83 réponses à ce sujet

[Blk_Mage_Ctype]

KalosCast wrote...

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.

I don't actually believe that, I was just joking. The joke is that Bioware gets tired of everyone never being satisfied and takes their request to an extreme to spite the fans. 
And before anyone starts, once again, it was a joke! I know you don't know what a joke is because you actually want back something as tedious as ME1's Inventory System, and thus have no concept of fun or sense of humor, but take my word for it, I'm not being serious.

No, ME3 won't become a JRPG if they add more RPG Aspects, but I fear that it'll be too much like a sci-fi version of Oblivion or Champions of Norath, and thus effectively lose anything that made it unique from the other rabble of generic WRPGs with frustrating gameplay. 

People here all sound like that game salesman from the Citadel... "RPG's today are all about big choices and visceral combat, I miss the old RPGs where you had to remember to drink water, and it took 5 hours in real time to fly somewhere!"

[KalosCast]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

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.

I don't give a **** what the age is, IT'S HIS SISTER. IT'S STILL GROSS.

[KalosCast]

Blk_Mage_Ctype wrote...
No, ME3 won't become a JRPG if they add more RPG Aspects, but I fear that it'll be too much like a sci-fi version of Oblivion or Champions of Norath, and thus effectively lose anything that made it unique from the other rabble of generic WRPGs with frustrating gameplay.

But the problem is, there ARE people who firmly believe this.

[SkullandBonesmember]

KalosCast wrote...

I don't give a **** what the age is, IT'S HIS SISTER. IT'S STILL GROSS.

First of all you mentioned underage and the average main characters in JRPGs are from 16-28.

Second, what JRPG are you talking about where incest is among part of the plot/sub plots?

[TJSolo]

KalosCast wrote...

Blk_Mage_Ctype wrote...
No, ME3 won't become a JRPG if they add more RPG Aspects, but I fear that it'll be too much like a sci-fi version of Oblivion or Champions of Norath, and thus effectively lose anything that made it unique from the other rabble of generic WRPGs with frustrating gameplay.

But the problem is, there ARE people who firmly believe this.

What people? Idiots and fearmongers?
RPG aspects, work very well in a game aiming to be an RPG.  Generic WRPGs, is a funny term but you would rather ME fall into the generic Shooter category.
People are dumb.

[KalosCast]

TJSolo wrote...

KalosCast wrote...

Blk_Mage_Ctype wrote...
No, ME3 won't become a JRPG if they add more RPG Aspects, but I fear that it'll be too much like a sci-fi version of Oblivion or Champions of Norath, and thus effectively lose anything that made it unique from the other rabble of generic WRPGs with frustrating gameplay.

But the problem is, there ARE people who firmly believe this.

What people? Idiots and fearmongers?
RPG aspects, work very well in a game aiming to be an RPG.  Generic WRPGs, is a funny term but you would rather ME fall into the generic Shooter category.
People are dumb.

Look for any shooter vs rpg thread on this forum, "It'll turn into Final Fantasy!" is pretty much the standard go-to argument.

[Rendar666]

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.

It isn't that. It is the fact that they didn't try to fix what was broken, they smashed it to pieces and built an airplane out of a boat. You don't do that to the sequel of a game. You do not change the entire way the game works. That's just bad, imo. The game is fun, but no where near as good as ME 1.

I'm going to go play Final Fantasy 13 and try and get all the achievements. Bloody tough. REALLY tough.

[SkullandBonesmember]

KalosCast wrote...

Look for any shooter vs rpg thread on this forum, "It'll turn into Final Fantasy!" is pretty much the standard go-to argument.

It shouldn't be like that though because JRPGs and Western RPGs are vastly different styles of games.

[Rendar666]

Blk_Mage_Ctype wrote...
No, ME3 won't become a JRPG if they add more RPG Aspects, but I fear that it'll be too much like a sci-fi version of Oblivion or Champions of Norath, and thus effectively lose anything that made it unique from the other rabble of generic WRPGs with frustrating gameplay.

Umm... What's wrong with both of those games? Oblivion, while not as good or hardcore RPGish as Morrowind, is an amazing game. Champions of Norath wets RPG gamer's appetite for a lot of loot with fun gameplay. Oblivion lets you complete a LOT of sidequests and places to explore (still not as much as Morrowind).


