shootist70 wrote...
HTTP 404 wrote...
Guess what I kind of agree with the OP.rpg "elements" are really subjective. When I played pencil and paper RPG we didnt concern ourselves with items, loot, etc but created very good stories.
This guy gets it.
Compelling plot, characters and story > intrinsic reward based, rat maze gameplay everytime.
Who said anything about shooting?wowpwnslol wrote...
SirOccam wrote...
Why would it have plot holes? Or necessarily be cheesy?
Like looting your 89th darkspawn dagger and selling it for 2 silver really adds to the fun. Oh, wait, you packs are full! Woo, now the fun really starts! You get to go through your 8 backpacks you are somehow wearing and decide if something there is less valuable than a darkspawn dagger! And then--hold on to your hats, folks--you get to lug all your junk back to a merchant! Wowzers! Hey hey, with that extra 50 silver you just made, you can afford your Sword of Badguy Slaying, which has +2 to accuracy! That may or may not be better than your current sword which has +2 to damage! You know what that means...time to whip out the spreadsheet! OMFG I am having so much fun! Hey, look at that! You're only 37.2 experience points away from leveling up! Better start deciding now if you are going to go for a 42nd point of dexterity, or maybe walk on the wild side and throw them all into strength! Is it going to have a measurable effect no matter where you put it? Who knows?! But the excitement level is at an all-time high, that's for sure!
Time to go back to Halo and MW2. People like you ruined RPG gaming on PCs and turned it into dumbed down shooters like ME2. There's plenty of "point and shoot" games out there. Leave one decent RPG for people who enjoy things you find boring thanks to your limited attention span and lack of desire to think.
A compelling world in which my character can make in-character decisions while the story unfolds around him - that's what I want.shootist70 wrote...
Compelling plot, characters and story > intrinsic reward based, rat maze gameplay everytime.
Sylvius the Mad wrote...
A compelling world in which my character can make in-character decisions while the story unfolds around him - that's what I want.shootist70 wrote...
Compelling plot, characters and story > intrinsic reward based, rat maze gameplay everytime.
Guest_JoePinasi1989_*
Mister Mida wrote...
I think both the ME series and the DA series can learn something from each other.
Modifié par JoePinasi1989, 02 septembre 2010 - 10:11 .
That's how roleplaying games work.Lusitanum wrote...
It's amazing how your posts always revolve around the "me, me, me" philosophy.
Altima Darkspells wrote...
Fact of the matter is that there are very few--and fewer, as time progresses--games that are similar to DAO. ME has its own series. DA should stay as true to its roots for as long as it can. Which, of course, it won't, since BW states that they no longer feel 'bound' to making the game a spiritual successor.
Mecha Tengu wrote...
turning DA2 into a TPS is fine, as long as they do not take out any RPG elements as they did for the transition from ME1 to ME2
for me this tab targetting combat system really only works in MMOs, or turned based RPGs
Modifié par FlintlockJazz, 02 septembre 2010 - 10:34 .
Sylvius the Mad wrote...
That's how roleplaying games work.Lusitanum wrote...
It's amazing how your posts always revolve around the "me, me, me" philosophy.
FlintlockJazz wrote...
God no, we already have plenty of
TPS, they should go the other way and run the game exactly like BG, in
isometric view all the time!
Modifié par Lusitanum, 02 septembre 2010 - 10:57 .
Lusitanum wrote...
Sylvius the Mad wrote...
That's how roleplaying games work.Lusitanum wrote...
It's amazing how your posts always revolve around the "me, me, me" philosophy.
Oh, so there's no distinction between roleplaying games and real life for you.
That certainly explains a lot...
Guest_JoePinasi1989_*
Lusitanum wrote...
Sylvius the Mad wrote...
Lusitanum wrote...
It's amazing how your posts always revolve around the "me, me, me" philosophy.
That's how roleplaying games work.
Oh, so there's no distinction between roleplaying games and real life for you.
That certainly explains a lot...
Of course not. In real life, decisions get made to benefit me from my point of view.Lusitanum wrote...
Oh, so there's no distinction between roleplaying games and real life for you.
Gatt9 wrote...
Guertyras wrote...
Dave of Canada wrote...
shootist70 wrote...
Dave of Canada wrote...
