131 réponses à ce sujet

[David Knight]

I really hope ME3 doesn't turn into KotOR. Don't get me wrong, Knights is one of my favorite games. But when I want to play a game like Mass Effect, I want to play Mass Effect. Not Knights with a Mass Effect skin.



God. This really ticks me off. People complain about the lack of RPG elements. If you want RPG elements, GO PLAY ANOTHER GAME WHICH HAS SAID ELEMENTS YOU DESIRE ENOUGH TO COMPLAIN ABOUT. Seriously. Mass Effect was made to be a shooter with roleplaying mixed in. It's a unique experience. I hope Bioware doesn't change it.



When ME1 came out, people complained about the combat and how it wasn't fast enough. They also complained about the clunky inventory system, the mako, and plenty of other things. Bioware fixed these issues and BLAM, more complaining. Ugh.



I have faith, though. Bioware is my favorite developer. I believe that they will turn out a great game, as always.

[RyrineaNara]

Daivd it is a freaking ROLE PLAYING GAME go play a shooter, if that is what you want to play.

[praetor_alpha]

AlanC9 wrote...

And I felt the need to go back to this

AND FOR THE LOVE OF GOD DO YOU REALLY BELIEVE PEOPLE IN 2148 HAS PROJECTILE WEAPONS??! WHERE ARE THE PLASMA / LASER / DEATH-RAY RIFLES????!!!.

Yes, I think projectile hand weapons will still be with us in 2148, and probably 2848. It's never been quite clear what problem laser hand weapons would be solving.

Recoil?

[David Knight]

No, it's not. Not in the sense of roleplaying games like KotOR or DnD. It was never designed to be so. It was supposed to be a cinematic experience, a merging of the shooter and roleplaying genres. It was never supposed to be like anything other than Mass Effect.

As I said before, I loved KotOR, so I'm not biased against RPGs. However, I don't understand why people are complaining about the lack of rpg elements when the original ME didn't really have any to begin with. Remember, those lackluster skinny "elements" were heavily critized when the game came out. It's one of the reasons Bioware changed the game to the version known as ME2.

Mass Effect's roleplaying comes from the dialogue and choices. Other than that, it's a shooter. I'm sorry, but that's the way it is. ME1 was little different. Sure, you could swap guns and armor and compare them, but compared to other RPGs which have many other misc items and such, it wasn't up to par. The Mako was a shooter vehicle, so I won't even touch that.

Mass Effect is a unique experience. It's not an rpg and it's not a shooter. It's some of both. That's why it's great.

[RyrineaNara]

Mass Effect is an action role-playing game where you get to choice your morality. Just because it not on paper doesn't mean it is not a Role playing game, and yes it was a Role playing game in the first one as well. You chose your back story, had stats, chose the design of your character ectt. That freaking sound like a RPG.

[KitsuneRommel]

David Knight wrote...

Mass Effect is a unique experience. It's not an rpg and it's not a shooter. It's some of both. That's why it's great.

This entire thread reminds me of the arguments between pen and paper rpg players and LARPers (live action role playing).

For one side it's the true form of role-playing and for the other it's just shallow wanna-be acting since the ruleset is so limited.

[David Knight]

RyrineaNara wrote...

Mass Effect is an action role-playing game where you get to choice your morality. Just because it not on paper doesn't mean it is not a Role playing game, and yes it was a Role playing game in the first one as well. You chose your back story, had stats, chose the design of your character ectt. That freaking sound like a RPG.

I think you misunderstood me. It is not an rpg in the sense of DnD or anything else. Sure, it's a roleplaying game. You play a role. But if you go by that definition, so is Halo, because you are the Master Chief. Mass Effect's rpg "elements" are the dialogue and choices. I suppose the backstory stuff counts as well, along with the facial features. That's it. The inventory was clunky and called unworthy. ME2 kept all the roleplaying elements from the first game (save for planet exploring, which was pretty much shooter gameplay anyway) except for the inventory.

It's combat is a form of shooter combat. So yes, ME is not an rpg in the older more tradiitonal sense. It's something different.

