1279 réponses à ce sujet

[DarthCaine]

AlanC9 wrote...

You put the whole question into play when you said that some aspects of ME are bad for an RPG.

Probably because ME is NOT an RPG. It's an ACTION RPG. People seem to forget that.

[MerinTB]

DarthCaine wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

You put the whole question into play when you said that some aspects of ME are bad for an RPG.

Probably because ME is NOT an RPG. It's an ACTION RPG. People seem to forget that.

Most peopel quibble about the definitions of RPG, cRPG, action RPG, etc...

and the sophists in the crowd want us to not even bother using terms and definitions as "people have different meanings for different words" , thus, you know, destroying our ability to communicate and the whole concept of words, dictionaries, etc.

RPGs and cRPGs used to have pretty stable definitions.  They can again.

I know I'll have some definitions soon, and they are what I'll be working from going forward.  Hopefully we can get people to accept some standards...

otherwise, honestly, why bother trying to communicate if we can't agree on what words mean?

[Saibh]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Bryy_Miller wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Not what I meant, but you know that anyway.

No, actually, from everything you have ever posted, I don't. The current discussion had nothing to do with defending BioWare.  I could only assume that you were linking people liking Mass Effect with blindly defending BioWare, when the discussion was about other people's opinions are not the exact same as everyone else's. So you can see how I got confused at your comment about the BioWare Defense Force, right?

But you'll just shrug this off as poppycock. So I don't know why I even bother replying to you.

I don't know why you bother either, but thats ok.

So...you're not going to bother to explain why liking ME is sucking up to BioWare? Unless I completely misunderstood you, but I just don't see much base for that sort of thinking.

Modifié par Saibh, 29 septembre 2010 - 09:56 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

When using contentious terms like "RPG" I find it helpful to define them right at the start of the conversation, and repeatedly throughout.

Otherwise you just can't get anywhere.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

MerinTB wrote...

DarthCaine wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

You put the whole question into play when you said that some aspects of ME are bad for an RPG.

Probably because ME is NOT an RPG. It's an ACTION RPG. People seem to forget that.

Most peopel quibble about the definitions of RPG, cRPG, action RPG, etc...

and the sophists in the crowd want us to not even bother using terms and definitions as "people have different meanings for different words" , thus, you know, destroying our ability to communicate and the whole concept of words, dictionaries, etc.

RPGs and cRPGs used to have pretty stable definitions.  They can again.

I know I'll have some definitions soon, and they are what I'll be working from going forward.  Hopefully we can get people to accept some standards...

otherwise, honestly, why bother trying to communicate if we can't agree on what words mean?

I honestly think people like to quibble to avoid actually discussing more pertinent points people bring up. classic deflecting if you ask me.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Saibh wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Bryy_Miller wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Not what I meant, but you know that anyway.

No, actually, from everything you have ever posted, I don't. The current discussion had nothing to do with defending BioWare.  I could only assume that you were linking people liking Mass Effect with blindly defending BioWare, when the discussion was about other people's opinions are not the exact same as everyone else's. So you can see how I got confused at your comment about the BioWare Defense Force, right?

But you'll just shrug this off as poppycock. So I don't know why I even bother replying to you.

I don't know why you bother either, but thats ok.

So...you're not going to bother to explain why liking ME is sucking up to BioWare? Unless I completely misunderstood you, but I just don't see much base for that sort of thinking.

Its really not even that at all Saibh its more so the usual suspects making their rounds making sure to defend criticism be it warranted or not. At least that's how it comes off to me anyway.

[John Epler]

By now, I've said this enough times that I imagine most of you are aware that discussion should be about the points people are bringing up, rather than the person. Insults, ad hominem attacks, or accusing each other of being fanboys or trolls - none of these are acceptable.



Let's try and keep that in mind as we continue forward in this thread.

[AlanC9]

MerinTB wrote...

and the sophists in the crowd want us to not even bother using terms and definitions as "people have different meanings for different words" , thus, you know, destroying our ability to communicate and the whole concept of words, dictionaries, etc.

Note that good dictionaries do acknowledge that words have different meanings. And those meanings change all the time, which is why there are new editions of dictionaries.

"Destroying our ability to communicate" is a ridiculous overstatement, but I figure that's just rhetoric.

RPGs and cRPGs used to have pretty stable definitions.  They can again.

Sure, but that definition will include games like ME. Bio wants to call such games RPGs, and they'll win. I suppose Action-RPG will continue to have meaning; whether it will be considered a hybrid or a subcategory of RPG is debatable. Currently Bio seems to want it to mean a subcategory, since that lets them have it both ways

Edit: whether such a debate will be worth having is another matter. What good would an accepted definition or RPG do us?

Modifié par AlanC9, 29 septembre 2010 - 10:18 .

[Bryy_Miller]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Saibh wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Bryy_Miller wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Not what I meant, but you know that anyway.

No, actually, from everything you have ever posted, I don't. The current discussion had nothing to do with defending BioWare.  I could only assume that you were linking people liking Mass Effect with blindly defending BioWare, when the discussion was about other people's opinions are not the exact same as everyone else's. So you can see how I got confused at your comment about the BioWare Defense Force, right?

