98 réponses à ce sujet

[Darth_Trethon]

TheMadCat wrote...

As for what older RPG's were like, I'm not sure if it's really possible for you to be more lost. Video game RPG's are descendants of table tops more or less, it was less about the overall story and more about character building and exploring; focusing on stats, loot, combat, ect. Now you may not like this style, and that's fine. But don't be a fool and start flinging around insults and ignorance because you personally don't like the style. From a traditional standpoint they are classed much more as RPG's then a BioWare game would be considered.

and those still have nothing to do with role playing.....dice rolling involves luck and cards and all the rest involves strategy. You are still NOT doing any role playing in the table-top games. It doesn't matter what they derived the wrong RPG classification from it still has nothing to do with playing a role.

[TheMadCat]

Darth_Trethon wrote...

TheMadCat wrote...

As for what older RPG's were like, I'm not sure if it's really possible for you to be more lost. Video game RPG's are descendants of table tops more or less, it was less about the overall story and more about character building and exploring; focusing on stats, loot, combat, ect. Now you may not like this style, and that's fine. But don't be a fool and start flinging around insults and ignorance because you personally don't like the style. From a traditional standpoint they are classed much more as RPG's then a BioWare game would be considered.

and those still have nothing to do with role playing.....dice rolling involves luck and cards and all the rest involves strategy. You are still NOT doing any role playing in the table-top games. It doesn't matter what they derived the wrong RPG classification from it still has nothing to do with playing a role.

Did you completely ignore the entire first paragraph of that post you quoted? I explained to you quite well a "role" is not unique to an RPG. Every video game or table top ever made gives you a role to play, some roles are direct and others are indirect but they all have a role for one to assume.

[Darth_Trethon]

TheMadCat wrote...

Darth_Trethon wrote...

TheMadCat wrote...

As for what older RPG's were like, I'm not sure if it's really possible for you to be more lost. Video game RPG's are descendants of table tops more or less, it was less about the overall story and more about character building and exploring; focusing on stats, loot, combat, ect. Now you may not like this style, and that's fine. But don't be a fool and start flinging around insults and ignorance because you personally don't like the style. From a traditional standpoint they are classed much more as RPG's then a BioWare game would be considered.

and those still have nothing to do with role playing.....dice rolling involves luck and cards and all the rest involves strategy. You are still NOT doing any role playing in the table-top games. It doesn't matter what they derived the wrong RPG classification from it still has nothing to do with playing a role.

Did you completely ignore the entire first paragraph of that post you quoted? I explained to you quite well a "role" is not unique to an RPG. Every video game or table top ever made gives you a role to play, some roles are direct and others are indirect but they all have a role for one to assume.

I already addressed that in the last reply before yours.....no need to type the same argument over again. Go read up on that if you care.

[ztonkin]

I don't buy that they retooled the console's combat system. Why would they do that? I don't really want to play Fable when I play Dragon Age, you know?

[DragonOfWhiteThunder]

Not really RPGs, but on the gameplay mechanics bit: Drakengard and Nier. Drakengard has the potential to tell an interesting story that deconstructs just about every JRPG trope in the book, but it does that interspersed with boring, repetitive combat that is nearly impossible to slog through and numbers that tell you that Caim is getting stronger, but it certainly doesn't feel like it. Nier suffers from the same problems. So yes, the gameplay mechanics can make or break a game regardless of how solid or interesting the story is.



That being said, I think that developing a different combat system for the consoles that is better suited to the gamepad is great! PC users get to keep the combat system they loved (well, if you did) or at least an evolution of it, while console players have a system that doesn't suffer from only 6 hotbar options. Win for both sides.



On a side note, I wonder how feasible it would be to meet your Warden? Probably not very, but it would be interesting.

[AlanC9]

Darth_Trethon wrote...
What lots of games give players choices and aren't classified as RPGs? Name 3 if you can.

What about games that are classed as RPGs but give the player no choices?

[TheMadCat]

Darth_Trethon wrote...

I already addressed that in the last reply before yours.....no need to type the same argument over again. Go read up on that if you care.

Sorry bout that, didn't catch it. Threads moving to quick.

What lots of games give players choices and aren't classified as RPGs?
Name 3 if you can. There are extremely few that leave the player any say
whatsoever and most of said non-RPGs barely give you one or two choices
max while maintaining a 99% strictly pre-determined story....that makes
them 99% action/adveture/whatever and 1% RPG therefore not earning the
right to be called RPGs. The term role playing implies just that playing
a role and that also means consitently not once every x dozens of
hours.

