138 réponses à ce sujet

[wookieeassassin]

I haven't finished ME2 yet, but from what I've played it seems like a lot of the actual role-playing elements have been taken out. I dont' understand why there couldn't have been an inventory and a skill tree in addition to the other changes they made to the game (the other things they have changed seem to be for the better IMO). The game isn't bad by any means, and what I've played so far I really like but I know that I'm going to miss having multiple skills to upgrade, having an inventory, 'looting'. Without lots of skills and those other elements its just a third person action game with dialogue sequences (again, doesn't mean it isn't a good game, just that its on the edge of not being an RPG anymore).

For Mass Effect 3 please bring the RPG elements back.

Thanks.

[Googlesaurus]

Well...yeah.

[ashwind]

 I am sure they will. Once everyone agrees on the elements that "defines" RPG. Cant help but to quote Chris Priestly from another thread 

Chris Priestly wrote...

* I expect this to happen right after everyone agrees on what the best pizza topping is.

[smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/devil.png[/smilie]

[clennon8]

Meh. To me, role-playing is about character interactions and moral choices. ME2 got it just about perfect.

[SSV Enterprise]

"RPG elements" aren't always a good thing. The inventory in ME1 was atrocious. I'd much rather have ME2's streamlined inventory than ME1's tedious, unrewarding system.

[AntiChri5]

There is an inventory system. It simply isn't the usual invisible magical floating bag following you along and holding 57 different suits of armour.

As for the skill tree, you know how many points my Adept spent in Throw in ME 1? 12. The maximum. In ME 2? 10. The maximum.

[Christmas Ape]

I find it interesting that everyone who tries to define the RPG genre in such a way as to exclude Mass Effect 2 never cites a single feature that has anything to do with roleplaying. It's like defining a pie by its roundness, and saying it stops being pie when you cut a slice out of it.

You have an inventory; it just contains no duplicates and always gives you the best example of the model you choose. You have multiple skills to upgrade, just less of them and they now improve in greater (I would say noticeable) increments.

"Make ME3 an RPG again!" is always just "I want to see numbers get bigger again!" around here.

[kstarler]

Christmas Ape, I don't know if you've won the entire internet, but I think you may have won mine. Or... something. Anyway, I agree.

[Oblarg]

SSV Enterprise wrote...

"RPG elements" aren't always a
good thing. The inventory in ME1 was atrocious. I'd much rather have
ME2's streamlined inventory than ME1's tedious, unrewarding
system.

If by "streamlined" you mean "completely absent," I'd have to disagree with you.  But maybe you have some different version of ME2 in which there is actual gear progression other than planet scanning to get increments of +10% damage, who knows?!

OP, I'll sum it up this way for you:

In terms of actual gameplay, there's not much left that resembles an RPG.  The shooting is no longer stat based, gear progression is gone, and the level-ups are superficial.  That said, it's a reasonably fun shooter.

Outside of the direct gameplay mechanics, there is still plenty of dialogue and narrative and whathaveyou, which would certainly classify it as RPG-ish (quality of the narrative is another issue entirely, of course, and I don't feel like ranting about that again).

I say "RPG-ish" because there's no clear definition of what an RPG is, and I really don't feel like taking a stand on whether or not ME2 meets whatever arbitrary assumptions people have about what the genre should be.

[Christmas Ape]

Oblarg wrote...
In terms of actual gameplay, there's not much left that resembles an RPG.

Except character creation and advancement, decision-making with an impact on character development and the game's setting, and an extensive reliance on dialog choices to move the plot forward.

You know - roleplaying.

[Lumikki]

I disagree and agree with OP, but little different ways.

They did not take away so much roleplaying elements, but they did take away a lot of tradional RPG elements. People should not mix roleplaying and traditional RPG's, they aren't the same. Traditional RPG is comming from table top RPG, but roleplaying is alot wider and older consept. Point is, roleplaying is not same as traditional RPG.

How ever, back to subject. Yes, I would also like some those removed elements back, but not all of them. I don't want to see inventory or combat system what ME1 had, they where really bad. How ever, character development customation, weapon and armor customation to all characters, impression details and exploration elements I would like to see better done in ME3.

Modifié par Lumikki, 30 octobre 2010 - 08:35 .

