264 réponses à ce sujet

[randName]

As for the RPG discussions, note that many, like I, didn't say that DA2 doesn't contain plenty of RPG elements, and I'd still claim that DA2 can easily call itself an Action cRPG.

It's simply reactions, and laughter, to the narrow view presented in the OP by a BioWare rep. since DA2 would have some issues calling it self an RPG based upon it, and at best be heavily in the grey.

Modifié par randName, 10 avril 2011 - 05:02 .

[DoNotIngest]

wowpwnslol wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

A lot of people don;t seem to know what RPG means..........

What do you expect? Most users on this forum were born in late 90's and raised on consoles.

There are people who think RPG stands for "Role Playing Game", and there are people that think RPG stands for "Rocket Propelled Grenade".

I like using them interchangeably.

[wowpwnslol]

DA2 is not an RPG. It's an action-adventure game with illusion of choice. There's not even an isometric view. RPG my ass.

[Zepplin_Rules]

wowpwnslol wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

A lot of people don;t seem to know what RPG means..........

What do you expect? Most users on this forum were born in late 90's and raised on consoles.

Heck I'd say a good many are Bioware employees, just trying to make it seem like they are a good RPG developer anymore.

[Boiny Bunny]

Made me laugh a bit.

Particularly the bit where they talk about having 3 dialogue options presented which are just illusions, and really, no matter what you say, you always end up having to say 'yes'.

Hypocritical much?

Ah well. I guess that's Bioware's formal acknowledgement that the games they make are not RPGs anymore. You can put an 'action' in it, but there is no RPG = by their own definition.

[gotthammer]

wowpwnslol wrote...

DA2 is not an RPG. It's an action-adventure game with illusion of choice. There's not even an isometric view. RPG my ass.

Yes it is. It's just a 'rushed out' and, thus, poorly executed one. 

*nudge, nudge* Free Enhanced Edition, please *wink, wink*

[wowpwnslol]

gotthammer wrote...

wowpwnslol wrote...

DA2 is not an RPG. It's an action-adventure game with illusion of choice. There's not even an isometric view. RPG my ass.

Yes it is. It's just a 'rushed out' and, thus, poorly executed one. 

*nudge, nudge* Free Enhanced Edition, please *wink, wink*

There is no shame to admit the game isn't an RPG, since there are many good games of other genres.

I don't consider Diablo games RPG's (they are hack and slash action games), but I like the them and will be purchasing Diablo 3, for example.

Dragon Age 2 is not only not an RPG, it was also poorly executed action/adventure game made for consoles.

[tmp7704]

wowpwnslol wrote...

I don't consider Diablo games RPG's (they are hack and slash action games), but I like the them and will be purchasing Diablo 3, for example.

They fall under "action RPG" -- the concept of RPG generally boils down to using character's attributes and stats to determine outcome of actions, rather than just skills of the player. E.g. dim-witted player can "role-play" a genius because it's his/her character's intelligence stat that determines whether they manage to invent the cure for cancer etc.

Modifié par tmp7704, 10 avril 2011 - 05:54 .

[astrallite]

tmp7704 wrote...

wowpwnslol wrote...

I don't consider Diablo games RPG's (they are hack and slash action games), but I like the them and will be purchasing Diablo 3, for example.

They fall under "action RPG" -- the concept of RPG generally boils down to using character's attributes and stats to determine outcome of actions, rather than just skills of the player. E.g. dim-witted player can "role-play" a genius because it's his/her character's intelligence stat that determines whether they manage to invent the cure for cancer etc.

You have to understand that for the better part of a decade, the typical poster on the Bioware forums believed the only games that fell under the description "RPG" were 1) Ultima and 2) Bioware games.

[randName]

tmp7704 wrote...

wowpwnslol wrote...

I don't consider Diablo games RPG's (they are hack and slash action games), but I like the them and will be purchasing Diablo 3, for example.

They fall under "action RPG" -- the concept of RPG generally boils down to using character's attributes and stats to determine outcome of actions, rather than just skills of the player. E.g. dim-witted player can "role-play" a genius because it's his/her character's intelligence stat that determines whether they manage to invent the cure for cancer etc.

Generally this is why I've always liked RPGs, to be able to be smart for once ~

[gotthammer]

randName wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...

wowpwnslol wrote...

I don't consider Diablo games RPG's (they are hack and slash action games), but I like the them and will be purchasing Diablo 3, for example.

They fall under "action RPG" -- the concept of RPG generally boils down to using character's attributes and stats to determine outcome of actions, rather than just skills of the player. E.g. dim-witted player can "role-play" a genius because it's his/her character's intelligence stat that determines whether they manage to invent the cure for cancer etc.

