194 réponses à ce sujet

[Ecael]

LorDC wrote...

The only thing Ecael proved is that Pokemon is better pokemon game than Mass Effect. I can prove that solitaire is better card game than Mass Effect in the same way.

That would be true if Pokémon wasn't considered the best selling RPG ever made, but it is.

They are in the same category, except Pokémon makes the Mass Effect series look like third-person shooters with dilute RPG elements (and technically speaking, they are).

Bluko wrote...

Personally I find turn-based combat silly. I don't see how combat can be exciting or fun if you can sit around picking your nose while deciding what attack to use.

Isn't that what pause is for in BioWare games?

Modifié par Ecael, 03 juin 2010 - 12:35 .

[LorDC]

Ecael wrote...

They are in the same category, except Pokémon makes the Mass Effect series look like third-person shooters with dilute RPG elements (and technically speaking, they are).

Technically speaking you just said that ME and Pokemon are different genres and thus shouldn't be compared directly.

[Ecael]

LorDC wrote...

Ecael wrote...

They are in the same category, except Pokémon makes the Mass Effect series look like third-person shooters with dilute RPG elements (and technically speaking, they are).

Technically speaking you just said that ME and Pokemon are different genres and thus shouldn't be compared directly.

Pokémon - RPG
Mass Effect 1/2 - TPS

Good point.

[LorDC]

Ecael wrote...

Pokémon - RPG
Mass Effect 1/2 - TPS

Good point.

Not exactly. ME is TPS/RPG with TPS element as dominant. So direct comparison between ME and classical RPGs is wrong.

[Ecael]

LorDC wrote...

Ecael wrote...

Pokémon - RPG
Mass Effect 1/2 - TPS

Good point.

Not exactly. ME is TPS/RPG with TPS element as dominant. So direct comparison between ME and classical RPGs is wrong.

Glad you see it my way, then.

[LorDC]

Ecael wrote...

Glad you see it my way, then.

Why you created such wall of text then? Only for the sake of showing stupidity of such comparisons to other?

[Cheese Elemental]

Ecael wrote...

LorDC wrote...

Ecael wrote...

Pokémon - RPG
Mass Effect 1/2 - TPS

Good point.

Not exactly. ME is TPS/RPG with TPS element as dominant. So direct comparison between ME and classical RPGs is wrong.

Glad you see it my way, then.

It's always been obvious that Mass Effect is a TPS first and foremost, with a lot of RPG elements. However, the 'RPG' side of Mass Effect is in the branching story, dialogue and moral choices. It's not an inventory or battle system that defines an RPG; it's ultimately about choice. It's a fantastic example of a WRPG.

Pokemon can't be compared to WRPGs at all. It doesn't have character development, the story always follows the same general line and it's all about pimping out your team to be the most hardcore team of bizarre Japanese monsters ever. WRPGs are about choice and developing your own characters, but JRPGs are about following a predetermined path.

Look at Final Fantasy. You don't have any control over how your character develops; it's always about a team of young men and women with ridiculous hair out to save the world. Square Enix have been using that formula for years now, and it works for them. I think it's getting harder for them to draw in new blood though, because people want more choice in their games (that goes beyond finding the best gear in the game).

Mass Effect is a better RPG than, say, Diablo. That was a hack-and-slash, not a true RPG. You pick a class, find the best build available, and go smack up demons. That's just fine. I find Diablo immensely fun, and I've clocked dozens of hours on it, but I wouldn't even consider it a good RPG. However, you've got people who claim that it is.

[Onyx Jaguar]

Cheese Elemental wrote...

it's all about pimping out your team to be the most hardcore team of bizarre Japanese monsters ever.

Confirmed



Pokemon is proper hardcore. The Mass Effect games are made for a casual audience.

[Cheese Elemental]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Cheese Elemental wrote...
it's all about pimping out your team to be the most hardcore team of bizarre Japanese monsters ever.

Confirmed

Pokemon is proper hardcore. The Mass Effect games are made for a casual audience.

Oh no, don't start with this casual/hardcore BS again. I get enough of that crap on 4chan.

[Goodwood]

LorDC wrote...

Ecael wrote...

