1230 réponses à ce sujet

[the_one_54321]

Ecael wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...
Arguing about the definition is not going to change anything about the mechanical aspects that people do or don't want to see in the game. What label you place on those aspects is irrelevant.

Except it's not a label when those "aspects" are strictly defined.

Being able to choose your race isn't tantamount to an RPG "aspect" in any shape or form.

Why do you care? It doesn't matter if "[X] makes it an RPG." They still want to see [X] in the game whether it makes it an RPG or not.

[joriandrake]

Ecael wrote...

joriandrake wrote...

Ecael wrote...

Define RPG.

roleplaying game:

you are able to set character stats and skills and abilities
you are able to decide on the name and looks of the character
you are able to decide the race of the character
you are able to decide how oyur character acts and what/how it says

character travels in a party of 4 or more
character influences the world around itself, and the world also influences the character
characters influence eachother as they travel together, changing their personality even

characters
abilities decide the effectiveness of its spells and melee/ranged combat
and not the ability of the plyer to swing a sword (or click a mouse)

character can decide how the armor and weapon looks like what it picks up, it may even be able to decide on its own coat of arms and the armament/cloth colors of its personal army in case it has access to such being a noble
or a rich merchant (or a mage lord or similar)


the character and its party experiences multiple events and quests, multiple campaigns as it grows "stronger" (meaning may  differ)

You just roughly defined Dragon Age: Origins

Yep, that I did, but not DA2 however

Ecael wrote...

and essentially weeded out every other RPG in existence.

not really, I didn't exculsively talk about computer games, but about pnp, real RPG

Modifié par joriandrake, 12 juillet 2010 - 10:10 .

[Jimmy Fury]

joriandrake wrote...
characters
abilities decide the effectiveness of its spells and melee/ranged combat
and not the ability of the plyer to swing a sword (or click a mouse)

From what little bit I know of D&D, that just excluded it.

[Sylvius the Mad]

joriandrake wrote...

roleplaying game:

you are able to set character stats and skills and abilities
you are able to decide on the name and looks of the character
you are able to decide the race of the character
you are able to decide how oyur character acts and what/how it says

character travels in a party of 4 or more
character influences the world around itself, and the world also influences the character
characters influence eachother as they travel together, changing their personality even

characters
abilities decide the effectiveness of its spells and melee/ranged combat
and not the ability of the plyer to swing a sword (or click a mouse)

character can decide how the armor and weapon looks like what it picks up, it may even be able to decide on its own coat of arms and the armament/cloth colors of its personal army in case it has access to such being a noble
or a rich merchant (or a mage lord or similar)

I disagree with all of your points, and you're derailing the thread.  Please stop.

Ecael wrote...

Again, we'd have to agree on the definition of an RPG (and a video game RPG, more specifically) before declaring two games as "not role-playing enough".

What's role-playing?  That's really the point of contention, here.  Now, BioWare might not care what role-playing is.  They just want to make a fun game, and whether it contains role-playing according to any particular definition (even their own) is likely incidental.

However, role-playing is the core of my gameplay experience.  Role-playing is the thing I find fun in games.  So I look to BioWare's RPGs not only to accommodate role-playing (which all of them outside the ME franchise do), but to revolve around role-playing as a core component of gameplay (or at least allow gameplay to revolve around role-playing, where the vast majority of in-game decisions can be driven by role-playing considerations).

So what's role-playing?  I think role-playing involves directing a character based on his or her personality, which is designed by the player.  I don't think that the personality is designed by the player is an important feature on its own, but I think it's necessary to accommodate deep role-playing.  So every time that character does anything, the player knows exactly why he or she did that.  When asked for money by a beggar, the game will typically allow you one or more options on each side of giving money or not, but the roleplaying aspect involves making that decision as to which option to choose.  If you're role-playing, you don't choose the option and then justify it after the fact - you consult your PC's personality (with which you are intimately familiar) to determine what to do.

Suppose your character elected to give the beggar a small amount.  Why was that?  You should be able to answer that question in considerably detail right away (because you've already thought about it).  Maybe you gave money because you pity the beggar, and you know that being poor isn't always the poor person's fault.  And maybe you gave only a small amount to prevent that beggar from becoming a target of other beggars.  Or maybe you're worrying that if you start giving out large sums you'll be hounded by other beggars.  Or that begging generally will being to be seen as a more lucrative acitivity, thus encouraging more begging overall within the city.  Or maybe you're trying not to look wealthy.  Or maybe you're trying to look generous but your character doesn't really know how to do that so he accidentally gives a stingy offering.  Any of these are reasons you might have chosen that one dialogue option, but the game never knows what they are.  They never matter within the game, but the game is really just a setting that exists for you in which to roleplay.  Yes, other things go on within the game (there's a plot, and there's combat) but the core gameplay is how you make decisions for your character.

