138 réponses à ce sujet

[Oblarg]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

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.

...And here we go again.

Isn't running in circles fun?

Try this for a change - stop using the term "RPG" as a class of games to which ME2 may or may not belong, and instead apply it individually to the mechanics in the game, and argue that.  It'll be a lot more productive, I promise.

Modifié par Oblarg, 30 octobre 2010 - 09:13 .

[Sirsmirkalot]

I never claimed ME1 is a floodblood RPG.

Modifié par Sirsmirkalot, 30 octobre 2010 - 09:16 .

[Oblarg]

Sirsmirkalot wrote...

Oblarg wrote...

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.

I never claimed ME1 is a floodblood RPG.

No, but if the argument is that, say, PS:T is an RPG and Mass Effect isn't, you're not going to get very far because no one with any sense will disagree with you.  The problem is that "RPG" is a poorly-defined class of games, especially in the context of action-RPGs such as Mass Effect or Alpha Protocol.

See my above post.

[Sirsmirkalot]

Oblarg wrote...

Isn't running in circles fun?

I'd call it the main feature of the internet.

[Oblarg]

Sirsmirkalot wrote...

Oblarg wrote...

Isn't running in circles fun?

I'd call it the main feature of the internet.

True, that.

[Bryy_Miller]

Oblarg wrote...

Try this for a change - stop using the term "RPG" as a class of games to which ME2 may or may not belong, and instead apply it individually to the mechanics in the game, and argue that.  It'll be a lot more productive, I promise.

That would do the exact opposite of what you say it will do. Have you seen the DA2 forums?

[Oblarg]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Oblarg wrote...

Try
this for a change - stop using the term "RPG" as a class of games to
which ME2 may or may not belong, and instead apply it individually to
the mechanics in the game, and argue that.  It'll be a lot more
productive, I promise.

That would do the exact opposite of what you say it will do. Have you seen the DA2 forums?

I have, and the result is certainly better than the pointless, circular
debate of definitions that trying to class a game as an
"RPG" inevitably leads to.

[Melancholic]

Let's see: character creation, extensive roleplaying through dialog and story choices, an inventory system of sorts, levelling, an array of abilities to invest in, stats, quests, towns with shops in them... Why would this not be an RPG? Because we're shooting things in third person? Is Dragon Age then not an RPG because we bash things with a sword in third person? The only major difference is Mass Effect 2 requires the player to aim and all that jazz, but the original Mass Effect also had that and nobody seems to dispute that game being an RPG. What disqualifying element that turns ME2 into a false RPG am I missing?

[Lumikki]

You aren't missing anything. It's not question does ME2 have those elements, it's more a question quality and amount of those elements. Some people feels that those RPG elemets are too limited, that's all. How ever, ME2 isn't full blood traditional RPG, it's mix of TPS and RPG. Also Biowares developers has already sayed that ME3 will have more "customation", base on RPG complains as ME2 been too simplifyed on some features.

[Melancholic]

So is Knights of the Old Republic then somehow more RPG than Final Fantasy 1 from this point of view? It's certainly much more complex.

[Lumikki]

Melancholic wrote...

So is Knights of the Old Republic then somehow more RPG than Final Fantasy 1 from this point of view? It's certainly much more complex.

Hard to say, I have never played Final Fantasy 1. How ever, all Mass Effect series games are less traditonal RPG than Kotor and DAO. It's style difference, not about roleplaying it self in games. Mass Effect 2 is also less traditional RPG than Mass Effect 1. That doesn't mean all games I sayed here isn't at least partly RPG, because they are.

Traditional RPG means when I talk more like roleplaying game what tries to simulate features used in board roleplaying games. While RPG is more general term for roleplaying games. So, when people talk that ME2 miss some RPG features, they really mean that ME2's traditional CRPG features are simplifyed or some even missing. Not sure does everyone understand the difference between that and roleplaying in computer games.

I don't know is the complexity the issue, but usually it's part of traditional CRPG. Meaning more complexity is consider in those traditional CRPG's as more freedom and customation. I don't know if the complexity it self is good or bad, I ques it depense how it's done.

Modifié par Lumikki, 30 octobre 2010 - 11:08 .

[Walker White]

These threads always fascinate me. When people talk about "traditional RPGs" they have this notion that was started by CRPGs (Hell yes, I still use that term) in the late 80s and early 90s. They ignore the massive diversity in pen-and-paper RPGs or even much of the experimentation that was going on with adding customization to interactive fiction in the 80s.



Why are we letting our definitions being guided by CRPGs which historically have been much more restrictive and less innovative than the pen-and-papers? These games have focused on item customization and heavy leveling (aspects often de-emphasized by pen-and-papers outside of the D&D mold) because that was all they could do to provide customization given the technology limitations. Now that technology is advancing, why are we still placing these shackles on this genre?

[LoboFH]

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.

ME2 has inventory and skills tree, in your Normandy armory, captain room, research lab...yeah, it's not magic, retarded, cheap and with no challenge like in ME1 and all the RPG fossil games.



