Current Events > It still blows my mind what happened to Bioware

(+) Yeah! (+)

They made critically acclaimed RPG's that basically had no competition and years later still don't. You're a hero and you have a cast of characters who help you on your journey and you can sometimes bang them. Basically do that with new settings and characters and you're good to go.

How do you fuck that up? Plenty of different ways in quick succession apparently.

---

EA claims another victim

---

I expected it

---

I feel like people started to turn on them before Anthem and Andromeda came out. Could have been a steady decline into mediocrity but they pressed the gas.
---

Smashingpmkns posted...

I feel like people started to turn on them before Anthem and Andromeda came out. Could have been a steady decline into mediocrity but they pressed the gas.

All their big names left round then too

---

Smashingpmkns posted...

I feel like people started to turn on them before Anthem and Andromeda came out. Could have been a steady decline into mediocrity but they pressed the gas.

Mass Effect 3's ending was a 'catalyst' for sure lol

---

Mass Effect 3's ending was very bad, and you can (and I largely will) argue that the game itself had severe lackings, but it's clearly not just a completely shoddy product the same way that Andromeda and Anthem is.
---

DeadBankerDream posted...

Mass Effect 3's ending was very bad, and you can (and I largely will) argue that the game itself had severe lackings, but it's clearly not just a completely shoddy product the same way that Andromeda and Anthem is.

Yeah it wasn't. But I feel like that was the start of people turning on Bioware.

Inquisition wasn't bad either. Had a few flaws that could easily be improved in a sequel (lol) and then it's just been disaster after disaster.

Mass Effect 2 was their last game that felt like a true home run.

---

I still rmb shills defending Andromeda


---

I mean warning signs where there already over 10 years ago when they streamlined ME2 into a more action game and then the rush job that is Dragon Age 2. Exactly around the time they got acquired by EA, it's a wonder Dragon Age: Origins was as good as it was.

---

Seitar posted...

I mean warning signs where there already over 10 years ago when they streamlined ME2 into a more action game and then the rush job that is Dragon Age 2. Exactly around the time they got acquired by EA, it's a wonder Dragon Age: Origins was as good as it was.

Dragon Age Origins was mostly done or way into production when EA got them IIRC. I remember them delaying the PC version to release with the consoles was controversial at the time so that was probably EA influence.

Oh and don't forget Origins was the game that started party member DLC and dialogue prompting you to buy DLC.

---

Seitar posted...

I mean warning signs where there already over 10 years ago when they streamlined ME2 into a more action game and then the rush job that is Dragon Age 2. Exactly around the time they got acquired by EA, it's a wonder Dragon Age: Origins was as good as it was.

Except ME2 was the best game in the series

---

ME3 was a mess. Most of the levels were just showcasing for the multiplayer (with the exception of a few critical story levels), no pilotable vehicles, no heavy weapons. Crappy ass ending. You could definitely see where and how EA's oversight committee made changes. I think Bioware's death started during production of Mass Effect 2. The introduction of the season pass, characters parceled off in to DLC, the lame weapon packs, they all felt so out of place.

---

Dragon Age Origins was the last great bio ware game. Mass effect 2 was the last good one. It's a shame

Before Game of Thrones Mass Effect 3s ending was my most hated

---

DuranOfForcena posted...

i'm playing through the ME trilogy again right now and this definitely isn't true. in fact at this point i'd argue that 2 is the worst. it was a travesty how they completely gutted all RPG aspects of ME and made it into almost a straight-up cover based third-person shooter.

the skill trees were abysmal in ME2. the inventory system was tedious in 1, yeah, but instead of trying to make it better they literally just got rid of it entirely in favor of "loadouts". the mission-based structure is just stupid and has no place whatsoever in a game that purports to be an RPG. the thermal clip shit was one of the most blatant and immersion-breaking retcons ever, serving solely to make it play more like a typical shooter and using a lore excuse that makes absolutely no sense under scrutiny.

and to top it off, the plot in 2 is extremely barebones and mostly a rehash of the plot of 1, just with the Collectors in place of the Geth, and the plot missions themselves feel almost like an afterthought, since the vast majority of the missions are recruitment and loyalty missions for a ridiculous bloated roster of squadmates which went for quantity over quality.

it's time to admit it, folks. ME2 is the real low point of the series.

Mass Effect 3 is still worse due to its dogshit writing.

---

Mass effect 3 could have been the best game in the series if it wasn't for that ending.

I actually like all 3 a lot so it's difficult for me to pick a favorite, but it's probably 2 even though they did gut the rpg mechanics and the plot is basically one big side mission.

---

It's literally impossible for any bio ware game to have worse pacing than mass effect 3, and that's enough to ruin the game for me.

When people talk about a best Mass Effect game its usually ME1 or ME2

---

DuranOfForcena posted...

I literally do not understand at all how one can acknowledge these things and still consider 2 a good game, much less the best or their favorite of the series

I understand your point, but the strength of a bioware game has traditionally been its characters, and 2 has the most development with them due to the recruitment and loyalty missions.

3 has the best moments and combat but really that ending is so terrible, it honestly ruins the whole game for me when it comes to replaying it.

1 has the best story and great banter, but is clearly outdated now.

---

DuranOfForcena posted...

how is the pacing any worse than 2's? oh, Collectors are abducting whole human colonies at a time and we need to go here and do this in order to stop them, but first let's fuck around doing all manner of personal favors for this ragtag bunch of misfits i'm calling a crew so that they like me

Because the whole intro hammers home that earth, and by extension the galaxy, is FUCKED

Then the arbiter holds out for weeks or even months in tiny packets of resistance. That's absurd. Then I go on a space chase AGAIN, and even go to parties and shit while earth is getting obliterated. I think it was a mistake to open with the reapers attacking earth

Outdated is a dumb term outside of graphics. Convenience at the expense of gameplay is not outdated its design catering to casuals

---

josifrees posted...