But you'll just shrug this off as poppycock. So I don't know why I even bother replying to you.

I don't know why you bother either, but thats ok.

So...you're not going to bother to explain why liking ME is sucking up to BioWare? Unless I completely misunderstood you, but I just don't see much base for that sort of thinking.

Its really not even that at all Saibh its more so the usual suspects making their rounds making sure to defend criticism be it warranted or not. At least that's how it comes off to me anyway.

But it wasn't criticism of the game that was being discussed, it was criticism of other people's opinions. It had absolutely nothing to do with whether Alan or I or anyone else liked Mass Effect. It had to do with someone coming in and saying "I don't understand why/how other people have different opinions". Unless you agree that nobody else can possibly have another opinion about Mass Effect, and that they all secretly "know the games flaws".

That, to me, sounds suspiciously like one step away from "people are stupid for liking Mass Effect, because I know the truth about it".

You're linking criticism of an attitude to blindly defending the object of that attitude's wrath.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Saibh wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Bryy_Miller wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Not what I meant, but you know that anyway.

No, actually, from everything you have ever posted, I don't. The current discussion had nothing to do with defending BioWare.  I could only assume that you were linking people liking Mass Effect with blindly defending BioWare, when the discussion was about other people's opinions are not the exact same as everyone else's. So you can see how I got confused at your comment about the BioWare Defense Force, right?

But you'll just shrug this off as poppycock. So I don't know why I even bother replying to you.

I don't know why you bother either, but thats ok.

So...you're not going to bother to explain why liking ME is sucking up to BioWare? Unless I completely misunderstood you, but I just don't see much base for that sort of thinking.

Its really not even that at all Saibh its more so the usual suspects making their rounds making sure to defend criticism be it warranted or not. At least that's how it comes off to me anyway.

But it wasn't criticism of the game that was being discussed, it was criticism of other people's opinions. It had absolutely nothing to do with whether Alan or I or anyone else liked Mass Effect. It had to do with someone coming in and saying "I don't understand why/how other people have different opinions". Unless you agree that nobody else can possibly have another opinion about Mass Effect, and that they all secretly "know the games flaws".

That, to me, sounds suspiciously like one step away from "people are stupid for liking Mass Effect, because I know the truth about it".

You're linking criticism of an attitude to blindly defending the object of that attitude's wrath.

There were clear criticisms of ME in there as well. At this point I'm not going to go back and forth with you as I'd hate to see another thread that has some actual good debate in it locked for no reason.

[Sylvius the Mad]

AlanC9 wrote...

Sure, but that definition will include games like ME. Bio wants to call such games RPGs, and they'll win.

Only if your idea of the "correct" definition is the one that's most widely used.

I'd rather a standard based on immutability and usefulness.

[AlanC9]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Only if your idea of the "correct" definition is the one that's most widely used.

I'd rather a standard based on immutability and usefulness.

Sure, but what you or I want isn't relevant.

You can enforce language standards if there's a mechanism for it. Lawyers have the Bluebook guys, for instance. Publish something professionally and you'll have to run a gauntlet of copyeditors.  (I've done these two) Hand in a paper and your teacher grades it. But outside of those mechanisms, there's nothing but community usage.

And even copyeditors are kind of squishy here, since none of us actually believe in anything other than current standards in whatever medium the piece is supposed to be published in.

[Morroian]

DarthCaine wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

You put the whole question into play when you said that some aspects of ME are bad for an RPG.

Probably because ME is NOT an RPG. It's an ACTION RPG. People seem to forget that.

Isn't an action RPG still an RPG? Just a sub-classification of it.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Morroian wrote...

DarthCaine wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

You put the whole question into play when you said that some aspects of ME are bad for an RPG.

Probably because ME is NOT an RPG. It's an ACTION RPG. People seem to forget that.

Isn't an action RPG still an RPG? Just a sub-classification of it.

Sure, its a stripped down, usually over simplified RPG. Happy now?

[Morroian]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
Sure, its a stripped down, usually over simplified RPG. Happy now?

Yep

[Tsuga C]

Morroian wrote...

Isn't an action RPG still an RPG? Just a sub-classification of it.

That's like saying that a vehicle with a V-8 engine and a manual transmission is by definition a sports car--my F-150 would qualify. 

Action-RPGs are essentially RPG-lite.  If you insist on lumping them together because they allow for a measure of character design and/or growth to be determined by the player, I suppose you have a valid point, but not one in which I place much stock.

[Saibh]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Morroian wrote...

DarthCaine wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

You put the whole question into play when you said that some aspects of ME are bad for an RPG.

Probably because ME is NOT an RPG. It's an ACTION RPG. People seem to forget that.

Isn't an action RPG still an RPG? Just a sub-classification of it.

Sure, its a stripped down, usually over simplified RPG. Happy now?

Maybe. Of course, modern computers are simplified versions of old versions, like using DOS format to accomplish everything. Simplified isn't always worse, isn't always better. Being user-friendly allows more people to enjoy something. That's not a bad thing.