For Mass Effect 3 please don't listen to nostalgic blind dudes, you nailed it down with ME2, don't ruin it.



Thanks.

[sinosleep]

This thread hasn't been done to death, lol. I'll leave you with this.

http://i55.tinypic.com/2yju8uw.png

You'll have fun now.

Modifié par sinosleep, 30 octobre 2010 - 03:40 .

[pacer90]

RPG. Role-Playing-Game.

Coming from Pen and Paper DnD style games, where you took on a "role" and lived within the world, changing to things and reacting as you saw fit. Customization of character through actions, decisions, armor, weapons, and companions largely defined how you constituted your "role" in the game.

How anyone doesn't see ME2 fitting all of those requirements is beyond me.

Modifié par pacer90, 30 octobre 2010 - 05:43 .

[Oblarg]

Lumikki wrote...

You aren't missing anything. It's not question does ME2 have those elements, it's more a question quality and amount of those elements. Some people feels that those RPG elemets are too limited, that's all. How ever, ME2 isn't full blood traditional RPG, it's mix of TPS and RPG. Also Biowares developers has already sayed that ME3 will have more "customation", base on RPG complains as ME2 been too simplifyed on some features.

This is pretty much correct.

[Phaedon]

Christmas Ape wrote...

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.

Even though I agree with you, I would like to see more RPG elements in ME3.

And by RPG I mean 'role-playing' and not the idiotic RPG system that includes huge inventories, no immersion and unrewarding upgrades.

[Oblarg]

One of the main complaints along these lines, which I agree with, is that the inventory and level up systems should have been streamlined, not gutted. Gear progression, at least for me, is an integral part of the RPG experience, and the planet scanning for generic +10% damage upgrades in ME2 really cheapened that experience for me. Part of the fun of an RPG is finding gear on your way through the game and building each character using gear and level ups to exactly how you want them. This was more or less absent from ME2. Yes, the ME1 inventory was absurdly cluttered, but that's because of the large numbers of duplicate items and the ridiculously large item drop rate, not due to the fact that inventories are a bad design choice.

[kalle90]

Bioware just went to extreme:

- If we have 2 same items in inventory why can't they be listed as one with a small "2" icon (like most other RPGs like KOTOR do)? With an option to delete 1 or all of the said item.

- If 150 items is redicilous, why isn't the limit 10ish (Like in Borderlands-Elder Scrolls)?

- If the skill steps needed to be reduced why do we also have less total skills?

- If a couple of item mods were overpowered why don't we have any mods available?

- etcetcetcetc.



Or do I see an EASPORTS style "addstuff-removestuff-addthesamestuff again and say it's something new and revolutionary" thing going on here? ME2 was downgraded on purpose so ME3 can be uberassumz?

[joey_mork84]

pacer90 wrote...

RPG. Role-Playing-Game.

Coming from Pen and Paper DnD style games, where you took on a "role" and lived within the world, changing to things and reacting as you saw fit. Customization of character through actions, decisions, armor, weapons, and companions largely defined how you constituted your "role" in the game.

How anyone doesn't see ME2 fitting all of those requirements is beyond me.

It truly is baffling.. What's worse, is there is more than one thread on this, with other (non-related) threads being dragged into the same topic for no other reason other than to be trolled. It really is amazing.

[Oblarg]

joey_mork84 wrote...

pacer90 wrote...

RPG. Role-Playing-Game.

Coming from Pen and Paper DnD style games, where you took on a "role" and lived within the world, changing to things and reacting as you saw fit. Customization of character through actions, decisions, armor, weapons, and companions largely defined how you constituted your "role" in the game.

How anyone doesn't see ME2 fitting all of those requirements is beyond me.

It truly is baffling.. What's worse, is there is more than one thread on this, with other (non-related) threads being dragged into the same topic for no other reason other than to be trolled. It really is amazing.

Ever occurred to you that people are legitimately disappointed with the changes in ME2, or do you actually dismiss everything you don't agree with as trolling?

[joey_mork84]

Oblarg wrote...

joey_mork84 wrote...

pacer90 wrote...

RPG. Role-Playing-Game.

Coming from Pen and Paper DnD style games, where you took on a "role" and lived within the world, changing to things and reacting as you saw fit. Customization of character through actions, decisions, armor, weapons, and companions largely defined how you constituted your "role" in the game.

How anyone doesn't see ME2 fitting all of those requirements is beyond me.

It truly is baffling.. What's worse, is there is more than one thread on this, with other (non-related) threads being dragged into the same topic for no other reason other than to be trolled. It really is amazing.

Ever occurred to you that people are legitimately disappointed with the changes in ME2, or do you actually dismiss everything you don't agree with as trolling?

Why so defensive? 

But to answer your question, no I don't. I wasn't talking about everyone who disagrees with my view when I said 'to be trolled'. There are some very trolly posts in some of those other threads, if you go and look. People posting certain things just to spark an argument rather than a debate. That's trolling.