Outdated is a dumb term outside of graphics. Convenience at the expense of gameplay is not outdated its design catering to casuals

The shooting and inventory system are clunky and outdated. 3 did things right. Gameplay arguably got worse in 2, but much better in 3.

---

DuranOfForcena posted...

the writing in 3 wasn't any better orr worse than in 2, and at least they made more than a nominal effort to make 3 actually feel like an RPG instead of Gears of War-lite.

Almost every major story beat in Mass Effect 3 is laughable and an example of poor writing. The genophage went from being somewhat justified to being Either cure it or youre an ass. The Geth who had displayed a resemblance of depth in the previous game were reduced to a Disneys Pinocchio tier story. Your decisions on the situation with the Rachni queen didnt matter. In fact, your decisions from the previous games dont matter.

Mass Effect 1 introduces a concept and tells us how to feel about it. Mass Effect 2 provides the player with another viewpoint to demonstrate the complexity of said concept. Mass Effect 3 takes that concept and simplifies it to an insulting level.

Dont even get me started on the stupid shit that is Kai Leng, everything involving Cerberus, the McGuffin that is the Crucible, and the horrendous ending. BioWare didnt even try with the writing in ME3.


---

I don't think the ME1 RPG mechanics or combat were good at all. So I was fine with ME2 streamlining. ME3 had a much better balance and was the best of both worlds though.

---

Darmik posted...

I don't think the ME1 RPG mechanics or combat were good at all. So I was fine with ME2 streamlining. ME3 had a much better balance and was the best of both worlds though.

Yeah, I really don't get what people are missing from ME1. Is it that skills have more levels, almost all of which are tiny fiddly implements to power or cooldown speed? Is it, starting around mid-game, having to periodically go through your inventory cluttered with a bunch of identical trash weapons(and identical fiddly ass weapon mods) and turn them all into omnigel one-by-one? Is it the fact that getting Shephard to take cover is a chore?
ME2 throws out most of that in favor of making everything feel like it matters more and is more impactful.
Because you can't tell me you miss the damned MAKO.

Like, I don't normally play shooters and vastly prefer RPGs and I think ME2's gameplay is a massive improvement on the first game's. Shep moves much more fluidly, equipment and skill upgrades feel more meaningful, it's just better.

I remember when everyone thought Sonic Chronicles would be good because of the BioWare prestige lol

---

Hopefully they refine its best qualities of DA:I into the next game, 'cause Inky generally had the right idea on a lot of things. The gigantic areas with nothing interesting and you have to ride those stupid horses need the boot, though.

---

DuranOfForcena posted...

i'm playing through the ME trilogy again right now and this definitely isn't true. in fact at this point i'd argue that 2 is the worst. it was a travesty how they completely gutted all RPG aspects of ME and made it into almost a straight-up cover based third-person shooter.

the skill trees were abysmal in ME2. the inventory system was tedious in 1, yeah, but instead of trying to make it better they literally just got rid of it entirely in favor of "loadouts". the mission-based structure is just stupid and has no place whatsoever in a game that purports to be an RPG. the thermal clip shit was one of the most blatant and immersion-breaking retcons ever, serving solely to make it play more like a typical shooter and using a lore excuse that makes absolutely no sense under scrutiny.

and to top it off, the plot in 2 is extremely barebones and mostly a rehash of the plot of 1, just with the Collectors in place of the Geth, and the plot missions themselves feel almost like an afterthought, since the vast majority of the missions are recruitment and loyalty missions for a ridiculous bloated roster of squadmates which went for quantity over quality.

it's time to admit it, folks. ME2 is the real low point of the series.

This entire post is garbage and lies.

---

wackyteen posted...

EA claims another victim

Its this. RIP dead space.
---

lets be real, western RPGs are pretty much a dead genre anyway

---

DuranOfForcena posted...

no, it's that there are more skills. and i never said it was a perfect system. yes, there were too many levels and the improvements were tediously incremental. but i like that my squadmates actually had more than one or two active powers.

Does more = better though? Most were just generic buffs and debuffs. Adrenaline Rush and ammo types was way more fun than each weapon having some sort of temporary buff for a soldier. And that's the boring class. Other classes got stuff like Drone and Charge to make up for it. Each class felt way more distinct to play in ME2.

---

DuranOfForcena posted...

in the case of ME1 to ME2, yes. i'm not even talking about the weapon buffing skills, i'm talking about the biotic and tech skills. in 1 each squadmate and each class had access to a wide array of skills that made for varied gameplay. in 2 basically every squadmate is a one- or two-trick pony, and the player character classes are not much more varied in that regard.

i will accede that the player character classes in 2 were more distinct from each other however, and that was a welcome change. i think they struck a good balance in 3 with the best aspects of each of the skill systems from 1 and 2.

The skills for engineer all felt pretty samey to me. Tech explosions that either debuff enemies or disrupt shields and I guess the ability that let you unlock crates with a QTE game. The Infiltrator had a few less tech skills with the same boring weapon skills from soldiers that limit how youcan play since you have to invest points in weapons. Hacking, cloak and drones were way better and actually let the player be varied.

Biotics were a bit better but again I found their abilities in 2 way more fun. ME1 just lead to enemies sorta ragdolling around while you shot them until they died and a lot of them were pretty redundant. Biotics did get nerfed in higher difficulties in ME2 however.

---