82 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

I've been quite critical of Mass Effect on these fora.  I don't think Mass Effect is a role-playing game (due to the combination of the voiced-PC and the dialogue wheel), and I'm not a fan of shooters.  I've played shooters over the years, and I've enjoyed some of them (my favourite probably being Delta Force - released 1998), but I mostly find the gameplay shallow and repetitve, and thus uninteresting.

That said, I knew going in to ME2 that it was a sequel to a very successful game, so they weren't likely to change a whole lot of it to suit me.

Now, I haven't actually played enough of ME2 (these are my first impressions, after all) to see whether the things I disliked in ME are any better or worse (so far the dialogue system seems the same), but two differences in particular have jumped out at me.

First, the entirely different user interface.  I can't imagine that the gameplay of ME2 is going to be so different from ME that the old user interface couldn't have been lightly adapted so as to feel at least vaguely familiar.  The default key bidings are completely dissimilar.  Breaking a pattern that has run through every single BioWare game ever, SPACE is no longer the pause key.  Instead it's the Left Shift, a key that I don't think any BioWare game has ever used before aside from activating alternate hotbars in NWN.  SPACE, in ME2, is a multi-function button that does several different things based on context.  My preference is that keys never do that (each key should have its own function), but even so the key ME used for that function was E - why change that?  I'll be spending some time today remapping some keys, I think.

Second, aiming is a much different exercise in ME2.  In ME, aiming was pretty much just target selection.  You'd hover over an enemy and Shepard would shoot at it.  In ME2, however, the reticle is much smaller so combat becomes a much more frantic exercise as I desperately try to place the reticle over a target. before I shoot.

Don't get me started on the heatsinks.  I have no idea what gameplay benefit those provide.

Finally, I wonder at the ruleset.  ME2 seems to have a very different ruleset from ME, which again I don't really understand.  It's a sequel, and the original was successful, so why fiddle with the rules of the game?  But regardless, given that we're permitted to import characters from ME1, it would have been noce for those characters--once we've imported them into ME2-- to resemble our ME1 characters.  The skills are very different (My ME1 Shepards were all Sniper Rifle users, and so far none of them can use Sniper Rifles in ME2 for reasons that haven't been explained to me at all), and even the faces are wrong.  The face on my imported Shepard bears only a slight resemblance to my ME1 Shepard.  The mouth is too wide, the overbite is gone, the eyes are entirely the wrong shape, and the skin tone looks like nothing I ever would have selected.  I'm suddenly thankful that the helmets don't come off the DLC armour.

Those are my first impressions.  I haven't played enough of the game yet to see the good points (I expect there are some), so I'm not saying that ME2 is a bad game.  I expect it will again fail to be an RPG (because fixing that would be a significant change from ME1), but I couldn't have reasonably expected otherwise.  But my first impressions aren't good.  I just finished playing ME1, and now I have to learn an entirely new style of game for ME2.  I don't see how anyone could have thought that was a good idea.

[faction699]

stopped reading when you seriously whined about having to target people and shoot them in an fps game

LOL

[Mister Mida]

So... because of the voiced PC and the dialogue wheel it is not an RPG?

[cachx]

Ooooooh boy,

Here we go again!  *Boing Sound*

[Hadark]

In case you didn't know;

Quote:

"Shooter combat must be fun without being propped

up by RPG mechanics."--Christina Norman, on crafting

the gunplay in Mass Effect 2.



Takeaway:

The gameplay difference between the original

Mass Effect and its sequel is marked, and that wasn't

accidental. Norman's team specifically set out to craft

a sharper shooter experience that could stand up against

the gunplay found in competitors' offerings, while maintaining

BioWare's strong tradition of narrative-driven, RPG-heavy gameplay.









Genres are almost a vestige of the past,” said Muzyka. “In a way,

a lot of the best shooters are RPGs as well, because they allow you

to have progression, exploration, combat or conflict, and a story.”



Those key attributes of RPGs, he said, are valuable for “any kind of game.”







Read More http://www.wired.com.../#ixzz0m4uyR6GJ

[Zulu_DFA]

faction699 wrote...

stopped reading when you seriously whined about having to target people and shoot them in an fps game

LOL

fps game

LOL

[faction699]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

faction699 wrote...

stopped reading when you seriously whined about having to target people and shoot them in an fps game

LOL

fps game

LOL

third person, whatever

i take it you're used to nitpicking in your 18 hours a day on these forums complaining about this game for the last 6 months?

[Zulu_DFA]

faction699 wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

faction699 wrote...

stopped reading when you seriously whined about having to target people and shoot them in an fps game

LOL

fps game

LOL

third person, whatever

i take it you're used to nitpicking in your 18 hours a day on these forums complaining about this game for the last 6 months?

5 months, FIVE, my man!!!

[MobiusTyr]

That's good it's not an RPG. RPG's suck, there was a study as they are the least liked games of all time. (Mainly because they are boring/suck/ and involve gay swords and dragons)

/thread

[Shotokanguy]

The voice acting and dialogue wheel are why it isn't an RPG?

