616 réponses à ce sujet

[bjdbwea]

AlanC9 wrote...

Every minute of developer time put into a sidequest is a minute that didn't go into the main plot. You can't dodge the question by saying that the sidequests are optional -- if someone doesn't like sidequests he can skip them, but a game with sidequests has less of what he does want.

He was however talking about what "modern" RPGs should be. And I say even a "modern" RPG has to offer side quests and exploration. There are enough linear shooters out there, if he wants that.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 01 juin 2010 - 07:20 .

[Sigma Tauri]

bjdbwea wrote...
But why do that? The "fluff" is exactly what made those missions interesting. Much more interesting than the side missions in ME 2, that's for sure.

No. What I'm saying is if you remove the planet's time sinks like minerals surveys, archaelogical scans, and accessing old probles, you essentially have a planet that serves for you to "shoot'em up." The Tuntau merc base facing Tonn Actus is as combat heavy as the N7: Archaeological Dig mission. Both essentialy are the same time to complete. You only have more time on a planet because you didn't have the Mako to explore a vast emptiness.

monkeycamoran wrote...
It was all optional. And there goes your "argument". You want to concentrate on shooting stuff, just ignore the side missions. Or - buy one of the countless shooters out there.

I want to concentrate on something more substantial than surveying quests. Even Bethesda learned the lesson of creating numerous quests that were at the most just fetching. Bioware hasn't made a great side quest since the dungeon crawlers in Baldur's Gate. So, don't lump in as if I like shooting solely. I don't have a vast RPG experience starting from Ultima or Wasteland, but I didn't start playing ME as my first RPG and call it a magnus opus.

Modifié par monkeycamoran, 01 juin 2010 - 07:21 .

[Ryllen Laerth Kriel]

It would be nice if they had a compromise between ME1 and ME2. Maybe having less weapon drops, more akin to ME2, but having the occaisional barrel, scope or ammo upgrade drop. I enjoyed swapping out mods on a good weapon in ME1, it really gave the game a custom feel that few shooters embrace. There's something nice about putting a high calibur barrel on your sniper rifle with high explosive ammunition. Sure it wasn't heat effective, that's not the point. Blowing the crap out of an enemy with one shot then switchng to a backup firearm was great. The freedom to specialize weapons was quite nice.

[Shotokanguy]

Ugh what the hell are you people even talking about anymore.



Ok, maybe I should have made a better topic title.

[Vena_86]

KalosCast wrote...

The "twoo RPG fanz0rz" are not going to be happy until we have thousands of skill points that have an effect approaching nothing on their own and are able to custom-build their character down to the very last newton that 'Throw' will do and the thread-count on their sheets, but also never actually needing to do any of the combat that they're painstakingly building their character around.

This game has a completely unpleasable fanbase, stop trying to make us happy.

And the non RPG fans just want no challenge for their little brains, colourfull explosions and bling bling and ofcourse lots of boobs.
Others can do gross oversimplification too...

[Sajon1]

I liked the fact that I sucked with the assault rifle in the beginning of the first game, and I actually had to invest points to boost the accuracy to an acceptable level. Not to mention upgrades to reduce overheating and other stats. Thats what I liked. In the second I wasnt really that worried about leveling up as much. It was more of a bonus, as you could just play it more as a shooter. More based on skill than character build. I like a mixture of both.

[SomeBug]

More superfluous junk to litter my captains cabin please. Like the damaged N7 helmet or that Prothean beachball.

[Spartas Husky]

Sajon1 wrote...

I liked the fact that I sucked with the assault rifle in the beginning of the first game, and I actually had to invest points to boost the accuracy to an acceptable level. Not to mention upgrades to reduce overheating and other stats. Thats what I liked. In the second I wasnt really that worried about leveling up as much. It was more of a bonus, as you could just play it more as a shooter. More based on skill than character build. I like a mixture of both.

me too, unfortunately in the 2nd accuracy is based on this you buy rather than the lvl you are...which comes to the same damn thing. You only get most accuracy upgrades later on.

[Kalfear]

Sajon1 wrote...

I liked the fact that I sucked with the assault rifle in the beginning of the first game, and I actually had to invest points to boost the accuracy to an acceptable level. Not to mention upgrades to reduce overheating and other stats. Thats what I liked. In the second I wasnt really that worried about leveling up as much. It was more of a bonus, as you could just play it more as a shooter. More based on skill than character build. I like a mixture of both.