[Oblarg]

Christmas Ape wrote...

Oblarg wrote...
In terms of actual gameplay, there's not much left that resembles an RPG.

Except character creation and advancement, decision-making with an impact on character development and the game's setting, and an extensive reliance on dialog choices to move the plot forward.

You know - roleplaying.

By gameplay I was referring to combat (which should have been obvious), but I do appreciate you jumping down my throat, thanks.

[Christmas Ape]

Oblarg wrote...
By gameplay I was referring to combat (which should have been obvious), but I do appreciate you jumping down my throat, thanks.

Then it was nonsense. The combat system used in an RPG has absolutely nothing to do with it being part of the genre or not.

[Oblarg]

Christmas Ape wrote...

Oblarg wrote...
By gameplay I was referring to combat (which should have been obvious), but I do appreciate you jumping down my throat, thanks.

Then it was nonsense. The combat system used in an RPG has absolutely nothing to do with it being part of the genre or not.

"My opinion is fact, your opinion is nonsense."

Except I didn't actually voice that opinion (in fact I explicity reserved judgment), so it's more like:

"My opinion is fact, and everything I perceive as disagreeing with it (even if that perception is due to my own failure to read people's posts) is nonsense."

[Christmas Ape]

I...I'm not even sure what thread you're reading any more. "The combat has been stripped of everything that resembles an RPG" is not reserving judgment - it is making one, specifically that in some way Mass Effect's combat made it an RPG while Mass Effect 2's makes it not one. As the combat system has nothing to do with whether it's an RPG or not, it's not an argument with merit.

[Oblarg]

Christmas Ape wrote...

I...I'm not even sure what thread you're reading any more. "The combat has been stripped of everything that resembles an RPG" is not reserving judgment - it is making one, specifically that in some way Mass Effect's combat made it an RPG while Mass Effect 2's makes it not one. As the combat system has nothing to do with whether it's an RPG or not, it's not an argument with merit.

I'm glad you've read the first half of my post.  Do you have the mental capacity to make it through the second, or are you going to continue slinging verbal **** at me because you don't like what you (incorrectly) perceive my opinion on the matter to be?

[Lumikki]

Oblarg wrote...

"My opinion is fact, your opinion is nonsense."

Except I didn't actually voice that opinion (in fact I explicity reserved judgment), so it's more like:

"My opinion is fact, and everything I perceive as disagreeing with it (even if that perception is due to my own failure to read people's posts) is nonsense."

This isn't first time I see you say this in this forum. So, I give you advice, think you self what you just did say. Maybe it's time to look mirror.

Modifié par Lumikki, 30 octobre 2010 - 08:49 .

[Oblarg]

Lumikki wrote...

Oblarg wrote...

"My opinion is fact, your opinion is nonsense."

Except I didn't actually voice that opinion (in fact I explicity reserved judgment), so it's more like:

"My opinion is fact, and everything I perceive as disagreeing with it (even if that perception is due to my own failure to read people's posts) is nonsense."

This isn't first time I see you say this in this forum. So, I give you advice, think you self what you just did say. Maybe it's time to look mirror.

Completely different situation, but I'll humor you:

My frustration in the ammo thread was that you repeatedly nitpicked at arguments in my posts which I repeatedly stated were irrelevant.

My frustration here is that mr. "nonsense" simply didn't bother to read past the part which angered him, and proceeded to attack my views without a clear idea of what they actually are.

[Lumikki]

Oblarg wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

This isn't first time I see you say this in this forum. So, I give you advice, think you self what you just did say. Maybe it's time to look mirror.

Completely different situation, but I'll humor you:

My frustration in the ammo thread was that you repeatedly nitpicked at arguments in my posts which I repeatedly stated were irrelevant.

My frustration here is that mr. "nonsense" simply didn't bother to read past the part which angered him, and proceeded to attack my views without a clear idea of what they actually are.

I agree, but my point is that you starts very easyly attack others too.

Sometimes we all make assumption what other is saying and sometimes those assumptions aren't the correct one. It's really hard to say what you mean so that no-one can understand them wrong. Also allmost all people have this need to skip some what they read, because they think it's not irrelevant when it was.