[David Knight]

KitsuneRommel wrote...

David Knight wrote...

Mass Effect is a unique experience. It's not an rpg and it's not a shooter. It's some of both. That's why it's great.

This entire thread reminds me of the arguments between pen and paper rpg players and LARPers (live action role playing).

For one side it's the true form of role-playing and for the other it's just shallow wanna-be acting since the ruleset is so limited.

Maybe you're right. Maybe it's all a matter of opinion.

[GMulryan]

There isn't much in ME that I want to see in ME3.



I just finished another painful play thru Mako hunting for piles of rocks, er minerals. Dead bodies with colony tags and capsules containing dolls, rags and pages form a book by a presumed dead asari sage.



Stupid combat AI where I would run around yet another room filled with ..guess what....big frickin boxes stacked on more boxes shooting targets running all over the dam room. Oh inventory, ya sure, omnigel for, for re purposing worthless loot. Enemies were animated silhouttes shooting red lines of death, blue blobs and un modded projectiles at Wrex, Tali and Shep all the while constantly chanting "I will destroy you".



I appreciate ME2 so much more. I can hope for head gear that retracts similar to that worn by with warriors in the original Stargate movie and mentioned in another thread. Some of the old faces coming back around. I wonder what an Arachni ship looks like since they will be joining my Shep in the fight, I am wondering what is going to happen to the Krogan as they unite under one banner and beyond after the Reaper threat is thwarted.



I am wondering whether my Shep will get to physically b*slap that Turian council member for implying my mental state was anything but normal, as the mythical reapers appear in council space.

[David Knight]

GMulryan wrote...


I am wondering whether my Shep will get to physically b*slap that Turian council member for implying my mental state was anything but normal, as the mythical reapers appear in council space.

I second this motion.

[KitsuneRommel]

David Knight wrote...

Maybe you're right. Maybe it's all a matter of opinion.

Opinion and taste. That's why the entire ME1 vs 2 war is pointless. ME2 has less classic CRPG elements but it's no less of an RPG. Almost 30 decades or playing PnP, CRPGs and occasional Larping makes you appreciate different styles. Some people just can't.


A quote from ID4 (horrible movie) comes to mind:
- I know there is much to learn from each other if we can make a truce. We can find a way to Co-exist. can there be a peace between us?
- Peace? NO PEACE!

Modifié par KitsuneRommel, 07 mai 2010 - 12:08 .

[David Knight]

Hmmm. You, sir, KitsuneRommel, are a gentleman and a scholar! Kudos to you for being levelheaded.

[TJSolo]

David Knight wrote...

No, it's not. Not in the sense of roleplaying games like KotOR or DnD. It was never designed to be so. It was supposed to be a cinematic experience, a merging of the shooter and roleplaying genres. It was never supposed to be like anything other than Mass Effect.

Back when ME was getting designed and Casey Hudson was hyping it, there was never a tone that didn't glorify exploration, customization, character development and other aspects as part of the overall package. The combat which uses guns Hudson glorified because it was real time and used innovative features not found in conventional shooters.

As I said before, I loved KotOR, so I'm not biased against RPGs. However, I don't understand why people are complaining about the lack of rpg elements when the original ME didn't really have any to begin with. Remember, those lackluster skinny "elements" were heavily critized when the game came out. It's one of the reasons Bioware changed the game to the version known as ME2.

Dig up the old forums. Complaints about the features talked about how the concept was nice but needed tweaking. Like better itemized guns and gear, not the barren armory of ME2. There was moaning about the Mako, but honestly it was really about the terrain, and in ME2 we get no vehicle and no planet exploration out the box.
Looks like Bioware took the complaints from ME1 and went to far with corrections.

Mass Effect's roleplaying comes from the dialogue and choices. Other than that, it's a shooter. I'm sorry, but that's the way it is. ME1 was little different. Sure, you could swap guns and armor and compare them, but compared to other RPGs which have many other misc items and such, it wasn't up to par. The Mako was a shooter vehicle, so I won't even touch that.

