83 réponses à ce sujet

[KotOREffecT]

We all know about Resident Evil 4, and how it advanced the horror genre for example, but didn't completely do away with the creepiness/horror factor. And then there was RE 5...... That took place in the daylight... Yes, daylight........

As far as appealing more to the masses thus, abandoning some of their roots. I mean as much as I enjoyed ME 2, it does seem weird that instead of fixing some of the RPG elements that add more to the immersive factor and combining them with the actual good actions elements of ME 2, they nix them all together. Now I for one think that BioWare actually proved that we really don't need a lot of those simple things to have an intense role-playing experience, and we didn't in ME 2. It's the same with more exploration elements and more freedom, instead we got more of a  simple straight-forward path, but still was very satisfying and intense with great looking enviornments. But why not of mixed both in ME 2? Instead of just completely abandoning them?  Think Noveria in ME 1 for example..That's what I don't get..

It's one thing to try and step out and expand which BioWare did greatly in ME 2 I think, but to imply that there will be more RPG in ME 3 when they technically could of just did that with ME 2, makes me really wonder if they really did shoot for the shooter fanbase this time, esp evident with the simple box-art. Not bashing ME 2 or BioWare, cause most know I usually defend ME 2 to the fullest on here, and I do think ME 2 was balanced just right with enough shooting and talking(the actual role-playing not rpg elements). But still, I mean, has the shooter genre really impacted the way that game developers now look at games? 

In the end, do you really see this as a new beginning for BioWare? Staying on a new route much as what has happened to the beloved Survivor Horror games becoming more shooter and action and less horror? Or do you really suspect ME 3 will be the true golden game in the trilogy that combines both great elements in of ME 1 & 2? And that ME 2 was just a bold step and nothing more? Do you think maybe BioWare would go to far to alienate their rpg fanbase if they haven't already did that with ME 2?

Personally, I felt that ME 2 still had the heart of a "role-playing" game, with a great cast, phenominal music that you come to expect from RPG games that try to immerse you into they're world. And you were still Shep, and you still got to guide him, plus the whole interrupt system, this game clearly still puts you in the "role" and lets you assume direct control of situations. And there is always ME 3, which could go so many ways and has a lot of us fans anxious no doubt..

Just wanted to share this, I just got to thinking about this and other aspects of future RPGs and how far they've come and what could happen to the genre.. Hell, even look at GTA series for example, I've heard people on here comparing the direction of ME 2 to that as well..

[ObserverStatus]

It seems to me that the more Monolithic the gaming industry becomes, the less likely major studios are to take risks. It seems that the people running EA and A/B are content to stick to proven formulas, like TPS shoot em ups, and feel no need to try anything new.

[benjdot]

The less time spent juggling stats and micro-managing inventory, the better.

If your idea of a fun time is a graphing calculator, maybe you need to go play with excel instead.

[Aceyalone7777]

I see where you are going to, but Bioware isn't Capcom. I have faith in them. They may got a little of in some things but they improved at least the 70% of what ME1 lacked. Yes there were the other 30% (RPG elements), but they were experimenting. I think the forums made it clear we didnt want to be too simplistic.



So there is no reason for me not to believe that ME3 will improve ME2 at least the fair percentage of what we lacked in ME2.

[Kusy]

Ok, so now I won't do trollin'.



I see your point, it does seem that BioWare wanted to show they can do other stuff than RPG games well. But I personlay belive that Mass Effect 2 was hurt by that attemp on breaking the frame. But there's hope that Mass Effect 3 will be more or better balanced Shooter/RPG.



I also don't understand why are you bringing up GTA here? Maybee it's just me but every GTA game is better than the last (cept for San Andreas - Vice City was better).

[Jackal904]

No.

[Elvis_Mazur]

The shooter elements in Mass Effect 1 was bad and needed a big improvement. So they corrected it in Mass Effect 2. If they really want the shooters fans, they would make a Mass Effect 2 without dialogues and only combats. Because Mass Effect 2 is approximately 50% combats and 50% dialogues and other things. I know the shooter fans very well to tell that they don't like dialogues.



Maybe the other RPG elements that existed in Mass Effect 1 would not work well in Mass Effect 2 and they decided to cut out some and simplify the rest. Because we never know, we was not there helping them to make the game.