Since im not actually a elite soldier working for Alliance or cerberus in real life, I dont know about this "skill" you speak of. Its a video game. Aiming and shooting is just a dex based action, there is no skill envolved.

I prefer the leveling up system as well. Its a staple of RPGs and should never be messed with!

Once I got the hang of Mass Effect 2 combat I was never challenged and often bored by it. Mass Effect 1 though limited your ability based on your level and added that extra bonus of ammo type and upgrades which changed weapons and how they functioned greatly. All this was lost in ME2 though.

I loved that I had to train and get better with my weapons in ME1, it made it interesting and gave you yet anouther way to change a character in a replay.

Your right though, ME2 was a shooter. High combat situations, weak story over all, poor character development!

With this announcement for multiplayer for part 3, its only going to get worse

ahhh well, It was nice well it lasted, a smart sci fi RPG for adults. Now its just a generic kiddy fodder game for the add crowd.

[Massadonious1]

BioWare hiring a designer with multiplayer experience = multiplayer in ME3 OMGLOLOLOLOZLZLZLZLZLZLZ!!1111oeneoeneoneoneoenoeneoneneoeoeneonenene

[Dracotamer]

I think a hybrid version would be great, but I honestly enjoyed Dragon Age Origins system and didn't mind ME 1's either.

[Terror_K]

Jestina wrote...

There is no natural progression with loyalty in 2. It just feels completely contrived and stupid. I could see someone like Tali being loyal as she was on the first Normandy. On the other hand, I can't see Shepard gaining loyalty with Miranda so easily...considering Cerberus incidents in ME and how much Cerberus love Miranda was spouting in 2. Instead of any kind of loyalty progression through conversations, training, missions, etc....we get boom, dumb loyalty missions. If you want to elaborate on a characters background there are way better methods of going about it than that.

If you look at the way they're structured though, they're not really "loyalty" quests so much as "distraction" quests, i.e. each crewmember has something that's distracting them from focusing on the mission, and its up to you, as Shepard, to help sort it out so they can stop being distracted and keep their minds on the task at hand.

[KitsuneRommel]

SSV Enterprise wrote...

I find your last sentence odd, as the Infiltrator did not carry assault rifles or shotguns in Mass Effect 2. It did, however, carry them in the first game.

It was even more funny for a class like Adept to carry all of them.

[KitsuneRommel]

Kalfear wrote...

I loved that I had to train and get better with my weapons in ME1, it made it interesting and gave you yet anouther way to change a character in a replay.

Scratch the character "war hero" backgrounds and make them accidental hero rookies and it would start to make sense. I'm sorry but it's just a huge immersion breaker for your veteran infiltrator to hardly know how to use a sniper rifle, not to mention that apparently they didn't even bother to equip their N7 special forces properly.

[SSV Enterprise]

Kalfear wrote...

With this announcement for multiplayer for part 3, its only going to get worse

Stop exaggerating.  There's been no announcement, only a rumor that BioWare is hiring programmers with experience in multiplayer for something related to Mass Effect.  This could mean full-blown online multiplayer for ME3, true, but it could just as easily mean a co-op mode for the story (which I think would be a good thing) or a multiplayer game in the Mass Effect franchise that is completely separate from Mass Effect 3.

Also, why would the existence of multiplayer mode necessitate that Mass Effect 3's story mode would be worse?  It's not like it's impossible for a game with multiplayer to have a really good story mode (example: Half-Life).

[FlyingWalrus]

Jestina, did you even play ME2? Because the way you're keening about how "stupid" and "vapid" the loyalty missions were isn't doing you any favors convincing anyone otherwise.

I guess exploring the conflict of morality versus duty with Mordin was pointless and stupid.

Same thing with Jack and wondering if it's not too late to change as a person.

Or maybe experiencing Krogan culture firsthand with Grunt was an contrived, idiotic waste of time?

Yeah, seriously. Stop. Legitimate criticisms are welcome, but hyperbolic whining just makes you look like a baby.

Kalfear, you are the worst example of ivory tower RPG elitists ever. You hold inventories and level-based systems to be sacrosanct no matter what other possibilities are out there. You would rather have 60 levels that, individually, mean nothing as opposed to 30 levels where one level up makes your character far more versatile or potent in ability. To take that further, you then insult the intelligence of any of those who may disagree. I suggest you step back from your computer screen, take a deep breath, and stop crying because you fear change.