Dialogue and choices isn't enough to dawn the title RPG, unless games like Infamous and GTA are now RPGs because they include dialogue and choices.  ME1 was a hybrid with a certain shooter and RPG mix, ME2 changed the mixture enough that people can get away will calling it a shooter that includes RPG elements.  ME1 was a dry gin martini  while ME2 is strawberry vodka martini that has no vermouth.

Mass Effect is a unique experience. It's not an rpg and it's not a shooter. It's some of both. That's why it's great.

Damn shame ME2 messed up the mix.

[David Knight]

TJSolo wrote...

David Knight wrote...

No, it's not. Not in the sense of roleplaying games like KotOR or DnD. It was never designed to be so. It was supposed to be a cinematic experience, a merging of the shooter and roleplaying genres. It was never supposed to be like anything other than Mass Effect.

Back when ME was getting designed and Casey Hudson was hyping it, there was never a tone that didn't glorify exploration, customization, character development and other aspects as part of the overall package. The combat which uses guns Hudson glorified because it was real time and used innovative features not found in conventional shooters.

Oh, sorry. I wasn't clear. I've seen the videos in which he hypes the very things you talked about. I agree with you wholeheartedly. However, just because he hyped said things up does not mean he meant for them to come to fruition or in the way we as fans expect them. It's actually kind of awful, really. I'm  at the point where a game dev says there will be exploration and I automatically think of a small map with repition, heh. Even Bioware lies, I guess. What I mean to say is they knew where they were going when they started to make the game.

As I said before, I loved KotOR, so I'm not biased against RPGs. However, I don't understand why people are complaining about the lack of rpg elements when the original ME didn't really have any to begin with. Remember, those lackluster skinny "elements" were heavily critized when the game came out. It's one of the reasons Bioware changed the game to the version known as ME2.

Dig up the old forums. Complaints about the features talked about how the concept was nice but needed tweaking. Like better itemized guns and gear, not the barren armory of ME2. There was moaning about the Mako, but honestly it was really about the terrain, and in ME2 we get no vehicle and no planet exploration out the box.
Looks like Bioware took the complaints from ME1 and went to far with corrections.

Again, what I mean to say is people on the forums (remember most forumners complain about one thing or another) complained a lot about the inventory and Mako. They did. Seriously. I'm not saying that that's unusal, as complainers here, now, complain about things all the time and over everything. Yes, some people did want more customization. I agree. However, these wants came out in the form of complaints. They were heavily criticized by the fans not the game reviewers (i.e. ign). Those "official" reviewers said much what you said, that it needed tweaking, etc.

Mass Effect's roleplaying comes from the dialogue and choices. Other than that, it's a shooter. I'm sorry, but that's the way it is. ME1 was little different. Sure, you could swap guns and armor and compare them, but compared to other RPGs which have many other misc items and such, it wasn't up to par. The Mako was a shooter vehicle, so I won't even touch that.

Dialogue and choices isn't enough to dawn the title RPG, unless games like Infamous and GTA are now RPGs because they include dialogue and choices.  ME1 was a hybrid with a certain shooter and RPG mix, ME2 changed the mixture enough that people can get away will calling it a shooter that includes RPG elements.  ME1 was a dry gin martini  while ME2 is strawberry vodka martini that has no vermouth.

I'm not sure what you mean to say here... the only rpg bit they took out of ME2 was the inventory. Other than that, any rpg elements stayed the same... so, I don't know what you want to discuss. ME2 is indeed a shooter with rpg elements. ME1 was also a shooter with rpg elements, because it did not include misc items, stats, dice-based gameplay, etc.

Mass Effect is a unique experience. It's not an rpg and it's not a shooter. It's some of both. That's why it's great.

Damn shame ME2 messed up the mix.

Well, that's a matter of opinion, I guess. As I said before, I loved ME1 and loved ME2 more. So did most reviewers. I don't know why many people think ME2 is so different from ME1 when they're both very similar. I don't know how ME2 messed up the mic when it kept everything that made the first one great (save for the inventory, which could have been upgraded but was instead taken out). I'm confused.