[KalosCast]

ME1 had way too much micro-management. 99.9999% of what you picked up was Vendor Trash before you bought the Spectre Gear, and 100% of it was afterward. Plenty of power chains were useless, and gaining a new dot in any of them didn't actually feel like you're getting anything out of it (oh goodie! my power lasts for 0.125 more seconds, that'll show those Geth!!)). The cover mechanic was also awkward to use and quickly didn't even matter (I distinctly remember the citadel fight in one of my ME1 breakthroughs just slowing walking forward and firing my non-overheat shotgun as fast as I could, dropping most things with one blast. The first game was definitely an "RPG with shooter elements" where grinding could turn you into an unstoppable monstrosity, and you walked around with your credits maxed and an inventory full of enough pants to max it out again. Hence why the RPG fans prefer it.

ME2 streamlines a lot of things, but also takes it too far. You have every heavy pistol in the game before you finish your first recruiting mission, there's no customization of weapons anymore, and the whole shield vs armor vs barrier mechanic is just plain annoying. There aren't a lot of things that are any good against barriers, shields are weak to everything and get blown apart almost instantly, and it seems our enemies are the only people who understand the concept of wearing heavy pants because your entire team doesn't get any armor, despite some of you appearing otherwise. There's also a lot less attention to even pretending there's a plausible universe anymore, apparently for Miranda and Jacob, wearing a plastic surgical mask is enough to protect them against the cold harsh vacuum of space. That and gratuitous ass-shots. It's not really a destruction or corruption of the RPG elements, as much as it is a total genre shift. This time around the game was an action game with shooter elements. Hence why the shooter fans prefer it.

Don't get me wrong, I absolutely loved both games, basically anything that I wasn't critical of is absolutely stunning. And Bioware stated that they're adding more RPG elements back into ME3, so with any luck that'll be the perfect balance between shooter and RPG. What we can count on though, is that the RPGtards will still hate that they have to aim, and the FPStards will hate that there are times that they aren't shooting, and the flame wars will rage across these boards until there are no survivors.

Modifié par KalosCast, 30 avril 2010 - 10:43 .

[Blk_Mage_Ctype]

There's a difference though...



Adding more action to a Survival Horror game like Resident Evil hurt the experience because it took away from the fear.



The shooter elements in ME2 and removal of the convoluted Inventory System made the game infinitely better.

[KalosCast]

Blk_Mage_Ctype wrote...

The shooter elements in ME2 and removal of the convoluted Inventory System made the game infinitely better.

As horrifying as it may sound, there are people who genuinely enjoyed the "murderous travelling pants saleman" aspect of ME1. Apparently merchants are totally willing to buy up bullet-riddled, overload-fried and blood-stained enviro-suits.

Modifié par KalosCast, 30 avril 2010 - 10:55 .

[Dick Delaware]

KalosCast wrote...

ME1 had way too much micro-management. 99.9999% of what you picked up was Vendor Trash before you bought the Spectre Gear, and 100% of it was afterward. Plenty of power chains were useless, and gaining a new dot in any of them didn't actually feel like you're getting anything out of it (oh goodie! my power lasts for 0.125 more seconds, that'll show those Geth!!)). The cover mechanic was also awkward to use and quickly didn't even matter (I distinctly remember the citadel fight in one of my ME1 breakthroughs just slowing walking forward and firing my non-overheat shotgun as fast as I could, dropping most things with one blast. The first game was definitely an "RPG with shooter elements" where grinding could turn you into an unstoppable monstrosity, and you walked around with your credits maxed and an inventory full of enough pants to max it out again. Hence why the RPG fans prefer it.

ME2 streamlines a lot of things, but also takes it too far. You have every heavy pistol in the game before you finish your first recruiting mission, there's no customization of weapons anymore, and the whole shield vs armor vs barrier mechanic is just plain annoying. There aren't a lot of things that are any good against barriers, shields are weak to everything and get blown apart almost instantly, and it seems our enemies are the only people who understand the concept of wearing heavy pants because your entire team doesn't get any armor, despite some of you appearing otherwise. There's also a lot less attention to even pretending there's a plausible universe anymore, apparently for Miranda and Jacob, wearing a plastic surgical mask is enough to protect them against the cold harsh vacuum of space. That and gratuitous ass-shots. It's not really a destruction or corruption of the RPG elements, as much as it is a total genre shift. This time around the game was an action game with shooter elements. Hence why the shooter fans prefer it.

