411 réponses à ce sujet

[Ziggeh]

Graunt wrote...

although if you want to get technical, in a "real" RPG, you only control your character period.

There are very, very few things which we would all agree are critical to the definition of rpg, and while I try not to speak for large groups of people in general, I'm pretty sure this would not be among them.

[Ziggeh]

Graunt wrote...

I shouldn't have to constantly pause the game, or continually correct the trajectory of any given party member because the AI is too stupid to perform basic logic functions.  That's not fun. 

Constantly?

I'm not even sure what you mean, because I never had this happen. I had them stop in their tracks occasionally, and the whole shuffling thing was a bit annoying, but removing that seems to be their main intention, so it would be premature to criticise.

Graunt wrote...
The game isn't an RTS, yet if you aren't pausing almost every action that's what it turns into.

Almost every?

I really don't mind your point, but you're making truly massive exaggerations that are rendering it rather silly.

Graunt wrote...
Why would anyone want to have "total control" over companions when 99% of the time you're just going to repeat the same clicks you've already done a hundred times before? 

In comparisons between the witcher and da:o, you're accusing da:o of repetitive clicking?

Modifié par ziggehunderslash, 16 décembre 2010 - 05:12 .

[AlanC9]

Graunt's incoherence aside, there's no rule that you have to like controlling your NPCs to like RPGs, even party-based RPGs. I mostly give orders in DAO when I need an AoE in a particular place; most of the rest of the time I just leave everyone on Tactics.

[In Exile]

Whereas you could say I dislike most traditional RPG features (e.g. silent VO, multiple race choice, etc.) but absolutely think full party control is crucial and the game is greatly diminished for lacking it.

People are unique, and it's hard to find a fixed box for everyone.

[daniel9ds]

I am a newbie here and just wanna say Hi to everyone. I am Daniel from Pennsylvania, US.


edit: spam link removed

Modifié par Seb Hanlon, 16 décembre 2010 - 05:01 .

[Graunt]

ziggehunderslash wrote...

Graunt wrote...

although if you want to get technical, in a "real" RPG, you only control your character period.

There are very, very few things which we would all agree are critical to the definition of rpg, and while I try not to speak for large groups of people in general, I'm pretty sure this would not be among them.

Have you actually played a pen and paper RPG?  If you ever have, then you would realize that unless you're the GM/DM, the only character you control is your own.  Roleplaying games are about...playing a role, not multiple personalities unless your sole character is actually played that way.  

Video game roleplaying games are only loosely based off of actual roleplaying games and I wouldn't be suprised if the entire reason developers ever even allowed you to control party members in the first place is simply because the technology did not exist in the past for them to truly be interactive or make intelligent choices by themselves.  The computer/videogame RPG has you in the role of a General more than it does a single character and you're pretty much displaced since you really aren't taking the role of any single individual.

Constantly?

I'm not even sure what you mean, because I never had
this happen. I had them stop in their tracks occasionally, and the
whole shuffling thing was a bit annoying, but removing that seems to be
their main intention, so it would be premature to criticise.

Not sure what platform you play on or what difficulty, but on Nightmare and on the PC they are extremely stupid and have to be micromanaged for at least half of every fight or they will run into area of effect spells (even though the AI is supposed to avoid them) and they will constantly run away into a zealotous rage away from the group leader to chase down something in another room (even though their script is setup for them to stay close).

Graunt's incoherence aside,

There was nothing incoherent about what I said.  Try playing on higher than normal difficulty or actually learn what an RPG actually is.  What people like to call video game RPGs are not actually roleplaying games at all.  Because if you want to get technical, you're in the "role" of a character in just about any genre of game, even Super Mario Brothers.

Modifié par Graunt, 16 décembre 2010 - 08:06 .

[Vylan Antagonist]

Graunt, while I understand where you are coming from, if you really want to go back to the origins of RPGs, you will find that Gygax and Arneson did in fact often play multiple characters, as did the others at their tables. This was a pretty natural state of affairs when you consider that D&D (and Chainmail) evolved from wargames. As a result, appealing to the authority in this case (tabletop RPGs) doesn't lead quite where you thought it might. The fact is, RPGs and CRPGs both have rich traditions of games involving both 1:1 player to character models and 1:many.



You prefer The Witcher. This is a forum dedicated to Dragon Age, so naturally there's going to be plenty of support for the opposite position. Even among adherents of Dragon Age, there's a good bit of divisiveness over what made the game good and/or great. I'm actually most concerned about the changes in DA2 that I feel make the franchise more like the Witcher, ironically enough, despite enjoying both games.

[Ticladesign]

See.. that's why nwn(2) is such a good game.. it acknowledges there are many different players with many different playstyles, and lets us shape a module to our own tastes and wants, then host it either as SP module or MP server for likeminded players.



Singleplayer Games have a habbit of only providing for a certain playstyle, and yes usually it leans to the playstyle of the majority - who in turn tend to be more action rpg oriented. So I understand why DA2 looks and plays the way it does currently. (based on what I've seen in movie clips)



Very specific playstyle wants, it can only be done with the next modulair game that allows the community to make changes to the rules/settings and whatnot in our own Modules. Then most playstyles can be served.

[AlanC9]

Vylan Antagonist wrote...

Graunt, while I understand where you are coming from, if you really want to go back to the origins of RPGs, you will find that Gygax and Arneson did in fact often play multiple characters, as did the others at their tables. This was a pretty natural state of affairs when you consider that D&D (and Chainmail) evolved from wargames. As a result, appealing to the authority in this case (tabletop RPGs) doesn't lead quite where you thought it might. The fact is, RPGs and CRPGs both have rich traditions of games involving both 1:1 player to character models and 1:many.

However, note that the AD&D DMG says that two characters belonging to the same player should usually not be associates.

But yeah, people play multiple characters in lots of PnP campaigns.

Modifié par AlanC9, 17 décembre 2010 - 07:40 .

[Dr. wonderful]

...is there another debate on what is a RPG?



How, about this: YOU'RE ALL RIGHT!



See? Everyone a winner and now we can have Cake.

[Sylvius the Mad]

AlanC9 wrote...

However, note that the AD&D DMG says that two characters belonging to the same player should usually not be associates.

Though the player would often control both his character and his character's henchmen.  Remember all those follower tables in 1st edition?

[Ziggeh]

Graunt wrote...

Have you actually played a pen and paper RPG?

You know how people always say the book was better that the film? I hate that arguement because it's founded upon the premise that you can directly compare two mediums with different strengths and weaknesses; On a simple level, the acting in books is rarely that good.

Similarly I think that claiming that cRPGs are defined by their adherence to systems outside of the strength and weaknesses of the medium is incredibly silly. But that's just me.

Second to that, I'm not keen on genre theory either as things are rarely that neat, and peoples definitions tend to differ. Your definition of the rpg is entirely idiosyncratic and so means as much to me as any other opinion.

Graunt wrote...
Not sure what platform you play on or what difficulty, but on Nightmare and on the PC they are extremely stupid and have to be micromanaged for at least half of every fight or they will run into area of effect spells (even though the AI is supposed to avoid them) and they will constantly run away into a zealotous rage away from the group leader to chase down something in another room (even though their script is setup for them to stay close).

No, those things rarely happened either. Perhaps my tactical scripts routinely countered the problems you encountered in every fight.

Modifié par ziggehunderslash, 18 décembre 2010 - 03:01 .