Every game gives players a choice, I gave you three examples already. Europa Universalis 3, the entire foundation of this game is placed on player choice, you assume the role of a national leader leaving you do lead a nation however and wherever you want. Silent Hunter 4, again a game that's entire foundation is based on player choice as you assume the role of a Sub Commander you build the story of your submarine and crew based on your choices. STALKER, a series with a more direct role. You take on a role, you make choices that effect your game form both dialogue and direct action.

A role is far more then the main character of a story and choices go far beyond the scope of a couple of lines of dialouge to chose from.

Modifié par TheMadCat, 13 juillet 2010 - 05:47 .

[bzombo]

DragonOfWhiteThunder wrote...

Not really RPGs, but on the gameplay mechanics bit: Drakengard and Nier. Drakengard has the potential to tell an interesting story that deconstructs just about every JRPG trope in the book, but it does that interspersed with boring, repetitive combat that is nearly impossible to slog through and numbers that tell you that Caim is getting stronger, but it certainly doesn't feel like it. Nier suffers from the same problems. So yes, the gameplay mechanics can make or break a game regardless of how solid or interesting the story is.

That being said, I think that developing a different combat system for the consoles that is better suited to the gamepad is great! PC users get to keep the combat system they loved (well, if you did) or at least an evolution of it, while console players have a system that doesn't suffer from only 6 hotbar options. Win for both sides.

On a side note, I wonder how feasible it would be to meet your Warden? Probably not very, but it would be interesting.

i completely agree. da2 looks like it will make use of the strengths of each system. the dao system is perfect for the pc. a different system for the 360 and ps3 should take advantage of console strengths. i kinda figured they were doing this for the dao ports, but they just kinda "ported" the pc system. it's clunky on the consoles, and if i like da2 enough i may just buy the 360 version to try it out.

[Fraq Hound]

Doesn't this effectively mean that Bioware is doing nearly double the work on this game then they did on the last game?

If you are planning to make an optimal combat system for a console controller it will have to be drastically different then the PC version. That means the developers will have to change literally every encounter in the game to fit each version.

Don't get me wrong, as someone who does 98% of my gaming on consoles these days I'm super psyched that they are working on a better control scheme! I'm just surprised they decided to do it.

It will be amazing if they actually hit the Spring 2011 release window they are working towards.

yoda23 wrote...

Awesome. After the Hack Job on ME2 finally some PC Gamer Love! PC hardware isn't that expensive folks. Get off the couch, build yourself a system and ditch that crappy console!!!

Dude i work sitting at a computer desk for 45-50 hours a week! When I get home the last thing I want to do is sit at another computer desk. I'll take my recliner, my 52" LCD, and the easy going social aspects of the 360 over my hardwood desk, straight backed chair, and the chaotic spam of gold farmers or 40 man raids EVERY TIME!

My $1200 "Gaming Rig" that I built myself almost 5 years has been my AVI/DVD player for the better part of the last 3 years.

Although I will be picking up Starcraft 2 for PC in a couple weeks because, well... It's freaking Starcraft 2!!!!

Modifié par Fraq Hound, 13 juillet 2010 - 05:53 .

[the_one_54321]

Fraq Hound wrote...

Doesn't this effectively mean that Bioware is doing nearly double the work on this game then they did on the last game?

They didn't say the combat system would be completely different on the consoles. Just that it would be tooled to work better for them.

[StartatZero]

If all this is true I'm actually pretty excited now, I think changing the combat system for the consoles is a smart choice, because I tried playing a friends copy of DA:O for xbox 360 and I didn't enjoy the combat as much as on the PC.

[Deathstyk85]

yoda23 wrote...

Awesome. After the Hack Job on ME2 finally some PC Gamer Love! PC hardware isn't that expensive folks. Get off the couch, build yourself a system and ditch that crappy console!!!

console hating doesnt make you cooler by the way.

[Darth_Trethon]

TheMadCat wrote...

Darth_Trethon wrote...

I already addressed that in the last reply before yours.....no need to type the same argument over again. Go read up on that if you care.

Sorry bout that, didn't catch it. Threads moving to quick.