Glad you see it my way, then.

Why you created such wall of text then? Only for the sake of showing stupidity of such comparisons to other?

Goodwood can think of three possible reasons:

1. For teh lulz.

2. For great justice.

3. To protect the world from devestation...

[Ecael]

Cheese Elemental wrote...

It's always been obvious that Mass Effect is a TPS first and foremost, with a lot of RPG elements. However, the 'RPG' side of Mass Effect is in the branching story, dialogue and moral choices. It's not an inventory or battle system that defines an RPG; it's ultimately about choice. It's a fantastic example of a WRPG.

Pokemon can't be compared to WRPGs at all. It doesn't have character development, the story always follows the same general line and it's all about pimping out your team to be the most hardcore team of bizarre Japanese monsters ever. WRPGs are about choice and developing your own characters, but JRPGs are about following a predetermined path.

Look at Final Fantasy. You don't have any control over how your character develops; it's always about a team of young men and women with ridiculous hair out to save the world. Square Enix have been using that formula for years now, and it works for them. I think it's getting harder for them to draw in new blood though, because people want more choice in their games (that goes beyond finding the best gear in the game).

Mass Effect is a better RPG than, say, Diablo. That was a hack-and-slash, not a true RPG. You pick a class, find the best build available, and go smack up demons. That's just fine. I find Diablo immensely fun, and I've clocked dozens of hours on it, but I wouldn't even consider it a good RPG. However, you've got people who claim that it is.

You are very much correct. RPGs rely on character development of your character and of all the characters around you.

BioWare has mastered this in every single game. However, a lot of other people think that the RPG "elements" are everything I described in my original post - and thus, Pokémon is much more of a "hardcore" RPG than others.

[Ecael]

LorDC wrote...

Ecael wrote...

Glad you see it my way, then.

Why you created such wall of text then? Only for the sake of showing stupidity of such comparisons to other?

Yup.

[Onyx Jaguar]

Goodwood wrote...



3. To protect the world from devestation...

So your saying that proving that Pokemon destroys the Mass Effect games as RPGs will unite us all and prevent the Ur-Quan from sending the Korh-Ah after us?

[Cheese Elemental]

Are these forums like this all the time?

[Ecael]

Cheese Elemental wrote...

Are these forums like this all the time?

Only on some threads. It's difficult to be serious all the time on an internet forum.

[Steingrimur Steingrimsson]

Ok, I actually read the whole thing, and I must say that the "What can ME learn from this" were very constructive. But for the comparison and Pokémon's perfect game against Mass Effect, I see only fanboyism. I cannot comprehend why anybody would think that Pokémon has a better plot, yes there is a clearly defined goal and antagonists, but the whole thing is just incredibly simple and shallow.

You even had exploration as a catagory, while ME is built far more linear than Pokémon on purpose, that is not necesserily a con. The catagories are mostly just a compilation of where you think ME derived from the "golden" Pokémon formula.

I personally think a lot of people are getting religious when it comes to defining what an RPG is and what it isn't, condemning and shunning every aspect of an RPG they do not find RPG-ish enough.

You mentioned the "nostalgic days of Pokémon", and I would say nostalgia is a very fitting word, you yearn for a time that is basically past, instead of enjoying the new ideas of the present.

[Ecael]

Steingrimur Steingrimsson wrote...

Ok, I actually read the whole thing, and I must say that the "What can ME learn from this" were very constructive.

Well, I'm glad someone read that part.

:innocent:

But for the comparison and Pokémon's perfect game against Mass Effect, I see only fanboyism. I cannot comprehend why anybody would think that Pokémon has a better plot, yes there is a clearly defined goal and antagonists, but the whole thing is just incredibly simple and shallow.
You even had exploration as a catagory, while ME is built far more linear than Pokémon on purpose, that is not necesserily a con. The catagories are mostly just a compilation of where you think ME derived from the "golden" Pokémon formula.
I personally think a lot of people are getting religious when it comes to defining what an RPG is and what it isn't, condemning and shunning every aspect of an RPG they do not find RPG-ish enough.
You mentioned the "nostalgic days of Pokémon", and I would say nostalgia is a very fitting word, you yearn for a time that is basically past, instead of enjoying the new ideas of the present.