Don't get me wrong, I absolutely loved both games, basically anything that I wasn't critical of is absolutely stunning. And Bioware stated that they're adding more RPG elements back into ME3, so with any luck that'll be the perfect balance between shooter and RPG. What we can count on though, is that the RPGtards will still hate that they have to aim, and the FPStards will hate that there are times that they aren't shooting, and the flame wars will rage across these boards until there are no survivors.

I greatly preferred ME2 to ME1, but your points are completely right. Even though I'd say that the writing of the characters and dialogue was on the whole significantly better, you are correct that there is not as much attention to making sure things are consistent within the universe. Seeing Jack fight with the only armor being around her nipples, or Miranda's shooting people ridiculous uniform is pretty silly.

I am also with you on the weaponry. Having only two heavy pistols in the entire game is just disappointing. I'd be happy with as few as 5 weapons as long as they handle differently and have different strengths and weaknesses. Really, I think the stripped down weapon system in ME2 is fine, it just needs more options. The rapid-fire sniper rifle compared to the powerful single shot one in ME2 is a good example of this, since it provides a nice trade-off. Even with the limited selection, I still found this better than in ME1, where all the weapons of a certain type handled exactly the same, except they did more damage or were more resistant to overheating.

Modifié par Dick Delaware, 30 avril 2010 - 11:09 .

[Blk_Mage_Ctype]

I still don't understand how taking 15 minutes out of the action to convert the 50 Kessler IV Pistols, and 200 outdated ammo types you picked up into Omnigel is something people want back...



It wasn't fun, it wasn't enjoyable, it was just disruptive and annoying.



Why do people love tedium so much?

What did that horrid Inventory System add to the gameplay?



And as for it being an RPG Aspect, NO IT WASN'T!!! That was a Dungeon Crawler Aspect, and even if it was an RPG Aspect, it still sucked! I hope to God that Bioware ignores the masochists who want that hideous Inventory System back.

[Masticetobbacco]

Blk_Mage_Ctype wrote...

I still don't understand how taking 15 minutes out of the action to convert the 50 Kessler IV Pistols, and 200 outdated ammo types you picked up into Omnigel is something people want back...

It wasn't fun, it wasn't enjoyable, it was just disruptive and annoying.

Why do people love tedium so much?
What did that horrid Inventory System add to the gameplay?

And as for it being an RPG Aspect, NO IT WASN'T!!! That was a Dungeon Crawler Aspect, and even if it was an RPG Aspect, it still sucked! I hope to God that Bioware ignores the masochists who want that hideous Inventory System back.

If people wanted a dedicated shooter, they'd have bought GOW 3 which is a much better TPS

people bought ME2 expecting an RPG. The inventory system in ME1 needed some work, but overall the customization was very well received. ME1 had a lot more powers, armour, and weapons. ME2 has little to no RPG aspects, and few customization in terms of gameplay

[SkullandBonesmember]

KotOREffecT wrote...

It's one thing to try and step out and expand which BioWare did greatly in ME 2 I think, but to imply that there will be more RPG in ME 3 when they technically could of just did that with ME 2, makes me really wonder if they really did shoot for the shooter fanbase this time, esp evident with the simple box-art. Not bashing ME 2 or BioWare, cause most know I usually defend ME 2 to the fullest on here, and I do think ME 2 was balanced just right with enough shooting and talking(the actual role-playing not rpg elements). But still, I mean, has the shooter genre really impacted the way that game developers now look at games?

Sadly, it looks that way.

[Brako Shepard]

These days I think sandbox games will be the games we turn to when we want stats and exploration.



To be honest though the Mass Effect should never have been labled an RPG. Its set to much on a path to allow for any true exploration and come across some nice surprises. Mass Effect had the odd groovy thing to come across, but it never featured anything about it in the codex, so kind of made it pointless.



Mass Effect 2 lacked any kind of exploration, aswell as taking out any true puzzle elements.



Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2 are both great games, but I would never class them as RPG.

[Blk_Mage_Ctype]

Masticetobbacco wrote...

If people wanted a dedicated shooter, they'd have bought GOW 3 which is a much better TPS

people bought ME2 expecting an RPG. The inventory system in ME1 needed some work, but overall the customization was very well received. ME1 had a lot more powers, armour, and weapons. ME2 has little to no RPG aspects, and few customization in terms of gameplay

Except God of War 3 isn't a TPS... 