Modifié par Saibh, 29 septembre 2010 - 11:23 .

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Tsuga C wrote...

Morroian wrote...

Isn't an action RPG still an RPG? Just a sub-classification of it.

That's like saying that a vehicle with a V-8 engine and a manual transmission is by definition a sports car--my F-150 would qualify. 

Action-RPGs are essentially RPG-lite.  If you insist on lumping them together because they allow for a measure of character design and/or growth to be determined by the player, I suppose you have a valid point, but not one in which I place much stock.

Pretty much, doesn't automatically make them bad games, just usually not what the majority here would want to play. At least that used to be the demographic here. These days I'm not so sure.

[Dave of Canada]

Tsuga C wrote...

Action-RPGs are essentially RPG-lite.

To you, maybe. Though the term RPG is subjective, I've been capable of playing through Alpha Protocol and such and label them as RPGs because to me an RPG is great plot and dialogue. Just because the game has a gun or two doesn't make it any less of an RPG to me, yet this other guy might like micromanaging party members and such and classify those sorts of games as RPGs.

It's too vague to begin calling other games as "RPG-lite" and such.

[Morroian]

Tsuga C wrote...
That's like saying that a vehicle with a V-8 engine and a manual transmission is by definition a sports car--my F-150 would qualify. 

Action-RPGs are essentially RPG-lite.  If you insist on lumping them together because they allow for a measure of character design and/or growth to be determined by the player, I suppose you have a valid point, but not one in which I place much stock.

All genres have outliers and are going to encompass many different variations of the tropes of that genre. The alternative is many many different genres which would be more confusing.

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
Pretty much, doesn't automatically
make them bad games, just usually not what the majority here would want
to play. At least that used to be the demographic here. These days I'm
not so sure.

Games like Torchlight and Dins Curse seem to have a lot of fans amongst even hardcore rpg players.

Modifié par Morroian, 29 septembre 2010 - 11:36 .

[John Epler]

Ahh, the 'what is an RPG'  discussion. Let me predict how this will go in a one-act play I call 'What be'eth a Game of RP?'

PERSON ONE: 'An RPG has to encompass these things here!'

PERSON TWO: 'No, I feel an RPG encompasses these things instead!'

PERSON ONE: 'You're wrong, and this is why I think that!'

PERSON TWO: 'No, YOU'RE wrong, and here are my reasons!'

PERSON ONE: 'Nuh uh!'

PERSON THREE: 'If I might interject...'

PERSONS ONE AND TWO: 'Shut up!'

FIN

So instead of going down this well-trodden road that never leads to any consensus, I'm going to call the discussion off-topic and suggest that you guys return to discussing the topic at hand - the pcgamer preview and how it relates to DA2.

Modifié par JohnEpler, 29 septembre 2010 - 11:35 .

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

JohnEpler wrote...

Ahh, the 'what is an RPG'  discussion. Let me predict how this will go in a one-act play I call 'What be'eth a Game of RP?'

PERSON ONE: 'An RPG has to encompass these things here!'

PERSON TWO: 'No, I feel an RPG encompasses these things instead!'

PERSON ONE: 'You're wrong, and this is why I think that!'

PERSON TWO: 'No, YOU'RE wrong, and here are my reasons!'

PERSON ONE: 'Nuh uh!'

PERSON THREE: 'If I might interject...'

PERSONS ONE AND TWO: 'Shut up!'

So instead of going down this well-trodden road that never leads to any consensus, I'm going to call the discussion off-topic and suggest that you guys return to discussing the topic at hand - the pcgamer preview and how it relates to DA2.

Oh thank god!. I was starting to worry this was going to delve into semantics land and not return. <3

[Dave of Canada]

JohnEpler wrote...

the pcgamer preview and how it relates to DA2.

It's a pretty preview. They did a good job to relate it to Dragon Age 2.

*whistles and walks away with watching his back*

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Morroian wrote...

Tsuga C wrote...
That's like saying that a vehicle with a V-8 engine and a manual transmission is by definition a sports car--my F-150 would qualify. 

Action-RPGs are essentially RPG-lite.  If you insist on lumping them together because they allow for a measure of character design and/or growth to be determined by the player, I suppose you have a valid point, but not one in which I place much stock.

All genres have outliers and are going to encompass many different variations of the tropes of that genre. The alternative is many many different genres which would be more confusing.

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
Pretty much, doesn't automatically
make them bad games, just usually not what the majority here would want
to play. At least that used to be the demographic here. These days I'm
not so sure.

Games like Torchlight and Dins Curse seem to have a lot of fans amongst even hardcore rpg players.

Thats fine, it doesn't make them any more deep complex non simplifed RPG's. Again I never said action RPG's were a bad thing, just usually more simplified for the masses so to speak. 5 years ago we'd not even be having this discussion on a Bioware forum, we'd be focusing on the actual game the thread topic is about.

[General Malor]

I thought it sounded great. Seems like they're making a whole slew of improvements and adding to what is already a great series. I for one look forward to the new combat system.