[quote]Il Divo wrote...
[quote]Evil Johnny 666 wrote...
Where did I say they were particularly well done in ME1? In fact I even said the conversation system wasn't particularly good. The problem, is that it was decent in ME1, here, it's a lot worse. [/quote]
If you're going to make the argument that Mass Effect 2 was 'dumbed down' from previous Bioware RPGs, you are going to have to demonstrate how those entries were more intelligent. From Baldur's Gate 1 to Kotor, Bioware simply stole their game mechanics right out of DnD without any innovation (except force powers). Jade Empire and Mass Effect featured very few statistics and Mass Effect 2 less so. In this, I'm inclined to say that the gap betwen Mass Effect and Kotor is much larger than the gap between Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2.
I wouldn't call Mass Effect's inventory 'decent' for example. So if the goal is to demonstrate how Mass Effect 2 is dumbed down, we must see how this stands against previous Bioware experiences. [/quote]
Which is what I did. Bioware stealing game mechanics from DnD doesn't meant that ME2 isn't less intelligent or complex. And comparing again to other Bioware games, stats, weapons, choices, EVERY RPG element got limited. How is ME2 better on those aspects?
[quote][quote]
Yeah, how that makes a game good? I don't play games to watch people talk, movies are for that. I mean, it's always a plus to have realistic characters, but that hardly changes the RPG side of things. [/quote]
So, you don't play Bioware games to meet new and exciting characters over the course of the main experience? You do realize that this has been the single element which every Bioware game has had, barring Neverwinter Nights and Baldur's Gate 1? Your character is given the opportunity to express their personality in these moments 'role-playing'. As such, anything which is capable of improving these interactions signifies a more positive leap for the direction of the Bioware RPG. That's the difference between the relationship between Shepard and Ashley vs. Han Solo and Leia; I can influence the former, I have no role in the latter. I am a passive observer. [/quote]
You're misunderstanding. Those interaction with new and exciting characters doesn't require life-realistic visuals/movements/eyes/whatnot. I play Bioware games to meet new and exciting character, and have deep and satisfying interactions with them, which Bioware almost failed in ME1, and failed in ME2 by only giving you the illusion of choice. Shepard can't not be a boring stereotypical character, and I can't have a choice besides being a saint or a redneck without feeling like having multiple personalities. With better technology comes the ability to make the same as before tenfold more difficult, time consuming and costly. Hence why ME2 got it worse. The script itself is good - although a step down from ME1 and past Bioware games probably because of their new Hollywood direction - as the acting, but that doesn't make anything more deep, only fancier on the surface.
[quote][quote]It's like saying Mass Efffect is a complete shift in how the RPG is made because graphics are better and give more life into the characters. That's just Bioware using technology to their advantage.[/quote]
No, it's not. Graphics are always improving marginally. Mass Effect 2 is closer to a complete overhaul in character interaction. Try talking to Ashley or Kaidan in Mass Effect. It's the exact same thing since Kotor; you stand in one stop, they stand in another, and you 'talk' for ten minutes. This was the evolution we've experienced? [/quote]
Complete overhaul in character interaction? You gotta be kidding. I always thought interaction included the player. Deeper, better interaction means YOU, the player having more possibilities and the NPC reacting accordinly in better, more dynamic - ie. a dynamic conversation system, not the different NPC poses - conversation system. Bioware are glossing over everything, but instead of manking more dynamic, reactive and interesting interactions, they're cheepening them on the inside.
[quote][quote]
And as much as the characters and how they move and all is realistic, the character themselves as the conversation system is worse than ever. I'd take KOTOR anytime as far as this goes, I don't care how realistic the characters are and that "my" character has voice, if it's at the disadvantage of the actual conversation system, it's a problem. Again, if I want life-realistic interactions I'll watch a movie, what I seek of video games - particularly in RPGs - is a relatively deep and satisfying experience, which Bioware fails to deliver in conversations besides the acting of the NPCs. [/quote]
I'm not fully understanding your criticism here. Are you complaining that Mass Effect 2 features a weaker cast than Kotor, or that the dialogue wheel is the problem (in which case, Mass Effect features the same problem).[/quote]
Both. Bioware seems to be hiding less the fact that their characters are quite stereotypical. Jack - look how I'm angry and want everyone dead emo girl - and Grunt - all I want is killing, oh my instincts tells me there's something wrong - are probably some of the worst Bioware characters ever. Samara's code is dumb and ridiculous, Jacob is you're usual guys who worked for the good guys but turned over to the bad guys to try to make a difference, and Miranda is you're made to be perfect by a rich dude chick. Bioware still managed to make both characters quite decent though. I love Garrus' direction as Tali and what she brings with her people. Legion is boring. Thane and Mordin are truly great though. Only I think Bioware tried to much to justify Mordin's action, rather than making the thing more morally ambigous, but that's also a problem with the whole game.