Modifié par FlyingWalrus, 02 juin 2010 - 05:08 .

[Sajon1]

Kalfear wrote...

Sajon1 wrote...

I liked the fact that I sucked with the assault rifle in the beginning of the first game, and I actually had to invest points to boost the accuracy to an acceptable level. Not to mention upgrades to reduce overheating and other stats. Thats what I liked. In the second I wasnt really that worried about leveling up as much. It was more of a bonus, as you could just play it more as a shooter. More based on skill than character build. I like a mixture of both.

Since im not actually a elite soldier working for Alliance or cerberus in real life, I dont know about this "skill" you speak of. Its a video game. Aiming and shooting is just a dex based action, there is no skill envolved.

I prefer the leveling up system as well. Its a staple of RPGs and should never be messed with!

Once I got the hang of Mass Effect 2 combat I was never challenged and often bored by it. Mass Effect 1 though limited your ability based on your level and added that extra bonus of ammo type and upgrades which changed weapons and how they functioned greatly. All this was lost in ME2 though.

I loved that I had to train and get better with my weapons in ME1, it made it interesting and gave you yet anouther way to change a character in a replay.

Your right though, ME2 was a shooter. High combat situations, weak story over all, poor character development!

With this announcement for multiplayer for part 3, its only going to get worse

ahhh well, It was nice well it lasted, a smart sci fi RPG for adults. Now its just a generic kiddy fodder game for the add crowd.

Well said. I was pretty much trying to say the same thing. Boils down to that I like being limited by character level. Makes leveling up much more crucial.

[Terror_K]

FlyingWalrus wrote...

Kalfear, you are the worst example of ivory tower RPG elitists ever. You hold inventories and level-based systems to be sacrosanct no matter what other possibilities are out there. You would rather have 60 levels that, individually, mean nothing as opposed to 30 levels where one level up makes your character far more versatile or potent in ability.

Uh... so would I. That's nothing but instant gratification, which a good RPG shouldn't stoop to, as all it is is a means of stopping people who are shallow and want every single thing they do to have visible gains from getting bored. A good RPG is about slowly building up your abilities so you gradually get better over time. Make a character noticeably better with every single level up and you just end up with them either too uber too quickly or running out of skills and abilities fast, or both. Even ME1 fell to the former though it was more gradual... if ME2 had gone to Level 60 it would have been nuts (which leaves me curious about ME3). The point is progression should be smooth and gradual, and not sudden and jumpy.

Modifié par Terror_K, 04 juin 2010 - 01:13 .

[HTTP 404]

I hate to say it but RPGs are never realistic. Even with swords, hacking someone at the arm almost always disables it no matter how much "Hitpoints" you have but you can take turns hacking at someone in "traditional" RPGs, you can get up from fireballs when they blast you, and dragons can't just step on you because it doesn't do enough <insert number> damage. If I went out today and killed a bunch of people do I all of a sudden become better at lockpicking? have more hitpoints? But I dont play RPGs for their "realism" I play them because they are fun!



With that said, I feel that the approach with Mass Effect is realism and I wholly support that and they should integrate RPG elements without sacrificing realism, if it isnt possible in real (loosely use real) life why would it in the game? Its a definitely tricky route where no one is going to be satisfied with the result but I would want bioware to take that route rather than stick with tried and true that many are comfortable with. I like OPs fresh approach to the situation about force, because that is how damage is done in real life, the amount of force it takes to hack an arm off to the amount of force a bullet is propelled at. There is no magic number called "damage"



I hate to break it to some of you that Mass Effect 2 is a shooter set in space. maybe Mass Effect 3 will be known as a Role playing Shooter game, a RPSG if you will.

[HTTP 404]

whats with the RPG elitests with their noses in the air?

[MerrickShep]

Jackal904 wrote...

KalosCast wrote...

This game has a completely unpleasable fanbase

That's true and it pisses me off how ungrateful people are. BioWare put show much effort into making such a deep game with an incredible story and incredible characters, and people can only focus on the few things they didn't like about the game. And they act entitled to things when BioWare doesn't owe them ****. Those people are a bunch of spoiled brats.