[I felt the need to link it because he's sort of what they are marketing for, he views Mass Effect 2 as the best thing since sliced bread (comparing it to Dragon Age) while he can't even be bothered to get past Ostagar before saying the game was a waste of money and such.
Bioware are marketing their games for morons? Not these generalisations again *sigh*
I didn't mean that, it's 5-am and I'm extremely confused. >.<
It's just that.. this guy here is what I hate. He happens to also be getting everything and more that he wants for DA2. I can't voice it correctly but.. yeah. I facepalmed at it.
well it makes sense, that guy represent he majority, he want quick responsive action, instant gratification,cinematic events, voice acting, he dont especially want a rpg. The new fans were attracted to dragon age with the gore trailers and mailyn Manson "this is the new **** " stuff ...Now logically bioware try to cater more to the new crowd they attracted, not the guys who liked old games where "it took ages to go anywhere and had to eat food"(mass effect 2 in game quote).
.What i am expecting next from bioware is a dragon age facebook game, one with microtransactions, those games requires a much lesser budget, cater to many more people and pay much more than a 3D fully voiced "next gen" game, its all win for them. They jumped from traditional pc rpg to console action/rpg to get even better sales then the next step are the social browser games.
Well spoken, but this is actually a much deeper event, bear with me, it's a long'un.
The gaming industry is actually characterized by cycles. Self imposed cycles actually.
20 years ago there was the NES/Sega Master System. They got their major kick via Super Mario and Final Fantasy, those two games sold ridiculous numbers of units. In short order, everyone was churning out some variation of those two games. This continued onwards into...
The SNES/Genesis, which boasted better graphics, but essentially the same games. Pretty much everything was a platformer, or a JRPG. All of them terribly similiar. Now punduits will blame Nintendo's promises of the CD and Genesis fragmenting the market for their death, but research actually shows that was not the case. Peripherals don't define systems, games do. Impending console launches don't affect game purchasing leading up to the release. These consoles died because they kept releasing the same couple games, and people got tired of them. Because othwerise we'd have simply seen steady sales on the old systems and none on the new ones, like Jaguar, 3do, CD-i failed to affect the market.
The PC rose to take it's place. From the early 90's to the 00's it stood strong. Except Warcraft 2/Starcraft/Doom was released. Then everyone and their grandmother made every game an RTS/FPS. Of course, most weren't very good, and PC Gaming started it's drop off, after a number of companies had high-profile deaths. There was the additonal factor of the profit margin from the 3d switch that accelerated things.
The PS2 took over. Carried by Resident Evil, Grand Theft Auto, Final Fantasy 7, Grand Turismo. It lost it's uniqueness, like Legacy of Kain, following in the footsteps of the preceeding generations, it started making everything similiar to a handfull of games.
Which is pretty much where we stand today. PS3/360, SNES/Genesis, it's the same event, and the same problem. A couple of games sold really well, so now every game is a couple of games. It leads to the same result, decreasing interest as people can only play the same game so many times. Oblivion, Fallout 3, Red Dead Redemption, Saint's Row, they're all just GTA. Mass Effect 2 is just Gears of War. Halo is just Doom/Half-Life. Etc.
It's *really* obvious what's happening, Gaming is starting it's decline, and it'll only accelerate. Month after Month of decreasing revenue this year, and if you remove the music games, you'll find it's been ongoing. Bethseda shipped 4.6 million units of Fallout 3, but sold only a fraction of that before NPD stopped reporting their numbers. People are *tired* of the same couple games.
Gaming is, and has been, a "Me too!" driven industry, which is fine so long as gaming has variety. When the market converges to a couple games, the market tanks. Almost all of the platforms ended their cycle on a convergence to a handfull of games with little variety.
This is no different, Bioware's converging along with the rest of the industry. Their right along with everyone else shouting from the rooftop "It's an RPG HYBRID!!!", and delivering some FPS/TPS/Grand Theft Auto variant.
So we're going to crash, in about 3 years. But this'll be different, this'll be Atari-style crash. This'll be total market collapse.
You see, today, companies are bankrolling their futures on the next 1-2 games. They're pretty much all over-extended. Firingsquad did a nice piece on this a year back, pointing out that pretty much everyone's one bad game away from bankruptcy, and it's only gotten worse. EA and Bethseda are prime canidates, and EA might even be a driving force for the upcoming crash.
