616 réponses à ce sujet

[Sigma Tauri]

Oblivion's deep?



Big news to me.

[Massadonious1]

For a "modified action title" it only sold around 1.6 million copies. Respectable numbers, sure, but for all that they apparently did to "dumb" it down, and cater to the "mainstream" it apparently didn't work out so well, considering the numbers of pure TPS titles like Gears 2.

[Kalfear]

slimgrin wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

Lol...this thread seems to get nowhere. Is it too radical to suggest ME2 could have had deeper strategy without sacrificing story or character?

Deeper like what?

ME2 is checkers. Dragon Age is chess. That make it clear?

Edit: You can substitute the following titles for Dragon age:

Baldurs gate 2, The Witcher, Divine Divinity, Fallout 3, Oblivion, Elder scrolls - these games have complexity and depth, ME2 is like watching an after-school tv special by comparison. It's all about cinematics and action, which is fine, but don't pretend the game is anything other than that. Its not tactical like Dragon Age. It offers virtually nothing in the way of open ended gameplay like Oblivion. The side missions are a joke, unlike Divine Divinity ( character missions aside) 

But no matter. I will be told how all the above titles are crap. They are, in fact not RPG's at all, and ME2 is master of the universe, the most sublime manifestation of any video game ever conceived.

It's a modified action title people. Wake up. This was a deliberate move on Bioware's part.  

 

ME2 is NOT the master of the universe and is infact not really even a RPG to anyone it seems but shooter fans and shooter fans claiming to be RPG fans.

But that aside, Oblivion and Elder Scrolls and Fall out 3 were not good RPGs either! Yeah they had lots of exploration but so does Modern Warfare and a variety of shooter/adventure games out there! Their storylines were short and terrible and almost non existant! Fallout3 had same problem as ME2, it was a Shooter that had no real progressing skills to it.

Open ended play doesnt = RPG

Story, plot, character progression, AND exploration are all needed for a RPG. Bethasoft games are terrible examples of what RPGs shouldnt be far as im concerned and fail as RPGs as much as ME2 did.

Dragons Age is the BEST pure example of a RPG in recent memory having ALL the elements needed for a good working RPG.

Mass Effect 1 was a great RPG with shooter qualities


Mass Effect 2 is checkers
Bethasoft games are chess at a basic level
Dragon Age and Mass Effect 1 and KotOR1 and 2 are 3 dimensional chess on a timer vrs a master

[FlyingWalrus]

Hahaha.

KoTOR 1 was twice the RPG that Mass Effect 1 was, bro. You undermine yourself with statements like that considering that there was a lot more character customization in KoTOR than in Mass Effect, and the plot and character progression AND exploration were of equal or higher grade in KoTOR than in ME1.

[Sigma Tauri]

slimgrin wrote...

monkeycamoran wrote...

Oblivion's deep?

Big news to me.

As if on cue...here come the cherry pickers. 

That want require me to even care about your argument  Frankly, I don't disagree with your idea that ME2 isn't as tactically deep an RPG as let's say DA. So, there's no counter from me there, but I don't care. I just find what you find as depth odd with Oblivion. Oblivion has some tactics, but it ain't that deep. Not in a sense that DA or BG2 is.

Modifié par monkeycamoran, 15 juin 2010 - 05:59 .

[Lord Jaric]

My opinion of an RPG is something that I have a control over the story's progression. and that's all this is really about, people with different opinions on something, I say leave it at that.

Modifié par Lord Jaric, 15 juin 2010 - 06:01 .

[HTTP 404]

slimgrin wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

Lol...this thread seems to get nowhere. Is it too radical to suggest ME2 could have had deeper strategy without sacrificing story or character?

Deeper like what?

ME2 is checkers. Dragon Age is chess. That make it clear?

Edit: You can substitute the following titles for Dragon age:

Baldurs gate 2, The Witcher, Divine Divinity, Fallout 3, Oblivion, Elder scrolls - these games have complexity and depth, ME2 is like watching an after-school tv special by comparison. It's all about cinematics and action, which is fine, but don't pretend the game is anything other than that. Its not tactical like Dragon Age. It offers virtually nothing in the way of open ended gameplay like Oblivion. The side missions are a joke, unlike Divine Divinity ( character missions aside) 

But no matter. I will be told how all the above titles are crap. They are, in fact not RPG's at all, and ME2 is master of the universe, the most sublime manifestation of any video game ever conceived.

It's a modified action title people. Wake up. This was a deliberate move on Bioware's part.  

 

is that really a bad thing?? I think you confuse RPG with Good game

[HTTP 404]

actually i take that back.  many people here confuse RPG with Good Game.

I actually agree with most points that ME2 is not really an RPG (no need to convince me) but I still think its a pretty damn good game.