Edit: I forgot. How does the removal of the inventory system ruin the game for a lot of people? It's one system. ??????????

Modifié par David Knight, 07 mai 2010 - 01:34 .

[David Knight]

Define depth. In terms of character and story depth, mass effect comes to mind imo.

However, in terms of just about everything else, you are indeed correct.

[TheConfidenceMan]

What happened to this game is the same thing that happens to all good IPs eventually, except this time it only took one sequel to run it into the ground, something that hasn't been achieved since Deus Ex: Invisible War. Bravo!



Some of the blame undoubtedly lies with EA. They wanted a safe, inoffensive, non-controversial, easily digestible mainstream hit to use as a delivery mechanism for their pathetic DLC offerings, and that's just what they got - at the expense of crafting a deep, challenging, and rewarding experience.



It also didn't help that they had at least one clueless lead designer, who doesn't appear to have even played the first game past the opening level, and for whom the game being "RPG-ish" is something that has to be buffed out like a scratch on a pristine paint job rather than expanded and improved upon.

[KitsuneRommel]

slimgrin wrote...

The term rpg need not be used for ME2. Sure it has rpg elements, but it lacks depth; that, imo, is what people are asking for - depth in the leveling mechanic, depth of customization, exploration, etc.

Would you say LARPing is not role-playing then?

It's like saying that Starcraft is not a strategy game because it lacks the depth of Europa Universalis II.

[Massadonious1]

Dialogue and choices isn't enough to dawn the title RPG, unless Infamous and GTA are now RPGs because they include dialogue and choices

I can't speak for the first game, but as for GTA, if "dialogue" means "pre-voiced cutscenes that you couldn't affect" and if "choices" mean "which guns you decide to use to take out armored trucks or which side of the street you wanted to perform a drive by on" then yes, I guess GTA has both.

[Meglivorn]

KitsuneRommel wrote...
Opinion and taste. That's why the entire ME1 vs 2 war is pointless. ME2 has less classic CRPG elements but it's no less of an RPG. Almost 30 decades or playing PnP, CRPGs and occasional Larping makes you appreciate different styles. Some people just can't.

Absolutely agree.

[FlyingWalrus]

I support BioWare's idea to use projectile weapons instead of contrived projected energy weapons as more typical. In the ME universe, directed energy weapons are something only Salarian warships put to extensive use and even then their applications are limited because of the huge energy load they require. They should be exotic, and they should be heavy weapons only.

And don't even bring up Sovereign's main gun. That was molten particulate fired in a stream.

I do agree with the majority of the OP's post, but I don't think BioWare deviated as far from its objective as some would like to believe.

[Jebel Krong]

FlyingWalrus wrote...

I support BioWare's idea to use projectile weapons instead of contrived projected energy weapons as more typical. In the ME universe, directed energy weapons are something only Salarian warships put to extensive use and even then their applications are limited because of the huge energy load they require. They should be exotic, and they should be heavy weapons only.
And don't even bring up Sovereign's main gun. That was molten particulate fired in a stream.
I do agree with the majority of the OP's post, but I don't think BioWare deviated as far from its objective as some would like to believe.

i liked them a bit more in the first game - they looked and sounded more like proper railguns, which is what they are supposed to be. in the sequel, the AR in particular sounds like a tinny machine gun, and not futuristic at all.

besides railguns would be more effective weapons than nearly all directed-energy ones, especially at range (even in a vaccuum).

[Nibroc17]

Zaxares wrote...

One thing I can say for still using projectile weapons in 2185: energy-based weapons consume an ENORMOUS amount of energy. For the same energy you would need to create a laser rifle that does the same damage as a mass-accelerated round, you could probably fire 10, 20 or even 100 mass-accelerated rounds. It's just more practical and economical to use projectile weapons.

Exactly!!! they even say that in the codex. besides real life science say's handheld laser weapons are impractical if not impossible.