Morrowind > most games.

ME 1 > most games.


Morrowind (most Bethesda games) were pretty, and still are, unique. They are the only REALLY good open world RPG games IMO. But... whatever. To each his own.

[SkullandBonesmember]

Rendar666 wrote...

Umm... What's wrong with both of those games? Oblivion, while not as good or hardcore RPGish as Morrowind, is an amazing game. Champions of Norath wets RPG gamer's appetite for a lot of loot with fun gameplay. Oblivion lets you complete a LOT of sidequests and places to explore (still not as much as Morrowind).


Morrowind > most games.

ME 1 > most games.


Morrowind (most Bethesda games) were pretty, and still are, unique. They are the only REALLY good open world RPG games IMO. But... whatever. To each his own.

Agreed.

[KalosCast]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

KalosCast wrote...

Look for any shooter vs rpg thread on this forum, "It'll turn into Final Fantasy!" is pretty much the standard go-to argument.

It shouldn't be like that though because JRPGs and Western RPGs are vastly different styles of games.

It doesn't change the fact that it's the argument made. That or "go play Fallout 3 if you want an RPG with gunz"

Modifié par KalosCast, 01 mai 2010 - 01:23 .

[OneDrunkMonk]

I said it once before I'll say it again.



A lot of tradition RPG elements simply don't make sense in Mass Effect. For example in ME1: Why would you need to buy Specter weapons when your a...Specter out saving the galaxy? Why do you need to loot every safe you encounter or hack every data pad for credits in order to afford weapon/armor upgrades in ME2? I am more than certain that Cerberus can foot the bill for whatever Shepard needs. How about ME1's ridiculously large and time consuming inventory system? You'd need a truck to carry all that stuff with you on a mission. How does character ability upgrades make sense in ME2 when logically everyone is pretty much at the top of their abilities already? Even the crafting in ME2 didn't really work as players found themselves grinding on planet scans, which considering the urgency of your mission...I mean hell, certainly Cerberus could send out survey teams for you or otherwise procure what you need. Anyways...Many examples are evident of how traditional RPG elements don't work in Mass Effect like they do in games like Dragon Age.



Now dialog choices are good, and the ability to Paragon or Renegade is decent (though really it should be Passive/Aggressive or Force/Reason). Squad commands are at least somewhat present but really should be expanded upon. BioWare should take it to the next level and let mission experiences effect characters in additional to dialog. So definitely some kind of RPG element can work in Mass Effect.



What I will agree upon along the lines of the OP is that Mass Effect 2 does play a lot more to the 3rd person shooter crowd than the RPG crowd. It's not all bad, ME2 does seem more focused and the momentum is good on missions and in combat. But I still feel like more can be done in Mass Effect than just the run of the mill guns 'n armor, run n shoot gameplay that makes up too much of today's video games.

[SkullandBonesmember]

KalosCast wrote...

That or "go play Fallout 3 if you want an RPG with gunz"

Well, that is a good point, but Fallout 3 is the only RPG I like the combat over the plot.

[SkullandBonesmember]

OneDrunkMonk wrote...

What I will agree upon along the lines of the OP is that Mass Effect 2 does play a lot more to the 3rd person shooter crowd than the RPG crowd. It's not all bad, ME2 does seem more focused and the momentum is good on missions and in combat. But I still feel like more can be done in Mass Effect than just the run of the mill guns 'n armor, run n shoot gameplay that makes up too much of today's video games.

True dat. <_<

[cachx]

I think it's funny that when the developers try to change something, some people go nuts because of the "they changed it now it sucks" effect. But if you keep the same line, other people come and go nuts because "they never do original stuff and the genre is going stale". It's practically a no-win situation.

I liked ME2 better, because they kept the story, characters and dialogue, and they improved the clunky, "bleh" combat. I miss the level of customization ME1 had, but it's not going to make or break the game for me.

Bioware should just focus and do it's thing... and stop 'yo-yoing' the whole basis of the games. "Oh I'll take RPG out for ME2, oh! I have put more RPG in for ME3 !".

