ZenBaller wrote...
Hello everyone,
I'm a ME series fanatic as most of you I assume. Even though in heart I'm still a hardcore RPgamer, I embraced
Bioware's innovations with KOTOR, ME and Dragon Age 1.
... What the heck is a "hardcore RPGamer"?
This isn't good. Three sentences in, and I'm already confused about your post.
I'm talking about the gradual de-RPG-ation, the gradual decrease of the classic RPG characteristics and the turn to a more cinematic-action gameplay.
Yes, I can easily see by the list you made of what makes an RPG "classic" or otherwise tha--- Oh, wait.
What are we talking about again?
I'm sorry in advance if this has been talked about before. What I'd like to discuss is that this process has become too much for me after Dragon Age 2. It's a good game but also an oversimplified RPG which well.. is not an RPG anymore.
Really? RPG is a Role Playing Game.
Is there a role to play in DA2: Yes.
Is DA2 a game: Yes.
Seems to fit just fine?
The label doesn't matter anyway, since there are still many people who liked it although most of my friends and internet communities around here are realtively negative towards the direction that DA2 took.
Great, now that the label doesn't matter, I don't have to worry about what I was confused about before! So why are we still here?
What do you think of ME3 taking that direction? Would you like to see it becoming less RP and more click n slash action fast food game like DA2?
Seeing as ME is designed for the consoles, and consoles lack a mouse, I doubt it will be anymore click 'n slash-y than it already is.
Otherwise, I thought we already agreed that labels don't matter.
Okay, okay, serious response:
Go back and play "classic" RPGs like BG1, BGII, Planescape, etc. etc. etc. Those games are still 90% fighting and 10% talking. They're more complex because the engines at the time required less work and the audience was smaller - so they were far more forgiving of things, like the entirety of D&D 2ed. which was an enormously convoluted system that ended up punishing people who were interested.
The sweet spot of complexity is hard to hit because it's different for each individual. Put in too much, and you run the risk of D&D 3-itis, where you have 58 skills and 6 points each level, but each skill only gets good once you've sunk some 24 skill points into it. That's ME1. All you REALLY needed to focus on was whatever your main weapon was, Charm/Intimidate, the Spectres skillset to get Unity, and the rest was whatever you felt like benefitted you the most. There were redundant skills, and most only improved your character a fraction at time.
ME2 is on the opposite spectrum. You have 4-8 skills, and enough points to get the majority of what you want. There's no debate to which skills you choose because you can choose all of them eventually. Whereas ME1 made level-ups fruitless because skill choices were inconsequential since the bonuses were barely noticable until you were almost maxed out - ME2 made level-ups fruitless because, while the skills you choose have a perceivable impact on your performance, there's no reason to value the levels because of the aforementioned over-saturation.
However, while I, too, get a thrill out of "mastering" a system - I don't play RPGs to compare spreadsheest. The complexity, if done well, is a very appreciated bonus. As much as I enjoy the little things, if I wanted to play a game full of dozens of interacting rules - I'd be playing EVE Online.
My joy from playing RPGs comes from the interactions and from feeling like the hero. As the years have moved onwards from games like BGII, I've been mildly disappointed in many of the outcomes, but also realized many things. The current development time of games is incredibly short, but with a hundred times the work to put in because people expect this generation of games to be viscerally better than the last. This amounts to a butt-load (or if you're metric, a butte-load) of money required to stay competitive. This necessitates a larger target audience, and whether you want to admit it or not, RPers aren't a majority of anything outside gaming-store customers.
So, the developers choose the "wide audience" route 90% of the time. The route which sort of hand-holds people through the game with the RPG elements by either making the elements very simple and easy to understand, or doing it for them. This allows gamers to focus on the story at hand and getting pass the other elements - enemies, barriers, puzzles, etc.
Does it mean the game is somehow a "dumbed down" RPG, though? No. It means it doesn't have the level of complexity you'd enjoy. It doesn't contain the specific elements you enjoy. As much as I wait, I know there will never be another BGII - but I know it's not because BGII used the 2ed rules. The 2ed rules sucked a big fat one for anyone who just jumped into BGII without knowing anything about D&D. THAC0? Weapon restrictions? Insta-death (much to my chagrin, actually)? They all sucked. You spent 5 minutes prepping to fight a Lich, only to have it dispel everything and Wail of Banshee your party - hope you saved right before!
That's not the yard-stick to judge RPGs by. You're afraid things are becoming simpler because you think ME2 took more control of YOUR character away from you. No conglomerated inventory, no complex skill system (which is supposed to represent a complex individual), and because you spend less time fiddling with the non-combat mechanics, you perceive more combat to take place.
Well, there isn't more combat taking place. There never was. It's been about the same ratio for 20 years now. Fight for 30-45 minute blocks, talk for 10 (if you're lucky). That's the way it's almost always been with BioWare and most other RPGs.
So, if I were to venture a guess onto your REAL reason for fearing that ME3 might be something you won't enjoy, I bet it has more to do with the story and the way you interact with it personally - rather than having the inventory split up into a Weapons Locker and an Armor Locker and being unable to sell useless junk.
Heck, I just started up Half-Life 2 again - another of my all-time favorite RPGs. Yeah, so I play a mute MIT scientist saving the world in a FPS style game. Ya know what? Alyx is one heck of a character, the facial animations are amazing (and revealing), and the game itself is amazing. It may not be a "traditional" RPG - I don't make any choices, there isn't any dialog for the protagonist, but I'm playing one hell of a role (as a fellow Scientist) - and it's one hell of a game.
That's all an RPG is to me.
Modifié par Scimal, 23 mars 2011 - 02:41 .
Guest_Tigerblood and MilkShakes_*
for Mass Effect 3.
Retour en haut
how is me1 idiotic? is it because it didnt fit your call of duty obsession?