I played a DAO character (among many others) who had no interest in being a hero, or a Warden, and hated combat.  So he didn't fight; he always sat at the back and let his companions do the fighting.  This is an example of combat decisions being driven my role-playing considerations.  By playing this way, the combat was a lot more difficult (I was always down a man), but that didn't matter because my primary concern was playing the character correctly.  He was also really shy and anxious, so he'd always choose the option advocated by his companions (effectively deferring to them) with regard to quests.  And to avoid giving anyone a reason to suggest that he fight, he only took non-combat talents (he was a Rogue).  And he was great fun to play, because it was an interesting role-playing exercise.

So I'm looking for a game that allows me to play as if role-playing is my primary concern (because it usually is).  If role-playing is only a secondary concern, then I'm inclined to go looking for other games that allow role-playing at the margins, but whose other core gameplay features are more fun (like turn-based strategy games).

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 12 juillet 2010 - 10:15 .

[jennamarae]

AlanC9 wrote...
Unless DA2 doesn't have the toolset DAO has, this should be simple enough to mod out, though maybe kinda tedious. If VA for the PC really is unpopular with enough folks, you should get this mod fairly soon.

Edit: hell, I'll make the damn thing myself. I got in the NWN HoF for a mod that I personally find completely worthless, so let's see if I can repeat the trick with DA2.

If you, or anyone else for that matter, makes a mod for it I can pretty much guarantee I'll be downloading it. Assuming of course that between now and release there is enough released about it that I think I'll enjoy enough to buy the game.

[joriandrake]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

joriandrake wrote...

roleplaying game:

you are able to set character stats and skills and abilities
you are able to decide on the name and looks of the character
you are able to decide the race of the character
you are able to decide how oyur character acts and what/how it says

character travels in a party of 4 or more
character influences the world around itself, and the world also influences the character
characters influence eachother as they travel together, changing their personality even

characters
abilities decide the effectiveness of its spells and melee/ranged combat
and not the ability of the plyer to swing a sword (or click a mouse)

character can decide how the armor and weapon looks like what it picks up, it may even be able to decide on its own coat of arms and the armament/cloth colors of its personal army in case it has access to such being a noble
or a rich merchant (or a mage lord or similar)

I disagree with all of your points, and you're derailing the thread.  Please stop.

1. Ecael asked what people's own idea of RPG is
2. You disagree with ALL my points of what RPG is about, seriously?
3. I do not derail the thread because the topic is the direction of where DA2 is heading and this is ontopic for that
4. No I won't

[DragonRageGT]

By such definition, Ecael, GTA series is RPG, Just Cause is RPG, everything is RPG. WoW is RPG! hahahahaha



As for the banning that some sheep-troll suggested, I would love to know why would someone be banned for posting intelligent arguments, even if not approved by the sheep-troll.

[the_one_54321]

So does this mean that we want to talk about what makes a game an RPG instead of talking about what we want to see in DA][? Because I can talk about what is or isn't an RPG for pages and pages.

[Jimmy Fury]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
 If you're role-playing, you don't choose the option and then justify it after the fact - you consult your PC's personality (with which you are intimately familiar) to determine what to do.

Not to pick at your playing style since it's entirely your right to play how you wish, but I feel that was directed at me and therefore I'd like to offer a thought.

Doesn't that absolve your character of growth though? Detailing his or her entire personality before things happen. Doesn't that prevent him or her from growing and changing as a story progresses?

[PSUHammer]

At the end of the day, it matters not what any individual thinks is an RPG. All it really means is you are assuming the role of an avatar in a made up world. The details are defined by the creator of said world and arguing about those details is just silly.



Was ME2 a role playing game by Joe Blow or Britannica's standards? Who freaking cares...it was fun as all H E double hockey sticks...

[joriandrake]

RageGT wrote...

By such definition, Ecael, GTA series is RPG, Just Cause is RPG, everything is RPG. WoW is RPG! hahahahaha

As for the banning that some sheep-troll suggested, I would love to know why would someone be banned for posting intelligent arguments, even if not approved by the sheep-troll.

call him a troll, otherwise you offend the poor, innocent sheeps

[Jimmy Fury]

RageGT wrote...