You couldn't have just changed your Shepard's face?

Are you an idiot?

[Ecael]

Hadark wrote...

Read More http://www.wired.com.../#ixzz0m4uyR6GJ

You took two quotes entirely out of context, it seems.

Here's a one sentence definition of RPG from Encyclopedia Brittanica:

electronic role-playing game - electronic game genre in which players advance through a story quest, and often many side quests, for which their character or party of characters gain experience that improves various attributes and abilities.

Also, Christina Norman is an RPG fan, and it's part of the reason she joined BioWare in the first place.

[uberdowzen]

Oh no, not this again...

[bjdbwea]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Second, aiming is a much different exercise in ME2.  In ME, aiming was pretty much just target selection.  You'd hover over an enemy and Shepard would shoot at it.  In ME2, however, the reticle is much smaller so combat becomes a much more frantic exercise as I desperately try to place the reticle over a target. before I shoot.

There's a simple solution for that: Get your games for PC. Less control issues there. Unfortunately, that doesn't make the rest of the game better. ME 2 has been changed significantly from ME 1 because they wanted to draw in more shooter fans.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 03 juillet 2010 - 09:45 .

[Comrade Bork]

The way it sounds he is on PC. Maybe he should try it on Xbox (which I find to have easier controls).

[Siansonea]

Wow. That's a lot of text. I stopped after "Mass isn't an RPG because of the voiced PC".



I like the voiced PC. If that makes it something other than an RPG, then I'm fine with dispensing with the RPG label. It is, after all, just a label. I like fun games. Categories aren't as important to me as how well-constructed and well-conceived the game is. I think both Mass Effect games are well-constructed and well-conceived.



My first impression of Mass Effect 2 was: "Oh wow, I can't believe [SPOILERS]" and "Tali already? Dang Talimancers".

[Sursion]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
Second, aiming is a much different exercise in ME2.  In ME, aiming was pretty much just target selection.  You'd hover over an enemy and Shepard would shoot at it.  In ME2, however, the reticle is much smaller so combat becomes a much more frantic exercise as I desperately try to place the reticle over a target. before I shoot.

Oh my god . That's all I'm going to say. I don't want a forum ban...

[demersel]

Yeah. and First Person Shooters should only be played just using keyboard. Because using a mouse turns serious game into some arcade.... Right there with you on that, OP/ ))))))

Modifié par demersel, 04 juillet 2010 - 12:56 .

[Chuvvy]

faction699 wrote...

stopped reading when you seriously whined about having to target people and shoot them in an fps game

LOL

TPS

[Unit-Alpha]

faction699 wrote...

stopped reading when you seriously whined about having to target people and shoot them in an fps game

LOL

Yes, TPS. But he has a point. Shooters usually require you to shoot things using a reticule. If that's not your thing, sorry. The combat is infinitely improved in ME2. ME2 even gives you the option to play adept and not have to target at all when you can pause.

In addition, ME2's shooter gunplay is remarkably easy. It has heavy autoaim. Compare it's "frantic" nature to that of a modern FPS. There's no way ME2's is more frantic.

I cannot say this enough. ME2's autoaim was ridiculous. Honestly, how is it difficult when the gun automatically follows your target?

Modifié par Unit-Alpha, 04 juillet 2010 - 03:56 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Mister Mida wrote...

So... because of the voiced PC and the dialogue wheel it is not an RPG?

Yes. 

You're unable to make coherent roleplaying decisions because you don't know what Shepard is going to do from moment to moment.  He can (and does) say things you wouldn't have chosen had the line been visible.

And the voice-over imparts tone that would have been left implicit without the voice-over, thus allowing the player greater agency in crafting his character's approach to the problems (and conversations) he encounters.

Mass Effect's dialogue system forces you to follow along a character over which you have very limited control, even
accepting that he's a pre-generated character whose personality was largely determined by thegame's writers .  It's absolutely possible to roleplay a pre-generated character, but not without being able to select (or at least avoid) specific responses within dialogue.

If I choose a response in the game, with some idea as to why Shepard is saying what he's saying, I can't guarantee that he won't later completely contradict me, thus breaking the role-playing experience.

I don't need a pure RPG.  Many features that seemingly always appear in RPGs aren't really that important to roleplaying (levels, for example).  But the ROLE-PLAYING is absolutely mandatory, and Mass Effect doesn't have any.

But as I mentioned, I knew that going in to ME2, so I wan't expecting anything different.

slimgrin wrote...

My two cents: this is essentially a cinematic adventure game

I agree entirely.  I've long said exactly that about Mass Effect.  ME2 probably should do the same.  I'm not complaining about that with respect to ME2.

Hadark wrote...

"Shooter combat must be fun without being propped up by RPG mechanics."--Christina Norman, on crafting
the gunplay in Mass Effect 2.

I would argue that it's the RPG mechanics that make combat fun, assuming combat is ever fun.  I view combat more as a sort of mini-game, much like puzzle-solving, and largely extraneous to RPGs.  The core of an RPG (and thus the fun, in my opinion) is making decisions that guide the development and expression of your character's personality,and ME never had that in the first place.