My point is, we aren't all perfect humans. Many of us are writing here language what isn't even our natural language. What makes it even harder to make other understand what we want and harder to read and understand what other are really saying. So, we need to give more time to people to explain what we mean and  ask what others mean, than try to make quick assumption what is sayed.

Modifié par Lumikki, 30 octobre 2010 - 09:01 .

[Bryy_Miller]

Oblarg wrote...

Christmas Ape wrote...

I...I'm not even sure what thread you're reading any more. "The combat has been stripped of everything that resembles an RPG" is not reserving judgment - it is making one, specifically that in some way Mass Effect's combat made it an RPG while Mass Effect 2's makes it not one. As the combat system has nothing to do with whether it's an RPG or not, it's not an argument with merit.

I'm glad you've read the first half of my post.  Do you have the mental capacity to make it through the second, or are you going to continue slinging verbal **** at me because you don't like what you (incorrectly) perceive my opinion on the matter to be?

You need to step back a bit, my friend. Ape is responding to you, and you somehow are treating those responses as if they are the worst thing in the world. 

I really, really do not understand how you can be arguing that ME2 has less RPG elements than ME1 when you have to ignore the fact that there ARE RPG elements (changing the context of what you meant by gameplay) in order to make your point. 

And can someone please explain to me why ME2's inventory system is so inferior to ME1's? I mean, they are the same exact system, except with a lot less choices. At face value, the lack of choice SEEMS like a massive change in quality, true, but... come on. ME1 could have made their inventory system far less sucky if they just grouped the same item together.instead of having you fish through 32 of the same weapon for every. single. one of your weapon types.

ME2's inventory, in my opinion, is leagues better than ME1's. 

As for the leveling system? Again: the lack of choices (or in this case, stats) is not to be taken at face value. It is extremely hard to figure out how to navigate allocating skill points. Sure, you get a certain amount of set EXP for certain types of levels and quests, but at the end of the day, it does not just hand you Every Ability Ever.

But then again, what do I know. I like ME2, that means, according to these forums, that I hate to read.

Modifié par Bryy_Miller, 30 octobre 2010 - 09:06 .

[Oblarg]

Lumikki wrote...

Oblarg wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

This isn't first time I see you say this in this forum. So, I give you advice, think you self what you just did say. Maybe it's time to look mirror.

Completely different situation, but I'll humor you:

My frustration in the ammo thread was that you repeatedly nitpicked at arguments in my posts which I repeatedly stated were irrelevant.

My frustration here is that mr. "nonsense" simply didn't bother to read past the part which angered him, and proceeded to attack my views without a clear idea of what they actually are.

I agree, but my point is that you starts very easyly attack others too.

Sometimes we all make assumption what other is saying and sometimes those assumptions aren't the correct one. It's really hard to say what you mean so that no-one can understand them wrong. Also allmost all people have this need to skip some what they read, because they think it's not irrelevant when it was.

My point is, we aren't all perfect humans. Many of us are writing here language what isn't even our natural language. What makes it even harder to make other understand what we want and harder to read and understand what other are really saying. So, we need to give more time to people to explain what we mean and  ask what others mean, than try to make quick assumption what is sayed.

Fair enough, but it really irked me that his post was so openly hostile to mine when I intentionally reserved judgment on whether or not ME2 is an "RPG."

[Sirsmirkalot]

Christmas Ape, you should really sit down for a second and think about which elements are added to games when they say that "RPG-elements have been added".

tip: It's not C&C.

ME2 is a shooter with light RPG elements and I simply don't see why people insist that ME2 is a fullblood RPG. It isn't, get over it.

Modifié par Sirsmirkalot, 30 octobre 2010 - 09:08 .

[Oblarg]

Sirsmirkalot wrote...

Christmas Ape, you should really sit down for a second and think about which elements are added to games when they say that "RPG-elements have been added".

tip: It's not C&C.

This is another good point, but if we're going to go by very strict traditional definitions ME1 isn't really an RPG either, which sort of makes the entire argument pointless.

[LiquidGrape]

A pointless argument? On the internet? Why, I never!

[Bryy_Miller]

Sirsmirkalot wrote...

ME2 is a shooter with light RPG elements and I simply don't see why people insist that ME2 is a fullbood RPG. It isn't, get over it.

Yeah, but, that's just your opinion. Maybe you should get over that.