As far as Resident Evil goes, the only good one was 4. The early ones had horible control, and RE5 was just a copy&paste job that got boring really quick.

[SkullandBonesmember]

cachx wrote...

they improved the clunky, "bleh" combat.

So another combat over story fan.  

Anyway, who cares about "change"? That doesn't mean it's bad by default. The way the change was executed however is why overall it sucked.

[KalosCast]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

cachx wrote...

they improved the clunky, "bleh" combat.

So another combat over story fan.

If you're going to have most of your gameplay in combat, it better be good. Has nothing to do with one being more important than the other, though, I would argue that core game mechanics are often more important than a good story or atmosphere. Old-school survival horror being the only notable exception.

[cachx]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

So another combat over story fan.  

So, not fully liking ME1's gameplay makes me hate story? Wow, just wow.

A videogame is the sum of a lot of parts and disciplines (art, design, writing, characters, gameplay, etc...). I should'nt have to "suffer" trough sub-par gameplay to get my story bits, that's just plain dumb. If it can be made better, then why not?

ME1's story is a bit better, I have said so many times here, but sorry, taking all elements into account, ME2 is the superior game for me, and I don't think RPG's as a whole are degenerating because of it.

I'm totally ok with people liking ME1 better, it's a good game. But some of you get so snobbish about it, treating everybody else like "twich gamers" or "console kiddies" or (my favorite) "lowest common denominator".(there might be a couple of trolls here that fit that description, but hey, it's the internet).

[SkullandBonesmember]

cachx wrote...

So, not fully liking ME1's gameplay makes me hate story?

Can you really say in all honesty you if you had to choose one or the other you like story over combat?

[SuperMedbh]

When did it become "combat versus story"? As far as I could tell, the combat in ME1 and ME2 took up equal amounts of game time. Heck, in ME2, there's some missions that don't have a shot fired at all. It's the SF action genre-- mock it with the " 'sploshuns" tag, but imagine Star Wars movies with action scenes on the level of old Buck Rogers reels (here's an example, lest you be unfamilar: )(oh fine, I admit to liking it in an old MST3000 way)



That said, there's a lot of the game that isn't action, and that deserves attention, too. But don't create some nonsensical dichotomy betwixt action and narrative sequences. There's plenty of room for both in games, and likely future top notch games will continue to be a combination of both.

[Rendar666]

[quote]cachx wrote...

they improved the clunky, "bleh" combat.[/quote]

[/quote]


Umm... the combat in ME 1 is (to me) SOOOO much better than in ME 2. ME 2's combat feels like Bioware tried too hard to make it fun TPS combat instead of just making it like they did in the first one. It feels so... generic and uninteresting. I prefer ME 1 in every way over ME 2 except for graphics.... I'll stick with my FAV games (ME 1, Final Fantasy 8, 10 and 13, The Legend of Dragoon etc.) and, I suppose, ME 2 will just collect dust. Kinda sad because I was looking forward to the game so much. It's a fun game, sure, but the first game's triumph makes the finished produect, ME 2, look like a pebble against a mountain.  No chance....

[SkullandBonesmember]

SuperMedbh wrote...

When did it become "combat versus story"? As far as I could tell, the combat in ME1 and ME2 took up equal amounts of game time. Heck, in ME2, there's some missions that don't have a shot fired at all. It's the SF action genre-- mock it with the " 'sploshuns" tag, but imagine Star Wars movies with action scenes on the level of old Buck Rogers reels (here's an example, lest you be unfamilar: )(oh fine, I admit to liking it in an old MST3000 way)

That said, there's a lot of the game that isn't action, and that deserves attention, too. But don't create some nonsensical dichotomy betwixt action and narrative sequences. There's plenty of room for both in games, and likely future top notch games will continue to be a combination of both.

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

YES, when comparing RATIO with ME1, there is way too much fighting.

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

uberdowzen wrote...

My completionist playthroughs of ME1 and ME2 took 40 and 50 hours to complete respectively. I've completed minimalist playthroughs of ME1 (just doing main story quests) in 15 hours. Using some simple maths:

Time for completionist playthrough - Main Story time = Side quests on citadel and other main worlds + Time wasted with Uncharted Worlds and Inventory managment

40 - 15 = 35 Hours of extra activites

Assuming up to 10 hours of that was the side quests, that leaves 25 hours of driving backwards and forwards across bleak scenaryless planets with little to no story.