By such definition, Ecael, GTA series is RPG, Just Cause is RPG, everything is RPG. WoW is RPG! hahahahaha

As for the banning that some sheep-troll suggested, I would love to know why would someone be banned for posting intelligent arguments, even if not approved by the sheep-troll.

I beleive that the comment about banning was directed at the guy who posted that giant wall of text.
It was't the wall of text itself but the fact that he posted that as a thread, it got closed, and he has gone around copying and pasting it on multiple threads spaming the entire forum.
-mind you I could be wrong because I keep getting distracted and skim a lot of the quote pyramids. -

Modifié par Jimmy Fury, 12 juillet 2010 - 10:25 .

[DragonRageGT]

the_one_54321 wrote...

So does this mean that we want to talk about what makes a game an RPG instead of talking about what we want to see in DA][? Because I can talk about what is or isn't an RPG for pages and pages.

Well, it really doesn't matter what WE want to see in DA, does it? We will see what they want us to see and that's final. It's not a colaborative job, gaming developement, AFAIK. Not between devs and customers anyway. It doesn't prevent us from saying what we don't want to see, what we disagree to be forced upon to see and, as for the why and when on the direction of DA2, I'll take the Escapist article link by Mr. Gaider as one possible answer.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Jimmy Fury wrote...

Doesn't that absolve your character of growth though? Detailing his or her entire personality before things happen. Doesn't that prevent him or her from growing and changing as a story progresses?

It prevents that growth from being mandatory, yes.  It certainly doesn't make that growth impossible.

[PSUHammer]

RageGT wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...

So does this mean that we want to talk about what makes a game an RPG instead of talking about what we want to see in DA][? Because I can talk about what is or isn't an RPG for pages and pages.

Well, it really doesn't matter what WE want to see in DA, does it? We will see what they want us to see and that's final. It's not a colaborative job, gaming developement, AFAIK. Not between devs and customers anyway. It doesn't prevent us from saying what we don't want to see, what we disagree to be forced upon to see and, as for the why and when on the direction of DA2, I'll take the Escapist article link by Mr. Gaider as one possible answer.

Quite right, quite right....the only thing that bothers me is the people who don't know how to properly gripe.  I think a good discussion on what constitutes a good RPG in each person's eyes is a fun exercises, but to write off a fine game like ME2 (or even DA2 even though no one knows) is just strange...

[the_one_54321]

RageGT wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...
So does this mean that we want to talk about what makes a game an RPG instead of talking about what we want to see in DA][? Because I can talk about what is or isn't an RPG for pages and pages.

Well, it really doesn't matter what WE want to see in DA, does it? We will see what they want us to see and that's final. It's not a colaborative job, gaming developement, AFAIK. Not between devs and customers anyway. It doesn't prevent us from saying what we don't want to see, what we disagree to be forced upon to see and, as for the why and when on the direction of DA2, I'll take the Escapist article link by Mr. Gaider as one possible answer.

Well, up until SWtOR I believed quite firmly that BioWare keep an ear open to their fans. SWtOR is BioWare Austin, though. This game is BioWare Edmonton. So there's still a chance. I'm not holding my breath.
That said, it still sounds like there is plenty of room in the mechanics for the devs to make a genuinely open and free experience. Unless you can't get past the hangup of a predefined character. Then you're just out of luck.

[PSUHammer]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Jimmy Fury wrote...

Doesn't that absolve your character of growth though? Detailing his or her entire personality before things happen. Doesn't that prevent him or her from growing and changing as a story progresses?

It prevents that growth from being mandatory, yes.  It certainly doesn't make that growth impossible.

I dunno...The Witcher was a pretty fun RPG and he was voiced and had a backstory....

[Jimmy Fury]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
It prevents that growth from being mandatory, yes.  It certainly doesn't make that growth impossible.

Fair enough. I myself don't mind some mandatory growth every now and then. Not constantly of course, but in small doses I feel it makes for a richer more thought provoking experience.

[Kalfear]

RageGT wrote...

By such definition, Ecael, GTA series is RPG, Just Cause is RPG, everything is RPG. WoW is RPG! hahahahaha

As for the banning that some sheep-troll suggested, I would love to know why would someone be banned for posting intelligent arguments, even if not approved by the sheep-troll.

LOL, save your breath Rage.

Ecael and her passive aggresive nonsense and made up opinions stated as facts will get you no where.
You say up and prove it, she casually dismisses your well through arguement and says down with a graph or partial quote taken totally out of context!

Make her look foolish (which many have, and she gets her good freind to lock thread.