What lots of games give players choices and aren't classified as RPGs?
Name 3 if you can. There are extremely few that leave the player any say
whatsoever and most of said non-RPGs barely give you one or two choices
max while maintaining a 99% strictly pre-determined story....that makes
them 99% action/adveture/whatever and 1% RPG therefore not earning the
right to be called RPGs. The term role playing implies just that playing
a role and that also means consitently not once every x dozens of
hours.

Every game gives players a choice, I gave you three examples already. Europa Universalis 3, the entire foundation of this game is placed on player choice, you assume the role of a national leader leaving you do lead a nation however and wherever you want. Silent Hunter 4, again a game that's entire foundation is based on player choice as you assume the role of a Sub Commander you build the story of your submarine and crew based on your choices. STALKER, a series with a more direct role. You take on a role, you make choices that effect your game form both dialogue and direct action.

A role is far more then the main character of a story and choices go far beyond the scope of a couple of lines of dialouge to chose from.

That's the 1% RPG and 99% something else thing I was talking about. There can be such a thing as no-enough RPG to nor earn the genre lablel and some consistency of giving you choice in more than half of the conversations and cutscenes or whatever but even a 1% RPG deserves the label more than a 0% RPG and the genre is already too broad. If they took out the JRPGs out alone as they don't contain any meaningful role-playing in the sense of having any impact on the story and included the 1% RPGs the genre would actually diminish.

[Deathstyk85]

bzombo wrote...

DragonOfWhiteThunder wrote...

Not really RPGs, but on the gameplay mechanics bit: Drakengard and Nier. Drakengard has the potential to tell an interesting story that deconstructs just about every JRPG trope in the book, but it does that interspersed with boring, repetitive combat that is nearly impossible to slog through and numbers that tell you that Caim is getting stronger, but it certainly doesn't feel like it. Nier suffers from the same problems. So yes, the gameplay mechanics can make or break a game regardless of how solid or interesting the story is.

That being said, I think that developing a different combat system for the consoles that is better suited to the gamepad is great! PC users get to keep the combat system they loved (well, if you did) or at least an evolution of it, while console players have a system that doesn't suffer from only 6 hotbar options. Win for both sides.

On a side note, I wonder how feasible it would be to meet your Warden? Probably not very, but it would be interesting.

i completely agree. da2 looks like it will make use of the strengths of each system. the dao system is perfect for the pc. a different system for the 360 and ps3 should take advantage of console strengths. i kinda figured they were doing this for the dao ports, but they just kinda "ported" the pc system. it's clunky on the consoles, and if i like da2 enough i may just buy the 360 version to try it out.

yes the console system was, flawed. it was great dont get me wrong, but some of the controls were kinda odd.

[Rpgsrock]

I just hope they change the interface or somthing, please still have pausing and being able to switch characters. I have a feeling if they do something different it will be bad

[sage_viper]

Well seeing this news, things brighten up for me. I mean, I still need to see an EXAMPLE of the dialog wheel, but it seems that we may have even more choices to choose from regarding tone.



I honestly never had a problem with the dialog wheel... Its ridiculous that people are flipping out over that. Its just a style, and is more compact than stacking, saving screen space. woo! Screen space!

[TheMadCat]

Darth_Trethon wrote...

TheMadCat wrote...

Darth_Trethon wrote...

I already addressed that in the last reply before yours.....no need to type the same argument over again. Go read up on that if you care.

Sorry bout that, didn't catch it. Threads moving to quick.

What lots of games give players choices and aren't classified as RPGs?
Name 3 if you can. There are extremely few that leave the player any say
whatsoever and most of said non-RPGs barely give you one or two choices
max while maintaining a 99% strictly pre-determined story....that makes
them 99% action/adveture/whatever and 1% RPG therefore not earning the
right to be called RPGs. The term role playing implies just that playing
a role and that also means consitently not once every x dozens of
hours.

Every game gives players a choice, I gave you three examples already. Europa Universalis 3, the entire foundation of this game is placed on player choice, you assume the role of a national leader leaving you do lead a nation however and wherever you want. Silent Hunter 4, again a game that's entire foundation is based on player choice as you assume the role of a Sub Commander you build the story of your submarine and crew based on your choices. STALKER, a series with a more direct role. You take on a role, you make choices that effect your game form both dialogue and direct action.

A role is far more then the main character of a story and choices go far beyond the scope of a couple of lines of dialouge to chose from.