[FlyingWalrus]

I just don't understand why you guys get so caught up in so many specifics when it comes to designating what an RPG is and what it's not. It's ridiculous to claim that ME2 isn't an RPG in some way. You can't call it an action/adventure title, because action/adventure games don't let you determine the outcome for anything beyond winning or game over. You can't call it a generic third-person shooter, because those games don't offer the least bit of story direction or character customization. You can't call it a first-person shooter, because it's obviously not in first-person.

So that leaves us with what? RPG Shooter.

It's not that hard.

[Massadonious1]

People just want to justify their disatisfaction by pigenholing it into something's it's not.

It allows them to hate it for what it isn't.

Modifié par Massadonious1, 15 juin 2010 - 06:12 .

[FlyingWalrus]

I can think of ways to improve the game, but to say that ME2 as it is offers no choices as to character progression is lol.

[Terror_K]

ME2 is an RPG. It's just a shallow one. Just because it fits the definition doesn't mean it succeeds at it.

[HTTP 404]

It really boils down to tastes but I dont think there is a conspiracy by bioware to create a game to frustrate a small population of rpg elitests.  I may not by as cynic as most on these forums but I honestly believe that bioware made a game they truly wanted to make.  A safe approach would be just using the same gameplay mechanics from the first one.

Modifié par HTTP 404, 15 juin 2010 - 06:16 .

[FlyingWalrus]

Terror_K wrote...

ME2 is an RPG. It's just a shallow one. Just because it fits the definition doesn't mean it succeeds at it.

Time to elaborate.

What's an RPG supposed to succeed at, again...?

Modifié par FlyingWalrus, 15 juin 2010 - 06:15 .

[Massadonious1]

In other news, the sky is blue.

[Terror_K]

FlyingWalrus wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

ME2 is an RPG. It's just a shallow one. Just because it fits the definition doesn't mean it succeeds at it.

Time to elaborate.

What's an RPG supposed to succeed at, again...?

Seriously? *sigh* Just look in the "Disappointment with ME2 thread" I've already explained it at least half a dozen times there alone... let alone in all the other threads over the last 5 months. I'm kind of sick of repeating myself and going in circles here.

[HTTP 404]

I think it was a rhetorical question Terror_k. People who dont really care if it isnt truly an RPG dont care if it lives up to its RPG "potential" whatever that is.

[FlyingWalrus]

Terror_K wrote...

FlyingWalrus wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

ME2 is an RPG. It's just a shallow one. Just because it fits the definition doesn't mean it succeeds at it.

Time to elaborate.

What's an RPG supposed to succeed at, again...?

Seriously? *sigh* Just look in the "Disappointment with ME2 thread" I've already explained it at least half a dozen times there alone... let alone in all the other threads over the last 5 months. I'm kind of sick of repeating myself and going in circles here.

The burden is on you to explain your ridiculous comment. I've had noooo reason whatsoever to look in that thread because I'm not disappointed with the game.



Because the last time I checked, the goal of any game was to "entertain," and ME2 doesn't really fail at that.

[Massadonious1]

You can come and be dissapointed with how circular the arguments have become.

[SkullandBonesmember]

FlyingWalrus wrote...

I just don't understand why you guys get so caught up in so many specifics when it comes to designating what an RPG is and what it's not. It's ridiculous to claim that ME2 isn't an RPG in some way. You can't call it an action/adventure title, because action/adventure games don't let you determine the outcome for anything beyond winning or game over. You can't call it a generic third-person shooter, because those games don't offer the least bit of story direction or character customization. You can't call it a first-person shooter, because it's obviously not in first-person.
So that leaves us with what? RPG Shooter.
It's not that hard.

Of course it's an RPG. Hardly anybody is saying it isn't. Just that it's not on par with their past title in terms of story. Drago made the perfect point in another thread. The EXCESSIVE combat is what kills ME2 for many. There was no balance with character interaction and moving along the plot. The story "evolves through the combat". And that's a GOOD thing, right? How dare story progress via character interaction and cutscenes. Screw that. Massadonious himself implies in his sig there's no such thing as too much 'SPLOSHUNS but there is such a thing as too much character interaction/plot.

Terror_K wrote...

I'm kind of sick of repeating myself and going in circles here.

You and me both. But I get the feeling half of the members who ask us things that we've already explained in depth do it for fun knowing full well we've already gone there.

Yes, I realize not everybody will read all threads others participate in, that's taken into account.

[SkullandBonesmember]

FlyingWalrus wrote...

The burden is on you to explain your ridiculous comment. I've had noooo reason whatsoever to look in that thread because I'm not disappointed with the game.



Because the last time I checked, the goal of any game was to "entertain," and ME2 doesn't really fail at that.

Most participating in that thread make up gamers who love ME2. The worst part in what is an otherwise epic game is the scanning according to them. The rest will go down in history as a near flawless, legendary title.