Takeaway:

The gameplay difference between the original Mass Effect and its sequel is marked, and that wasn't accidental. Norman's team specifically set out to craft a sharper shooter experience that could stand up against the gunplay found in competitors' offerings, while maintaining BioWare's strong tradition of narrative-driven, RPG-heavy gameplay.

"Narrative-driven" and "RPG-heavy" are very different things.  Mass Effect is certainly narrative-driven.

Siansonea II wrote...

I like fun games.

That is, and always will be, a completely meaningless statement.  Everyone likes fun games.  The important question is, "What features do you find fun?"  For me, it's roleplaying.

That said, my objective here was not to complain about the lack of roleplaying in Mass Effect.  I wanted to highlight the obvious and immediate differences between ME and ME2, from the point of view of someone who just started playing ME2.  Like the controls.  Why is ME2 making me learn an entirely new control scheme?

Unit-Alpha wrote...

Yes, TPS. But he has a point. Shooters usually require you to shoot things using a reticule. If that's not your thing, sorry. The combat is infinitely improved in ME2. ME2 even gives you the option to play adept and not have to target at all when you can pause.

The ability to aim while paused is a wonderful feature of both games, but that didn't change between the two so I didn't mention it.

One thing I don't understand is this:  Since we can aim and trigger biotic powers while paused (and in ME could do the same with tech bombs - I only ever played the Engineer and Adept in ME), why can't we do the same with our guns?  We can aim while paused (though not with the zoom enabled) - why not let us fire as well?  It would just be a single shot, but it would be consistent with how the other powers worked.

In addition, ME2's shooter gunplay is remarkably easy. It has heavy autoaim. Compare it's "frantic" nature to that of a modern FPS. There's no way ME2's is more frantic.

And I hate modern FPS games.  There's a reason why my favourite shooter ever came out more than 10 years ago, and was best known for its wide-open level designs where every enemy could be engaged at extreme range if you had the patience to sneak around for 20 minutes at the start of the mission (and I have that sort of patience).

I cannot say this enough. ME2's autoaim was ridiculous. Honestly, how is it difficult when the gun automatically follows your target?

Now that I know that I'll probably spend less time panicking during firefights.  Thanks.

Incidentally, can I give move orders to my squad in ME2?  In ME I could send them to a specific location - it was useful to draw fire.

And holy cow, why can't I crouch?

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 04 juillet 2010 - 06:25 .

[SithLordExarKun]

bjdbwea wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Second, aiming is a much different exercise in ME2.  In ME, aiming was pretty much just target selection.  You'd hover over an enemy and Shepard would shoot at it.  In ME2, however, the reticle is much smaller so combat becomes a much more frantic exercise as I desperately try to place the reticle over a target. before I shoot.

There's a simple solution for that: Get your games for PC. Less control issues there. Unfortunately, that doesn't make the rest of the game better. ME 2 has been changed significantly from ME 1 because they wanted to draw in more shooter fans.

Ah yes, "shooter fans". More unproven conspiracy theories. If i were a shooter fan, i would  go play Call of duty or battlefield. I wouldn't waste my time playing a game that has dialogues and cutscenes.

Grow the hell up seriously.

Modifié par SithLordExarKun, 04 juillet 2010 - 06:49 .

[Vaeliorin]

bjdbwea wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
Second, aiming is a much different exercise in ME2.  In ME, aiming was pretty much just target selection.  You'd hover over an enemy and Shepard would shoot at it.  In ME2, however, the reticle is much smaller so combat becomes a much more frantic exercise as I desperately try to place the reticle over a target. before I shoot.

There's a simple solution for that: Get your games for PC. Less control issues there. Unfortunately, that doesn't make the rest of the game better. ME 2 has been changed significantly from ME 1 because they wanted to draw in more shooter fans.

I feel oddly compelled to point out that Sylvius is, in fact, playing on PC.

Anyway, it's far too late for me to give first impressions of ME2, but I will say, I find it much less replayable than ME1.  I'm not entirely sure why.  Everything about it just seems much more static, I guess.

[Beerfish]

ME and ME2 are roleplaying games there is zero question about that according to my definition.

You choose the makeup of your class and training, you have tangible choices to make during the game that affects what comes later. You choose your companion. Having voice over and a wheel to make dialogue choices from rather than the standard list of dialogue picks are both really weak arguments against roleplaying in my mind. If a person is going to target things of that nature one would have to wonder just what game is a roleplaying game?

[RyuGuitarFreak]

Mister Mida wrote...

So... because of the voiced PC and the dialogue wheel it is not an RPG?

I wonder what this guy thinks what an RPG game is. Oh wait, should be about levels, items and equipment.

Edit: Your complaints on the replies are limitations about video game rpgs as they are. Not really a problem in Mass Effect but a problem in all of them. A true RPG experience is only possible on pen and paper RPG.

Modifié par RyuGuitarFreak, 04 juillet 2010 - 03:53 .