I just hope Bioware smart enough to realize those that question everything are their target audience. Chances are the Ecaels and Alanc9s and LPPrinces wont even buy the games anyways, they just here to argue and annoy you to utter fustration. The people worried about the games are the ones that play and enjoy the products and feel attatched to those products. Obviously by their willingness to have everything changed, the troll crowd felt no connection to the games to begin with and wanted something else.

Time will tell if Bioware does realize the truth of the matter OR if the cyber ego stroking of those that blindly rubber stamp every little move they do is what they enjoy!

As a long time manager of bussinesses, id much rather hear passionate and intellegent comments (even negative) then just someone saying "In "so and so" we blindly trust".

Modifié par Kalfear, 12 juillet 2010 - 10:32 .

[Stanley Woo]

The "definition of an RPG" is a long-winded argument that never comes to any resolution, because everyone has their own definition of what constitutes an RPG and what games fall into that category. it is a HUGE discussion in its own right, and doesn't belong here in the DA2 forums. There may already be a thread in this forum about it already, and there is certainly one in Off Topic, so take your discussion there.



Disagreements come up in conversation, but bickering, name-calling, and insults are not welcome here in the BioWare Social Network. Argue the points that people are making and support it with evidence or opinion, but once you start calling people "sheep," "trolls," or "fanboys," you're already heading in the wrong direction.



Consider this your warning to keep the discussion civil and on-topic.

[Sylvius the Mad]

joriandrake wrote...

3. I do not derail the thread because the topic is the direction of where DA2 is heading and this is ontopic for that
4. No I won't

I was too curt.  I apologise.

2. You disagree with ALL my points of what RPG is about, seriously?

I don't think any of the points you listed are required for a game to be an RPG.  I don't think you dealt with the role-playing.

You did mention the ability to decide what your character says and does - which was close - but since those are actually decided by the writers we don't have a ton of freedom to say or do what we'd like.  I think the role-playing comes in how we decide to do things rather than what we actually do.

If I roll a rock down a hill and kill someone, did I do it in order to kill him, or was his death incidental?  If it was incidental, did I do it even though I knew he'd die (and didn't care) or did I think he'd get out of the way?  And this all assumes my character even knew he was there.

As you described it, the choice was whether to roll the rock down the hill (possibly whether to kill that man by rolling the rock down the hill).  I think the role-playing resides in how and why you decided to roll the rock.

edit: Ninja'd by Stan.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 12 juillet 2010 - 10:33 .

[ejoslin]

Hammer6767 wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Jimmy Fury wrote...

Doesn't that absolve your character of growth though? Detailing his or her entire personality before things happen. Doesn't that prevent him or her from growing and changing as a story progresses?

It prevents that growth from being mandatory, yes.  It certainly doesn't make that growth impossible.

I dunno...The Witcher was a pretty fun RPG and he was voiced and had a backstory....

I agree that the Witcher is fun and has a good back story.  The difference is, of course, is that when I play the Witcher I'm guiding Geralt instead of becoming the Witcher.  I'm not sure if that makes sense.  It's a great game, but it's not as immersive.  And there's no dialog wheel.  You select the exact line before he says it.

Really, I'm resigned to the wheel (not much I can do about it).  I am not expecting the same depth as DAO, and since voice acting is very expensive, it will probably have a lot less dialog. 

I do think DA2 will be a good game.  It has good writers and there's a good backstory going on there as well.  I would be surprised if it were anywhere near as immersive or as epic feeling as DAO.  I hope I'm wrong.  I hope there will still be the same in depth conversation instead of, well, half the amount conversation since now both halves are voiced.  

We'll see.

Modifié par ejoslin, 12 juillet 2010 - 10:35 .

[Dolcrist]

It would stand to reason that a Role-playing Game does not require user creation of that role. If the writers predefine certain aspects of a character, it's simply more like a play than a choose-your-own-story book.

[Sylvius the Mad]

ejoslin wrote...

I agree that the Witcher is fun and has a good back story.  The difference is, of course, is that when I play the Witcher I'm guiding Geralt instead of becoming the Witcher.  I'm not sure if that makes sense.  It's a great game, but it's not as immersive. 

Both Geralt and Shepard are the main character in a third-person narrative.

The Warden in DAO is the main character in a first-person narrative.

It sounds very much like DA2 is also intended to be a first-person narrative, so we (the players) should have far more control over the personalities of our various Hawkes than were ever seen in ME or the Witcher.

[ejoslin]

RPG has always been a specific genre. I see people changing that definition to include, well, ANY game at all. It takes more than an avatar and a story to make a game an RPG. I think we can agree that halo fits that definition but is NOT an RPG.