[Dick Delaware]

I wouldn't say that they're not RPG's, but they're definitely RPG-lite.

[KalosCast]

Blk_Mage_Ctype wrote...

Masticetobbacco wrote...

If people wanted a dedicated shooter, they'd have bought GOW 3 which is a much better TPS

people bought ME2 expecting an RPG. The inventory system in ME1 needed some work, but overall the customization was very well received. ME1 had a lot more powers, armour, and weapons. ME2 has little to no RPG aspects, and few customization in terms of gameplay

Except God of War 3 isn't a TPS... 

Gears of War. Which, being an incredibly avid shooter fan... is a terrible example of the genre. Often runs into the unrealistic problems that ME2 has where every installation is made from chest-high walls.

[Blk_Mage_Ctype]

Oh, by "GoW" he meant Gears of War...



For the record, Gears of Wars official shortened form as used by Epic Games is "Gears" not "GoW"



Oh, and as for all you folks saying ME2 wasn't RPG enough...



http://i848.photobuc...tYouWishFor.jpg

[BatarianBob]

It's one thing to try and step out and expand which BioWare did greatly in ME 2 I think, but to imply that there will be more RPG in ME 3 when they technically could of just did that with ME 2, makes me really wonder if they really did shoot for the shooter fanbase this time, esp evident with the simple box-art.

These posts are getting stranger by the day.

[KitsuneRommel]

KalosCast wrote...

Blk_Mage_Ctype wrote...

Masticetobbacco wrote...

If people wanted a dedicated shooter, they'd have bought GOW 3 which is a much better TPS

people bought ME2 expecting an RPG. The inventory system in ME1 needed some work, but overall the customization was very well received. ME1 had a lot more powers, armour, and weapons. ME2 has little to no RPG aspects, and few customization in terms of gameplay

Except God of War 3 isn't a TPS... 

Gears of War. Which, being an incredibly avid shooter fan... is a terrible example of the genre. Often runs into the unrealistic problems that ME2 has where every installation is made from chest-high walls.

At least it's not 'breaking barrels to find loot'.

Edit:
Or a weapon mod taking as much inventory space as a full suit of armor.
Or items getting increasingly more powerful as you travel around.
Etc.

Modifié par KitsuneRommel, 01 mai 2010 - 12:13 .

[KalosCast]

Blk_Mage_Ctype wrote...

http://i848.photobuc...tYouWishFor.jpg

I lol'd.

But seriously, I don't understand how people are so convinced that if ME3 doesn't "RPG it up" then it's going to turn into GEARS. IN. SPAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACE!

Likewise, I don't understand how people are so convinced that if ME3 doesn't "stick to da gunz" then it's going to turn into yet another Japanese RPG where a bunch of girly girls and girlier boys and one hilariously racist ethnic character team up to kill Satan.

KitsuneRommel wrote...

At least it's not 'breaking barrels
to find loot'.

But when some of them explode
and do minimal damage to you (and break the rest of the barrels) the fun
never stops!

Modifié par KalosCast, 01 mai 2010 - 12:13 .

[SkullandBonesmember]

Blk_Mage_Ctype wrote...

http://i848.photobuc...tYouWishFor.jpg

Nothing wrong with a lot of cutscenes if it furthers the plot and immersion.

[KalosCast]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Blk_Mage_Ctype wrote...

http://i848.photobuc...tYouWishFor.jpg

Nothing wrong with a lot of cutscenes if it furthers the plot and immersion.

He's not talking about a Mass Effect level of a lot of cutscenes (and boy does ME love cutscenes)

He's talking about a Final Fantasy level of cutscenes where most of them have nothing to do with anything and just involve your gratingly whiney protagonist giving questionably lustful stares at his under-age sister.

[SkullandBonesmember]

KalosCast wrote...

He's not talking about a Mass Effect level of a lot of cutscenes (and boy does ME love cutscenes)

He's talking about a Final Fantasy level of cutscenes where most of them have nothing to do with anything and just involve your gratingly whiney protagonist giving questionably lustful stares at his under-age sister.

Plenty say Mass Effect needs less cutscenes and more 'SPLOSHUNS.

And if you think a 17 and 18 year old together is wrong, you got a problem.