Time for completionist playthrough - Main Story Time = Planet Scanning + Um...come to think of it there was nothing else

I can't do this calculation right now because I haven't done a minimalist playthrough of ME2 (because all of the game is so engaging and fun) but I think you see my point.

Since you obviously like combat, I'd bet money your difficulty is always at least on Veteran? Am I wrong? In ME2 Bioware even admits casual is for if players enjoy the story the most over combat. Except, you know, casual in ME2 is equivalent to veteran in ME1. I play casual for both ME1 and ME2 and the difference is night and day.

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

To get from the beginning of a main world to the end took about 35-45 minutes on average with my ME1 Shepard. After every main plot world we can see how everybody in our squad is with the exception of Tali, we could chat it up with Conrad again at the Citadel, we could check in with Anderson and Udina, and we could give the post mission report to the council. There was also the scenic view. When all is said and done, dialogue was even with the length of missions, sometime even more. In addition there was a lot of dialogue and character interaction DURING the missions. Now let's look at ME2. We could get maybe 10 minutes of dialogue on average with SOME characters if milked dry. After those 10 minutes, we're thrown in with an hour long plus mission stopping for the occasional renegade/paragon interrupt. We can talk to Garrus only TWICE. Your entire squad is almost always too busy to speak with you. We have more squad members, but not more dialogue to reflect that. And there's hardly any discussion with anybody post main mission. Instead we get text to read from emails. The only time Anderson talks again is after meeting Ashley.

Face it. There's a reason groups like this were started-
http://social.bioware.com/group/1763/

We get more emotional satisfaction from chatting with the crew as opposed to headshots.

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

When comparing both side by side, ME2 is MORE of a shooter since there's MORE of an emphasis on combat.

http://meforums.biow...17725&forum=144

There are some really good points in that thread.

I mean, what choice do I have but to support Mass Effect? How many games are out there that focus on plot? Not many. How many games are out there that focus on combat at the expense of plot? Too many. And Mass Effect 2 kissed the Halotards assess because they complained the first wasn't ENOUGH OF A SHOOTER. It's not enough that there's a plethora of games that cater to them. It doesn't matter story driven fans barely have anything for them. The shooter fans still had to whine for more emphasis on combat at our expense. And we have to take what they give us, even if it sucks compared to the original.

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

If you're familiar with shooting mechanics and actively go out of your way to play such games because you enjoy them, it's not gonna be a problem for you. I DON'T play shooters because they're boring as hell and devoid of real story AND character interaction. That's why I liked ME1 so much. ME2 was definitely a shooter whereas ME1 wasn't. Hence why shooter fans bit****. However, the fact ME1 WASN'T a shooter is what made it so enjoyable for me.

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

I've already shared my opinions many times but I'll participate in this thread. While some like to make a joke out of my sig and would prefer the "boom boom" over story and character interaction, there are just as many that don't.

And if anybody is gonna bring up the "book" BS, if you haven't seen the Sci Vs. Fi clip, watch from the 3-4:00 mark.

Just a handful of posts of mine from another thread.

Yes. For none-shooter fans, the missions in ME2 were a helluva lot longer compared to ME1. I once played on veteran in ME1 and it was a breeze at level 60. The missions were STILL not as long as those in ME2 despite me being level 30. Give me a freaking break to let me get to know my crew. There wasn't an even ratio of combat/story.

Modifié par SkullandBonesmember, 01 mai 2010 - 03:29 .

[AlanC9]

KotOREffecT wrote...

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........

What do you mean, "we"? When I hear "Resident Evil," I think "crappy film."

[AlanC9]

KalosCast wrote...

Look for any shooter vs rpg thread on this forum, "It'll turn into Final Fantasy!" is pretty much the standard go-to argument.

Isn't that usually found right next to the  "Bio turned ME into Gears of War!" post?

[IrishSpectre257]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...


So another combat over story fan.

If I'm playing a videogame, gameplay is more important than story. I love a great story in a game, but if the gameplay is lacking, I would much rather be enjoying that story in the form of a book or TV show.