E3 was a fucking rail shooting sequence.

Been wondering, has the transition of more action less rpg actually helped out their sales? I don't recall the recent ones doing amazing (still really good).

@Chop said:

I still don't understand the massive backlash Bioware seems to be getting these days...  A year ago everyone loved them, now they're apparently one of the most hated developers on the internet. 

  Especially right now after the one bit of ME3 they decide to show off at E3 was a fucking rail shooting sequence. 

The hardcore are never satisfied no matter what.

Because, they are, hardcore.

@chickdigger802:

ME2 sold more than 2mil (was on some EA press event long ago). i think FO manage to outsell the ME franchise, because they are better at deceiving people that its a FPS.

@niamahai said:

The hardcore are never satisfied no matter what.

Because, they are, hardcore.

@chickdigger802:

ME2 sold more than 2mil (was on some EA press event long ago). i think FO manage to outsell the ME franchise, because they are better at deceiving people that its a FPS.

Hmmm I'm really curious how well ME3 will do. If you haven't played ME1+2 or just 2, would you want to pick up 3? There marketing seems to emphasize 'end of a epic trilogy' aspect. Might turn off a few people.

@chickdigger802:

nah. They will get Gamestop to do pack-in deals with ME2. Or heavily promote a "Previously on ME" trailer.

Is there any recent video game trilogies where the final entry of the series gained more popularity than the earlier ones? Just for comparisons sake.

It all comes down to how much you're willing to let the game embrace you. I went through six run-throughs in both games with all 6 classes. Worked my way from my favorite (infiltrator) down to the one I hardly payed attention to (engineer) and in that entire time there wasn't a moment where I said "okay. I'm done. Same ol' 'shoot out of cover' mechanics". It is what it is. That's like saying you bought a God of War game and didn't like it cause there wasn't a speech system a-la Fallout where you can basically by-pass every fight sequence with a speech check. It's got guns. You shoot guys with them. I spent my entire first run-through in ME1 just sniping heads off and upping my Sniper specialization to get that scope as steady as possible.
 
I also don't get the sentiment of why this game isn't as RPGish as the first one. Even down to the last 30 minutes of the engineer run I barely found out that Overload does have an effect on unshielded enemies. It doesn't lower their health a single bit, but it does overheat weapons so the enemy NPC gets stuck in a reloading animation for about 5 seconds. It's a form of crowd control. It's small, but it's there. When I found out about it I was kind of saddened that it was right at the end. I would have loved to have a go at the entire campaign bringing that little crumb of knowledge into each battle. Even singularity, a move that supposedly has no effect on shielded enemies and therefor got gimped in part 2, does so in fact by stunning them momentarily.

@Doctorchimp said:

@chickdigger802 said:

@Pinworm45 said:

I really don't see how you can possibly say DNF had better gameplay than ME2. I'll grant you that ME1 was a bit broken and shit gameplay wise, but ME2 was more than serviceable. The control and fluidity was fine. It worked well as a shooter. I'm not really sure what could have been done to make it any better in that regard. Completely disagree with you that ME2 lacked solid gameplay.

ME2 was fine, but there was no deviation at all from one gameplay concept. Every level was linear path with nothing besides cover and shoot probably less than 10 variations of enemy types. This would be fine for 5-10 hour game, but 20-30hrs?

Duke at least has some platforming, puzzling, driving, random interactions, etc. Not really a good game but I enjoyed the "gameplay" parts more. At least ME3 seems to be addressing these issues with... turret sequences. YAY!

Oh so now you're just going to cherry pick Mass Effect 2 apart to make it just look like a linear shooter? So you're really gonna exclude every other story interaction and times when you had to explore levels where you just walk and talk and guide your way through? mighty unfair....

well the gameplay parts are just that aren't they? When you enter a 'mission' you pretty much have only 1 path to go. The game even acknowledges that with it's big arrow when your in 'tactics' mode, but that's not what I'm complaining about. I'm more against how there were probably only a handful of unique encounters that felt somewhat different (half of those are dlc). Most are just enter map with assorted cover, and fight krogans (rarely), collectors, or misc mercs, with slightly different environment textures and skybox.

But go back on topic, I can argue ME2 gameplay all day in another thread ;)

Dunno about you guys but I've reached a point in playing RPGs where I want less weapon/armor

*i'm not a developer but sometimes I can feel their pain when i play a game*

Whats the point of generating multiple assets for different grade of gear when the player will always use the best item. And selecting 'DA BEST ONE EVA" isn't really a "complex' thing to do.

As for boss battles, I think they are harder to pull off nowadays. No matter how you script it, its just pattern memorization on the players part. The design the team will probably spend a lot of time creating/re-iterating these battles where the player will have a challenging experience only once. More time could've been spend making better encounters?

Bethesda

@100_Hertz said:

Bethesda

@chickdigger802 said:

After playing a large part of Duke Nukem Forever, I'm sad to say the gameplay aspect is better than ME2 >.>" But that's 'kinda' apples and oranges so I digress.

Welp.