Well, Bioware owes it's fans everything without fans they would be nothing...

I love the games but Improvements can always be made and I have suggested the improvments I would like to see myself. Nothing can be made 'better' without critisizm and this is what that is critisizm.

By people complaining about the game shows how much they care in an attempt to make the next game better.
I know some people are a little... nasty with their posts but every one counts when it comes to creating a Bioware game fans included.

They shouldn't create a bridge between RPG and Shooter, they should let them live together.. if that makes any sense

Modifié par MerrickShep, 03 juin 2010 - 06:58 .

[KitsuneRommel]

EA_BiowareAccount wrote...

I hate to say it but RPGs are never realistic. Even with swords, hacking someone at the arm almost always disables it no matter how much "Hitpoints" you have but you can take turns hacking at someone in "traditional" RPGs, you can get up from fireballs when they blast you, and dragons can't just step on you because it doesn't do enough damage. If I went out today and killed a bunch of people do I all of a sudden become better at lockpicking? have more hitpoints? But I dont play RPGs for their "realism" I play them because they are fun!

RuneQuest: Characters did not gain more 'hit points', they just got better at avoiding damage or delivering more damage to their enemies.

RoleMaster: Critical Hits (or simply "crits"), can inflict additional concussion hits, bleeding (subtracted from concussion hits at the start of each new round), broken bones, loss of limbs or extremities, internal organ damage and outright death.

Cyberpunk 2020: The combat system, called "Friday Night Firefight", emphasizes lethality. Several pages in the rules are devoted to discussing real combat vs. the illusions often seen on TV.

Did I have fun playing or GMing them? Oh, yes.

Modifié par KitsuneRommel, 03 juin 2010 - 07:01 .

[christianlian]

Louboutin shoes[/i][/b] create luxury footwear for women known for their distinctive materials and delicate embellishments. Long a favorite of some of the world’s most stylish women, Christian Louboutin [/i][/b]are instantly recognizable to fashion cognoscenti for their trademark lipstick-red soles. Here you will find the cheap Christian Louboutin shoes[/i][/b]; women definitely need to learn everything.

[Kalfear]

FlyingWalrus wrote...

Jestina, did you even play ME2? Because the way you're keening about how "stupid" and "vapid" the loyalty missions were isn't doing you any favors convincing anyone otherwise.

I guess exploring the conflict of morality versus duty with Mordin was pointless and stupid.

Same thing with Jack and wondering if it's not too late to change as a person.

Or maybe experiencing Krogan culture firsthand with Grunt was an contrived, idiotic waste of time?

Yeah, seriously. Stop. Legitimate criticisms are welcome, but hyperbolic whining just makes you look like a baby.

Kalfear, you are the worst example of ivory tower RPG elitists ever. You hold inventories and level-based systems to be sacrosanct no matter what other possibilities are out there. You would rather have 60 levels that, individually, mean nothing as opposed to 30 levels where one level up makes your character far more versatile or potent in ability. To take that further, you then insult the intelligence of any of those who may disagree. I suggest you step back from your computer screen, take a deep breath, and stop crying because you fear change.

Notice how Walrusboy here cant debate or discuss anything about the game.
His only move is to attack attack attack (make up bunch of stuff not even in game) attack attack attack some more

Well Walrusbutt, your cyber bravery is so impressive you have us all shaking in fear (if we didnt know you were shoved in some garbage can for half your jr high school day every day)

If you want to discuss the TOPIC AT HAND (gasp, the horrror of it all), feel free to come forth with well thought out and EXISTING examples to discuss (not that garbage you proposing to Jestina thats not even in game to begin with) but otherwise Ill tell you what I told your other flaming comrade!

Go suck your mothers .... (you get the idea) and come back when you grown up some! Im bored of pre puberty children running their mouths on topics they have no clue about!

Again, if you want to actually talk about the topic, go ahead but based on your reply to anyone smarter then you, that doesnt seem likely to happen.

And people wonder why shooter kiddies have bad reps!

Oh and I dare you to find a post by me complaining about ME inventories. LOL, tell me, do you normally just make crap up or does someone older write it out for you before hand?

[Massadonious1]

By the way, having him suck on his mothers breast would be the exact opposite of growing up.

Modifié par Massadonious1, 03 juin 2010 - 09:30 .