Let's consider EA. Need for Speed, NFL/NHL, the Sims, and Bioware. But what happens to NFS when Grand Turismo comes out? How many Sims are too many? Bioware's banking everything on the TPS market now instead of delivering quality RPGs. So what happens when NFS gets tanked by Grand Turismo? What happens when Sims hits saturation like Rockstar did? What happens when Bioware sells far fewer games than they thought they would by playing "Me too!"?
EA's going to fold, it no longer has insurance. It killed Origin, Westwood, Bullfrog. NFL/NHL can't support a company of it's size. So then the market loses the NFL/NHL revenues for 24 months, and a bunch of casuals. It'll be a massive drop, and like Microsoft did to the Tech market, it'll take alot of others with it.
Gaming's unhealthy, has been for years. History has shown us several times what happens when the market converges to "Me too!", and like the ancient saying, it's what's going to happen again. Bioware can chase after this "Mass Market!" all it wants, but it's still just riding the fad, just like others have before it (Super Mario, Final Fantasy, Doom, Myst, Full Motion Video, RTS, and today GTA), just like every other fad it'll end, and just like every other time, companies are going to die.
Sadly, because we're at an "All the eggs in one basket" case, gaming as we know it is going down.
Lusitanum wrote...
EVERY - SINGLE - FIGHT in the whole damned game was solved in the exact same way: one tank, one DPS dealer, one support Rogue that is more useful to open locked crap than anything else, and my mage just bombarding the enemy with the same spells until everything is killed.
Sylvius the Mad wrote...
Of course not. In real life, decisions get made to benefit me from my point of view.Lusitanum wrote...
Oh,so there's no distinction between roleplaying games and real life for you.
In an RPG, the decisions are made to benefit my character from his point of view.
There's no difference at all.
JoePinasi1989
wrote...
Lusitanum, if you're under the impression that talking about what each individual wants in a game is something selfish and egotistical, I suggest you find another forum to post in, because this is what this forum, and this thread especially, is all about.
AlanC9 wrote...
As for the overall point, I kind of agree that DAO combat wasn't all that deep. But I'm not really sold on ME2 being deep either. Then again, I can't remember a commercial RPG with really hard-to-solve combat.
Modifié par Lusitanum, 03 septembre 2010 - 03:33 .
Wizard's Crown.AlanC9 wrote...
As for the overall point, I kind of agree that DAO combat wasn't all that deep. But I'm not really sold on ME2 being deep either. Then again, I can't remember a commercial RPG with really hard-to-solve combat.
It makes perfect sense that the character makes decisions for himself. Doesn't your character do that?Lusitanum wrote...
Sylvius the Mad wrote...
Of course not. In real life, decisions get made to benefit me from my point of view.Lusitanum wrote...
Oh,so there's no distinction between roleplaying games and real life for you.
In an RPG, the decisions are made to benefit my character from his point of view.
There's no difference at all.
Wow, that's one seriously messed up mind right there... [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/surprised.png[/smilie]
SirOccam wrote...
If you're incapable of opening your mind enough to consider the possibility that complexity and fun aren't directly proportional, then you have only yourself to blame, not "people like me." It doesn't make you "intelligent" to enjoy busywork. My attention span is fine, and I have plenty of desire to think...it's just that I'd rather think about things that are fun.
Deciding what to delete from your packs to make room for your newly-looted darkspawn dagger doesn't really requires a lot of meditative contemplation. And running mindless courier quests doesn't really stretch one's intellect. These things don't call for "thinking" or "intelligence," they call for, at best, a high tolerance for monotony. I guess a self-righteous sense of elitism probably helps too. "Hurr, selling my junk to a vendor is SO MUCH FUN because I'm playing a REAL RPG and I R SMRT!"
Altima Darkspells wrote...
If only BioWare had waited
until the next TES game had been release! Then a bunch of people who,
basically, want an FPS with swords and quests would be, well, not here.
Fact of the matter is that there are very few--and fewer, as time
progresses--games that are similar to DAO. ME has its own series. DA
should stay as true to its roots for as long as it can. Which, of
course, it won't, since BW states that they no longer feel 'bound' to
making the game a spiritual successor.
AlanC9 wrote...
As for the overall point, I kind of agree that
DAO combat wasn't all that deep. But I'm not really sold on ME2 being
deep either. Then again, I can't remember a commercial RPG with really
hard-to-solve combat.
Lusitanum wrote...