As satirical as my original post was, it does make a few points, despite being a very shallow argument for each of them (which is basically a lot of the arguments on these forums).

Yes, people definitely are getting devoted to defining what is an RPG or isn't an RPG because of nostalgia. However, the more they do that, they more they ought to see how Mass Effect 1 and 2 should pale when held up to their standards.

[Steingrimur Steingrimsson]

Ecael wrote...

Steingrimur Steingrimsson wrote...

Ok, I actually read the whole thing, and I must say that the "What can ME learn from this" were very constructive.

Well, I'm glad someone read that part.

:innocent:

But for the comparison and Pokémon's perfect game against Mass Effect, I see only fanboyism. I cannot comprehend why anybody would think that Pokémon has a better plot, yes there is a clearly defined goal and antagonists, but the whole thing is just incredibly simple and shallow.
You even had exploration as a catagory, while ME is built far more linear than Pokémon on purpose, that is not necesserily a con. The catagories are mostly just a compilation of where you think ME derived from the "golden" Pokémon formula.
I personally think a lot of people are getting religious when it comes to defining what an RPG is and what it isn't, condemning and shunning every aspect of an RPG they do not find RPG-ish enough.
You mentioned the "nostalgic days of Pokémon", and I would say nostalgia is a very fitting word, you yearn for a time that is basically past, instead of enjoying the new ideas of the present.

As satirical as my original post was, it does make a few points, despite being a very shallow argument for each of them (which is basically a lot of the arguments on these forums).

Yes, people definitely are getting devoted to defining what is an RPG or isn't an RPG because of nostalgia. However, the more they do that, they more they ought to see how Mass Effect 1 and 2 should pale when held up to their standards.

Just realized that I am utterly humourless, but you never know on the internet, there are plenty of fundamentalist RPG-fans out there who could have made such a thread.

[Ecael]

I consolidated all the suggestions into the post after the original:

http://social.biowar...91290/1#2791295

[Annihilator27]

ShamieGTX wrote...

He actually said Pokemon beats Mass Effect In the Plot.........WHAT?

next thing we'll see is Shepard throwing a pokeball to catch a squadmate.... -_______-
What? Kaidan is Evolving....... Congratulations Kaidan Evolved Into Jacob.... TinTunTunTanananaNA!!

LMAO, Fail. Ive played all the main stream games. I guess stopping some crazy team from abusing legendary pokemon powers is a way better story line. I bet were gonan catch Harbinger with a Master Ball

Harbinger the Reaper pokemon. Dark/Steel
Its said to be older then Arceus itself, Legends say It returns every 50,000 years to harness pokemon types.
Special move "Assuming Direct Control" Dark move, Takes control of opponent pokemon forcing them to throw out another pokemon.

[ShamieGTX]

LPPrince wrote...

ShamieGTX wrote...

He actually said Pokemon beats Mass Effect In the Plot.........WHAT?

next thing we'll see is Shepard throwing a pokeball to catch a squadmate.... -_______-
What? Kaidan is Evolving....... Congratulations Kaidan Evolved Into Jacob.... TinTunTunTanananaNA!!

1. She
2. It does
3. What do you mean, "What?"? Pokémon generally has the same general plot line in each game, and yet still, 10 years after the first set was sold, millions of people continue to purchase the new games.

Why? Because they stand the test of time.

Now, will people purchase Mass Effect/Mass Effect 2 in 10 years? Of course.

In the numbers of the Pokémon games? Hell no.

And its for the simple reason that what Pokémon does, WORKS.

Nobody Plays pokemon for the plot... everyone plays pokemon for the pokemon...

POKEMON's plot is not revolutionary its not redefining theres NOTHING fresh about pokemon's plot, Pokemon's success is the same one as Mario's, Kirby, Sonic, Metroid...Nothing But CASH COW MILKING... I mean Sure thats what the static's say, and i'm not gonna lie to you i sometimes pick my nephew's DS and play pokemon and waste the whole day catching that pikachu, BUT honestly when you buy it Do you think about the story or do you think more about "I Wonder what sort of pokemon are gonna be here, I wonder how they evolve" and to add HOW MANY of the people you know play Pokemon now a day, In my case? out of ALL my friends...Im probably the only one that sort of still plays it....