[wookieeassassin]

Look what I've started...

I never said that Mass Effect 2 wasn't an RPG. I said that a lot of what are commonly thought of as RPG elements are no longer there or they are extremely limited. Remember that I haven't played much of the game yet so I may not know everything.

Anyway, from what I have played, I notice that each character has a very limited number of skills. There are probably 5 or 6 special abilities with 10 points to max one of them out. That doesn't mean that skills are non-existent in ME2, its just that there aren't as many as there are in ME1. Anything that isn't directly relevant to a combat skill seems to be gone. There are no skill points to increase your accuracy when firing a certain type of weapon, there are no hacking skills (you can just hack based on your own ability, not on anyone in your squad having to level that up), and from what I have seen the special abilities for weapons are gone. By special abilities I mean things like "assassination" in the ME1 where the next shot from a sniper rifle would do 50% more damage.

Also, while you technically still have an inventory I have not seen an option at any of the stores I've been to where I can actually sell the things that I don't want for credits. It seems like the only way to earn credits in ME2 is to find them in wallsafes or get them from completing side/main missions.
If I am correct in my assumption then that means you can't go out and loot an area and take all of that back to a shop to sell for credits. I looted the heck out of ME1 areas and by the end of the game I had 6.25 million credits and the best armor for each of my squadmates. I also have the best weapons in the game, one or two of each weapon of the Spectre only prototype weapons.

So, since there are no skills for weapon proficiency it means your accuracy is spot on from beginning to end. I can see a possible reason why this change was made: it can be annoying to in the earlier parts of the game for combat because when your weapon proficiency is low you can barely hit the broad side of the barn with whatever weapon you're using. Later on when your proficiency is better you don't really have to worry about that anymore but still, I remember using the sniper at the beginning of ME1 (as a soldier) and it was very difficult to hit anything with it, the scope was jerking around all over the place.
So having said that, I'm not sure whether or not weapon accuracy as a skill should be reintroduced.

However, the rest of the things like being able to loot, having to actually develop a skill to hack, charm/intimidate people in conversations, etc. definitely should be in in some way.

[EDIT]
Also, being able to add different mods to weapons seems to be completely gone now. There wasn't anything wrong with that in ME1 that I could recall.

Modifié par wookieeassassin, 30 octobre 2010 - 07:02 .

[Lumikki]

Oblarg wrote...

One of the main complaints along these lines, which I agree with, is that the inventory and level up systems should have been streamlined, not gutted. Gear progression, at least for me, is an integral part of the RPG experience, and the planet scanning for generic +10% damage upgrades in ME2 really cheapened that experience for me. Part of the fun of an RPG is finding gear on your way through the game and building each character using gear and level ups to exactly how you want them. This was more or less absent from ME2. Yes, the ME1 inventory was absurdly cluttered, but that's because of the large numbers of duplicate items and the ridiculously large item drop rate, not due to the fact that inventories are a bad design choice.

I agree and disagree.

ME1 inventory system was badly done, but that's not only reason why it doesn't fit in Mass Effects. Hole problem starts from looting system. I mean looting induvidual items is what cause the hole problem. ME2 had totally different way to do looting system and that changed hole consept of "inventory" as how it works. Why it was done?

ME1 you loot induvidual items, what without exemption allways cause garbageman rummage in the trash and scrap yard symptoms. That's how traditional RPG looting works. This cause huge inventories, what requires item sorting system, because other ways player is drowning huge amount of junk items. This is unavoidable consequence of this kind of systems. More items (customation) game has, more problems it creates for player. This often also leeds inventory limits and player is forced to clean up inventories or waste time when selecting loot. Often selecting loot isn't even usefull, because games requires selling those junk items to get money to buy what player really needs. My point here is hole problem starts from looting and all the consequences from there are unavoidable. More customation you want in that system, more problems you also have and focus is more in items, not playing in story.

Some players think this is okey to have induvidual items and inventory. I disagree because Mass Effect is build very cinematic impression gameplay, so item management ways is more like what traditional RPG's often are, isn't fitting well in Mass Effects. Traditional RPG way turns the main focus of the game from cinematic impression to stats and item managements. So, that's reason why ME2 item handling is better, it was just little too limited (too little customation) in ME2, but the way it's done, fits better to Mass Effect. Same way that rat to god progression isn't best for Mass Effect story, because story doesn't support it. It's like forcing traditional RPG system to inside something what isn't like that, so it's better to try find RPG system what fits the nature of the game better. People are mostly annoyed to ME2 because it was so limited, but that's not systems fault. It was developers fault as they simplifyed too much and left alot of what was good out of it. Base system is still fine, it just need to be expanded, so that players have more choises and those choises means more.

There is no point to go back for garbageman rummage of trash style. That's not the style of Mass Effect. Not every damm game has to be fit in traditional RPG mold, there is other RPG possibilities too.

Modifié par Lumikki, 30 octobre 2010 - 06:54 .