That's the 1% RPG and 99% something else thing I was talking about. There can be such a thing as no-enough RPG to nor earn the genre lablel and some consistency of giving you choice in more than half of the conversations and cutscenes or whatever but even a 1% RPG deserves the label more than a 0% RPG and the genre is already too broad. If they took out the JRPGs out alone as they don't contain any meaningful role-playing in the sense of having any impact on the story and included the 1% RPGs the genre would actually diminish.

This is what you descirbed for an RPG...

I play role-playing games to actually play a role and enjoy the
experience of the story and make decisions that drive the story in the
direction I want.

Nothing there is unique to the RPG genre, that can be experienced with every game out there. What creates the RPG genre isn't just the story and choices a character makes in the story, it's also the statistical character development, it's the exploration, it's the emphasis on loot and equipment, it's combat that is determines through the characters stats instead of the players reflexes. All of these are what seperates it from other genres.

RPG's long before BioWare came into exsistence gave players a role and a story and allowed them to guide themselves through that story and BioWare has never stepped away from the traditional RPG mechanics, all I'm saying is BioWare flipped the importance of those aspects, giving story and dialogue more emphasis and depth over the traditional mechanics.

[Aktivity]

Darth_Trethon wrote...

TheMadCat wrote...

Darth_Trethon wrote...

I already addressed that in the last reply before yours.....no need to type the same argument over again. Go read up on that if you care.

Sorry bout that, didn't catch it. Threads moving to quick.

What lots of games give players choices and aren't classified as RPGs?
Name 3 if you can. There are extremely few that leave the player any say
whatsoever and most of said non-RPGs barely give you one or two choices
max while maintaining a 99% strictly pre-determined story....that makes
them 99% action/adveture/whatever and 1% RPG therefore not earning the
right to be called RPGs. The term role playing implies just that playing
a role and that also means consitently not once every x dozens of
hours.

Every game gives players a choice, I gave you three examples already. Europa Universalis 3, the entire foundation of this game is placed on player choice, you assume the role of a national leader leaving you do lead a nation however and wherever you want. Silent Hunter 4, again a game that's entire foundation is based on player choice as you assume the role of a Sub Commander you build the story of your submarine and crew based on your choices. STALKER, a series with a more direct role. You take on a role, you make choices that effect your game form both dialogue and direct action.

A role is far more then the main character of a story and choices go far beyond the scope of a couple of lines of dialouge to chose from.

That's the 1% RPG and 99% something else thing I was talking about. There can be such a thing as no-enough RPG to nor earn the genre lablel and some consistency of giving you choice in more than half of the conversations and cutscenes or whatever but even a 1% RPG deserves the label more than a 0% RPG and the genre is already too broad. If they took out the JRPGs out alone as they don't contain any meaningful role-playing in the sense of having any impact on the story and included the 1% RPGs the genre would actually diminish.

This whole discussion is kind of moot, choices in videogames are an illusion anyway. Your still
following a predetermined path. In most games it just comes down to a binary
choice, either you’re good or evil. This moral system is something you can find in a lot of games nowadays. I think we should just agree to disagree. There's no set definition for rpg in videogames and thus greatly varies from
person to person. Some say it's the statistical nature of the leveling system,
others the story & branching paths and yet others(like me) believe it needs to be
combination of the two.

Modifié par Aktivity, 13 juillet 2010 - 06:16 .

[In Exile]

TheMadCat wrote..
Nothing there is unique to the RPG genre, that can be experienced with every game out there. What creates the RPG genre isn't just the story and choices a character makes in the story, it's also the statistical character development, it's the exploration, it's the emphasis on loot and equipment, it's combat that is determines through the characters stats instead of the players reflexes. All of these are what seperates it from other genres.

I don't want to get into this too strongly, but you're falsely equivocating "choice" as used in a very narrow sense by other posters with "choice" in the broadest possible sense, which is the option to select more than one thing.

People use choice to refer to a very specific kind of ability to influence a story in a very specific kind of gameplay setting with a very specific kind of narrative device. So while you're entitled to think that it is the statistical combat that makes an RPG, at the very least respect the opposing view enough to use the term in the same way they do.

[Rpgsrock]

I hope the combat on the xbox will still feel like dragon age, otherwise it will be bad

[TheMadCat]

In Exile wrote...