[Jackal904]

Are you seriously comparing Mass Effect to Pokemon? Seriously? I hope it was sarcasm. One giant sarcastic rant. If it's serious, I'm not even sure what to make of it.

[ShamieGTX]

Jackal904 wrote...

Are you seriously comparing Mass Effect to Pokemon? Seriously? I hope it was sarcasm. One giant sarcastic rant. If it's serious, I'm not even sure what to make of it.

He's, She's, It's DEAD serious....

[HyperLimited]

Hmm, that was a good chuckle. Thanks.

[Sailears]

Bluko wrote...

Well I never played Pokemon as kid cause I never had a Gameboy...



(I wasted way too much of my allowance on those stupid cards to cement my hatred of Pokecrack forever. I did however get a N64 as a child so I can't complain too much.)

That said Pokemon is more exemplar of the Japanese RPG. Essentially JRPG have lots of weird/unique characters, and tons of items along with all sorts of nifty stats to track. And most JRPGs are turn based... Bioware on the other hand is more of a Western RPG if you will. WRPGs are more about freedom of choice and tend to have preference to real time combat. Although there still items, stats, levels, etc. The most ideal example of WRPGs I can think of is probably the Elder Scrolls series. Personally my favorite/ideal RPG is the Baldur's Gate series.

WRPGs have some kind of central story, but along the way you are faced with many decisions to essentially be good or evil. JRPGs on the other hand tend to have a strong central plot, but don't really present you with many choices other then what to level up. In WRPGs your choices ultimately don't change the story, but do change whether you end up the Hero or the new Villian.

Bioware's games are somewhat unique in that characters are very important (Like most JRPGs), but your character is generally faced with many choices. Bioware's success is largely based on it's blend of different game elements, which in the end makes their games feel more fresh and fun.

Personally I find turn-based combat silly. I don't see how combat can be exciting or fun if you can sit around picking your nose while deciding what attack to use. I love how monsters will just sit there and wait it's turn to attack. Having "turns" to me is something more suited to strategy games. Things with roots in games like Chess. Simply put real time combat is the way to go, and you still can technically have "turns" in a real time combat system anyways.

Do you really want to see this...

Shepard has encountered.... THRESHER MAW

Shepard: "Garrus I choose you!"

GARRUS>Sniper Shot

THRESHER MAW -10 HP!

Garrus: "Scratch one!"

SHEPARD>Rocket Attack

THRESHER MAW -20 HP!

Shepard: "I should go."

THRESHER MAW>Acid Spit

GARRUS -500 HP!

SHEPARD -500 HP!

Game Over


This may well and all be fun for some, but for me not so much. Of course said battle could have been won had I only grinded XP from Vorcha so that Garrus was Level 85.

Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2 are not meant to be classic RPGs. The point of the Mass Effect games is to cross genres being a hybrid of Shooter and RPG. Core gameplay wise the Mass Effect games are Third Person Shooters. There's just no escaping this. Combat is to be resolved primarily by your shooting skills. However you do have some RPG elements in the forms of Levels and Abilities. Basically the games are meant to be Shooters with RPG elements. They are not however meant to RPGs with Shooter elements. The idea is you have the fun shooting mechanics combined with some tactical RPG elements to add depth.

It's hard to classify what Mass Effect truly is, because in many ways it's almost a new genre of game. Making ME3 into a pure Shooter would just being dumbing the game down. While making ME3 into a pure RPG would just make it needlessly complicated and dull. The key to success lies in finding the right balance of Shooter stuff and RPG stuff. Which is hopefully what Mass Effect 3 will accomplish.

That said I think the general consensus is ME2 is a bit too much Shooter, and not enough RPG.

However what RPG elements are needed to make Mass Effect 3 better needs to be carefully examined within the context of what the Mass Effect games are trying to achieve. For example making weapon effectiveness entirely stat based like most RPGs is probably not the way to go.

*Putting on my serious face* Good post, I like the way you've expressed those concepts.

But back on topic, nice thread, made me laugh.