Top
80°

Zeschuk: "You have to innovate" on sequels

Bioware's vice-president Greg Zeschuk spoke of how important sequels are to developers and the industry as a whole.

The story is too old to be commented.
Godmars2902253d ago

So ME3 not only brings back actual planetary exploration, better tech puzzles but starship combat while going nowhere near multi-player? Sweet...

NYC_Gamer2253d ago (Edited 2253d ago )

do you mean turn them in to crappy action shooters/hack&slash instead of rpgs?

Kon2253d ago

Well, they innovated =D

SageHonor2253d ago

One of the main flaws about the first Mass Effect and even the 2nd Mass Effect was some combat flaws. There is nothing wrong with them improving on those aspects and making it more action oriented. Just because its more action oriented doesnt mean all of the RPG elements are gone. Ive seen and read about the customization. There are more RPG elements in ME3 then there was in ME2... Isnt that good enough

NYC_Gamer2253d ago (Edited 2253d ago )

that E3 stage demo just screamed out third person shooter instead of rpg.....they might as well have brought cliffyb on development....its ashame when studios make all these huge changes all for the mainstream approach...

Blacktric2253d ago

NYC_Gamer is trying too hard to throw mud at Mass Effect today. If you don't like it, then don't play it. Everyone knows that Mass Effect games are great and innovative enough and nobody needs to prove you anything.

grifter0242253d ago

I'm sorry but I agree with NYC_Gamer.

I LOVE Mass Effect as a franchise..hell thats the only game I preordered last year.

The idea that Bioware wanted to go after the "Halo," And "COD," Kids made me sick to my stomach and go look for yourself THEY said that not me.

WHY does an RPG an extremelly good one at that NEED to go after the FPS consumer fanbase!

I'll more than likely buy the 360 bundle with ME3 but the way they totally switched gears after the 1st game kind of peeves me and alot of other hardcore ME fans.

Did ME2 do good yes, did ME1 do good yes...did they have to take out 80% of the RPG elements in 2 just to have it pure combat? No but thats what they did and E3 showed them playing a segment that reminded me of a part in GOW2 I saw.

Blacktric2253d ago

There's nothing to be sorry about but tell me this; was first Mass Effect an RPG heavy game? To me, it was an RPG and Shooter hybrid just like ME 2. You have a right to say anything to Bioware after what they did with Dragon Age 2 when they already had a successful RPG/Shooter hybrid franchise like Mass Effect. But ME was already an action heavy game so streamlining some RPG elements didn't take too much from the game. Choices were still there and mattered the most and you still had basic RPG elements like spending points to your attributes. Not to mention ME 3 will bring back inventory and modding. IMO, Bioware should make Dragon Age 3 exactly like Origins and keep Mass Effect as an action RPG hybrid.

SageHonor2253d ago

The biggest newest thing about Mass Effect 3 is the new and improved combat. Why not show it off in a demo at E3. If you havent check out the developer walkthroughs. He shows exploration and some of the customization. Also, this article explains some of the RPG elements..

http://www.rpgsite.net/arti...

jsslifelike2253d ago

You nailed it:

Innovate = Make Every Game A Shooter

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 2253d ago
2253d ago
mrv3212253d ago

You shouldn't.

You make a new game, and a new IP to innovate as not to upset fans and great a new fanbase. You improve upon the formula and add new elements in the sequels. If the franchise receives too many sequels too soon it needs a break. Here's an example

Dead Space -> Dead space 2
Bad Company -> Bad Company 2
AC -> AC2
Uncharted -> Uncharted 2
Killzone -> Killzone 2
inFamous -> inFamous 2

Neither really reinvent their games, but the seuqels have become truly great games despite the original only being seen as good