Oh, ME2 wasn't all that deep, it's just
that when compared to DA, it might as well be freaking chess. There's
positioning, covering fire, having the right skills for the right
enemies, moving from cover to cover while avoiding enemy fire, and it
gets really demanding if you choose to make these decisions on the fly,
without using the pause function.
Did you read the post I was responding to? I wasn't "chest-thumping." He essentially said people who don't like some of that stuff have limited attention spans or don't like to think, as though the things in question had anything to do with intelligence at all. If anyone was chest-thumping, it was him.In Exile wrote...
SirOccam wrote...
If you're incapable of opening your mind enough to consider the possibility that complexity and fun aren't directly proportional, then you have only yourself to blame, not "people like me." It doesn't make you "intelligent" to enjoy busywork. My attention span is fine, and I have plenty of desire to think...it's just that I'd rather think about things that are fun.
I find the chest-thumping cute. If you're validating your intellectual worth on the basis of the sort of video games that you play, well, someone is missing the point.
That's nice. I never said no one was allowed to like that stuff. I can get a little fixated on details of some mundane task myself every once in a while. That doesn't mean I want it in a video game.If there is anything that life taught me, it's that some people enjoy what essentially amounts to ****work. A friend of mine was teaching to cook two years ago, and while I was struggling not to burn water, she went off for ten minutes, and came back saying she cleaned my room because likes cleaning. Another guy I know essentially throws himself at anything that even remotely resembles an errand. He's the best roomate ever.Deciding what to delete from your packs to make room for your newly-looted darkspawn dagger doesn't really requires a lot of meditative contemplation. And running mindless courier quests doesn't really stretch one's intellect. These things don't call for "thinking" or "intelligence," they call for, at best, a high tolerance for monotony. I guess a self-righteous sense of elitism probably helps too. "Hurr, selling my junk to a vendor is SO MUCH FUN because I'm playing a REAL RPG and I R SMRT!"
And so on.
SirOccam wrote...
Did you read the post I was responding to? I wasn't "chest-thumping." He essentially said people who don't like some of that stuff have limited attention spans or don't like to think, as though the things in question had anything to do with intelligence at all. If anyone was chest-thumping, it was him.
That's nice. I never said no one was allowed to like that stuff. I can get a little fixated on details of some mundane task myself every once in a while. That doesn't mean I want it in a video game.
If he, or you, or anyone else, likes to sort through bags of junk loot, then fine. More power to him/you/them. But it's not any less "intelligent" not to like it, nor does it have anything to do with attention span.
Lusitanum wrote...
Oh, ME2 wasn't all that deep, it's just that when compared to DA, it might as well be freaking chess. There's positioning, covering fire, having the right skills for the right enemies, moving from cover to cover while avoiding enemy fire, and it gets really demanding if you choose to make these decisions on the fly, without using the pause function.
Again, not especially deep, but it certainly beats doing the same damned thing for 80 hours.
D'oh. No, my fault, that should have been obvious. It even occured to me for about half a second, but for some reason I discarded the notion. Note to self: if everything someone is saying appears to apply to someone you're quoting, they're probably talking about that person.In Exile wrote...
SirOccam wrote...
Did you read the post I was responding to? I wasn't "chest-thumping." He essentially said people who don't like some of that stuff have limited attention spans or don't like to think, as though the things in question had anything to do with intelligence at all. If anyone was chest-thumping, it was him.
Yeah, I re-read that post. I mean "you" as the general you, as opposed to "you" as the specific you. I apologize for the confusion. I did meant to say that the poster you were quoting was doing that, as a reply to you, basically saying that I agree with you.
Ah, well, that attempt at communication largely failed.That's nice. I never said no one was allowed to like that stuff. I can get a little fixated on details of some mundane task myself every once in a while. That doesn't mean I want it in a video game.
If he, or you, or anyone else, likes to sort through bags of junk loot, then fine. More power to him/you/them. But it's not any less "intelligent" not to like it, nor does it have anything to do with attention span.
Well, yeah, that's what I mean. Some people like things that to me, apparently you, and others, seem terrible and mundane. Just because they like it doesn't mean it's fun, or particularly intelligent. It just means they like it.
But like I said - it seems I failed at communication. I mean, I'm well aware of your position on games, which is the fun + story + interaction, versus the minutae or lolz moar loot!
Maybe that was someone else. Ah, good times.
Retour en haut