TheMadCat wrote..
Nothing there is unique to the RPG genre, that can be experienced with every game out there. What creates the RPG genre isn't just the story and choices a character makes in the story, it's also the statistical character development, it's the exploration, it's the emphasis on loot and equipment, it's combat that is determines through the characters stats instead of the players reflexes. All of these are what seperates it from other genres.

I don't want to get into this too strongly, but you're falsely equivocating "choice" as used in a very narrow sense by other posters with "choice" in the broadest possible sense, which is the option to select more than one thing.

People use choice to refer to a very specific kind of ability to influence a story in a very specific kind of gameplay setting with a very specific kind of narrative device. So while you're entitled to think that it is the statistical combat that makes an RPG, at the very least respect the opposing view enough to use the term in the same way they do.

But that's all choice is. It's the ability to make a decision and act upon it when multiple viable options are avaliable. There is no context for the word, it's meaning is it's meaning. Why does the word have a larger meaning in a BioWare game choosing a specific line of dialogue or action then it does in EU3 playing as Castille, debating whether I want to invade Portugal or France.

[Darth_Trethon]

TheMadCat wrote...

This is what you descirbed for an RPG...

I play role-playing games to actually play a role and enjoy the
experience of the story and make decisions that drive the story in the
direction I want.

Nothing there is unique to the RPG genre, that can be experienced with every game out there. What creates the RPG genre isn't just the story and choices a character makes in the story, it's also the statistical character development, it's the exploration, it's the emphasis on loot and equipment, it's combat that is determines through the characters stats instead of the players reflexes. All of these are what seperates it from other genres.

RPG's long before BioWare came into exsistence gave players a role and a story and allowed them to guide themselves through that story and BioWare has never stepped away from the traditional RPG mechanics, all I'm saying is BioWare flipped the importance of those aspects, giving story and dialogue more emphasis and depth over the traditional mechanics.

Yes and I admitted as such in my earliest arguments where I criticized the games industry for missclasyfying games as that is the deffinition of playing a role not the actual gameplay mechanics.

[Kinthalis ThornBlade]

Fraq Hound wrote...


Dude i work sitting at a computer desk for 45-50 hours a week! When I get home the last thing I want to do is sit at another computer desk. I'll take my recliner, my 52" LCD, and the easy going social aspects of the 360 over my hardwood desk, straight backed chair, and the chaotic spam of gold farmers or 40 man raids EVERY TIME!

My $1200 "Gaming Rig" that I built myself almost 5 years has been my AVI/DVD player for the better part of the last 3 years.

Although I will be picking up Starcraft 2 for PC in a couple weeks because, well... It's freaking Starcraft 2!!!!

Sucks to be you then. 

I also work at a desk the whole week through, but sitting on my comfy desk at home and playing Left4 Dead still feels great.

More importantly, I also have a large screen LCD hooked up to my PC. Guess what, I can play Dirt 2 from my couch on my 50" LCD just like you can.  Except that my Dirt 2 runs on DX 11 and is rendered at the full 1080p resolution. not < 720p like yours is

[AlanC9]

Why do so many people insist on having uncomfortable chairs for their PCs?

[mopotter]

AlanC9 wrote...

GraciousCat wrote...

I like my Xbox though, besides, I don't have like $2000 to build my dream computer. 
Does this mean hack n' slash gameplay on consoles?

$2000? Dude, you've been lied to. My rig's about three years old, cost me about $400 when I built it plus maybe about $100 for leftover components from my last one. It runs DAO and ME just fine.

Can someone explain what FFXII combat was like? I checked out of JRPGs a long time ago

I play both.  Yep, my pc was something like $500, though I'd sure take a $2,000 one if it was offered to me.  
I like the fact that I don't have to install the game on the xbox 360 to play it.  
On m PC I have enough room for 2 games if I don't add a lot of stuff, but I like stuff so I end up with one game on the pc, like DA, Oblivion, Morrowind becuase they have good stuff.   My xbox360 dosen't have mods so I play all of the games on it that I don't really care about my hair styles.    ME, Fable, Fallout.   Not saying I don't download DLC, but not as much, since there isn't as much available.  Or once in awhile I'll pick up the game for both formats.  My husband hates using the keyboard so he'll use the xbox 360 if I'm on the computer and if he's checking out youtube I'll play on the 360.  works out nicely for us.