Yes, ME1 had problems with the wheel system, but Bioware didn't improved it and made it even worse. Yes, you could never really know what Shepard would say sometimes, but it wasn't as awful and making you contradict yourself as in ME2. I used to not always choose the same option in ME1, I always do in ME2 because it's unbearably impossible otherwise. Bioware went all the way to the "choose between 3 even more stereotypical Shepards". I always thought he was the weak link in Mass Effect, but it's worse than ever in ME2. Add in that the way the paragon/renegade system is implemented, and the conversation system is a total wreck.
Just look how sometimes you could just kill someone in KOTOR, but you could also keep in alive and manage to get better advantages/be more evil in the process. You could do so after helping someone, but you could refure the reward, as keeping it without being an a-hole. You had far more choices with more subtleties, and you always knew what you were telling people. But I'm not saying the conversation system should've been identical to KOTOR, only improved, using the new technology to do that, rather than make things all the more shallow.
[quote][quote]
I'm all for choice. Excepts even KOTOR gives more choice than Mass Effect 2, and it has more RPG depth in a whole. [/quote]
Depends on the choices. But I think this speaks for the excellence of Kotor, considering it is my single-favorite Bioware experience. But even Kotor had areas for improvement. Much as I love Bastila and HK, Morrigan and Alistair are my two favorite Bioware npcs.
This however does not diminish Mass Effect 2's value in increasing the interactive experience. [/quote]
At least in ME1 you saw what happened to the Rachni by killing them or not, you saw the Council being dead or not or Anderson being a councilor or not. In ME2, besides the Collector base you barely have any choice, and how the choice got carried over is very limited, most being e-mails. Some people you kept alive only have two sentences to tell you, it seems Bioware did the whole thing as an afterthought, while it was supposed to be one of the big features of the game. Again, Obsidian beat Bioware at their own game with the dynamic choice/consequence system of Alpha Protocol.
[quote][quote]
Again, I fail to see what's so special about the way RPGs are made by Bioware, realistic characters has nothing to do with the RPG itself, and it certainly doesn't mean these RPGs elements need to be dumbed down. All I see, is Bioware dumbing down the RPG and using technology and other game elements. [/quote]
Anything which contributes to the immersion of the universe improves role-playing. Anything which throws me out of the events of the game is contrary to role-playing. When Bioware creates realistic character interaction between Shepard + squad, role-playing is improved; in real life, people are not static.
In some ways, video games should not be 'real'. I do not want to watch Shepard take a ****** or eat, for example. In other ways, video games should feel 'real'. I much prefer it when Shepard moves, speaks, and acts human. [/quote]
That's probably our biggest disagreement. As much as it's a plus to have better graphics (better graphics = better immersion, improves role-playing?) and realistic characters - which I don't think changes anything at all about interactions - I need the game depth. What are they gonna do? Throw out the class/skill system, strips down the conversation system even more, so you don't feel thrown out of the events of the game? As much as everything will be realistic, the game itself will again feel limited as ever. I don't play games to solely walk around talk to people with the illusion that I have choices and that the character is mine.
But then, my point was about freshing-up the role-playing genre, about changing it, not about improving it. Any game is improved by a better immersion, that has nothing to do with making the genre evolve. And there, I'd disagree with you too, I feel ME2 is even more less immersive, as it feels 1) more like a movie 2) more arcadey. By making the game even more limited and shallower, it feels more like a game. The more choice you have, the more abilities, etc. the more you feel like playing a character and doing something. I feel like having no choice with Shepard, not knowing what he will say makes it even more obvious that he isn't me, that he's just the main character of a video game. Putting points solely towards unlocking special bullets or combat abilities makes it even more obvious that I have no control over other parts of my character. Whatching MY character talk makes it again more obvious that he isn't my character. Seeing different perspectives of Shepard walking around speaking to a NPC again shows me how I'm not seeing what Shepard sees, that he's not my character and that I have barely no control over him.
Modifié par Evil Johnny 666, 16 mars 2011 - 05:22 .
Retour en haut