Generally this is why I've always liked RPGs, to be able to be smart for once ~

Hmm...maybe that's the (subconscious) reason I tend to increase INT stats...

[Tirigon]

DoNotIngest wrote...

There are people who think RPG stands for "Role Playing Game", and there are people that think RPG stands for "Rocket Propelled Grenade".

I like using them interchangeably.

I think some people would quite profit of being treated with an RPG, or at least anyone else would.

[v_ware]

You do make choices in DA2.

They just have no consequence at all or are later retconned by the game.

[Warheadz]

XxTaLoNxX wrote...

v_ware wrote...
 are later retconned by the game.

Please, provide an example. Prove to me you are not just another mindless drone echoing a word that they heard on the forums without knowing the meaning.

Retcon = Retroactive Continuity; Retroactive continuity (often shortened to retcon) refers to the alteration of previously established facts in a literary work.

Examples... please.

Doesn't Leliana's respawn qualify as one?

[Abispa]

I loved both games, but neither game is a "true" role-playing game. No matter what background and race you chose, you were still "the Warden," and in DA2, you're still "Hawke." If you are going to ****** and moan about not being able to rename Hawke, how exactly was DA:O better? You still only have a given last name, maybe, and then only for the opening segment. Having three races and three classes to choose from still meant you had 99 percent the same game each time.

[randName]

XxTaLoNxX wrote...

v_ware wrote...
 are later retconned by the game.

Please, provide an example. Prove to me you are not just another mindless drone echoing a word that they heard on the forums without knowing the meaning.

Retcon = Retroactive Continuity; Retroactive continuity (often shortened to retcon) refers to the alteration of previously established facts in a literary work.

Examples... please.

Most of the endings are ignored in, and now claimed to be only rumours.

Characters that died are back alive in the case of Leliana and Anders.

Lots of small lore changes, or mages couldn't teleport according to the lore, now they can, and so on.

There is also some confusion since the import was so bugged, so for some time I though that Zevran was also brought back to life, and that Alistair had been sent into exile regardless, but since I had Alistair show both as a bum, and as a King, I figured that for a bug (and it was, in other imports it has worked as intended).

Modifié par randName, 10 avril 2011 - 04:08 .

[Gatt9]

If Diablo is an RPG , Dead Space is an RPG also.

No,  it fails the defined character and character based skill components of an RPG.

Lol... After seeing the post above yours, I can 100% say your statement is correct.

If people got into table-top role playing games (rpgs), they will definitely see the differences between the two. "Dragon Age II" loses out on being called an rpg because of the voiced player character. Anything that takes 'you' out of playing a 'role' automatically disqualifies it from being called a "role"-playing game. During many points in your character interactions, Hawke replies to npcs without any dialogue being clicked. Other words, the player is no longer 'role'-playing, and the character's personality is being played by preset (coded) switches.

When the player character is silent, your mind creates the personality of the character (through your imagination). All your player character's vocal responses are your own, for you are playing the 'role' out according to how 'you' think the dialogue is being expressed. Once "Dragon Age II" replaced your imagination with preset vocals, the game became something entirely different than "Dragon Age: Origins". "Dragon Age II" has more in common with "BioShock" than "Dragon Age: Origins".

Since many people have not played a table-top rpg, I can see how this may be a hard concept to grasp.

You are still dead wrong.

An RPG is a system that has rules that define how characters are represented in a world,  and demands that all skill check outcomes be based upon the character's attributes and skills,  NPC interaction is not a necessity,  nor is your ability to make choices to affect the outcome.

Entire campaigns can be designed in any given system in which you do not make any NPC interactive choices,  and the rules function just fine without any breakage. 

You are attributing your preference for a style of RPG as if it were the basis of all RPGs,  it isn't.  None of the sourcebooks expressely require the concepts you put forth,  and in truth,  most of the source material printed for virtually every PnP system stand in stark contrast to what you are asserting.  Any given module or prebuilt campaign has one or two preset paths to the end,  and DM's essentially force characters to follow those paths no matter what the PC's say or do.

Once again,  Dragonlance is the easiest example.  There is no possibility for the PC's to side with Verminaard and assist his armies in wiping out the Qualinesti,  You either kill him and free the slaves,  or you are done playing.

So with all due respect,  the major problem here isn't that "People don't know what an RPG is",  the problem is that you keep trying to define a sub-genre of RPG as the basis.  Looks to me like you probably need to go and reread whatever sourcebooks you have before trying to discuss the topic again,  you really need to notice how the rules actually work.

[Aermas]

Gatt9 wrote...

If Diablo is an RPG , Dead Space is an RPG also.

No,  it fails the defined character and character based skill components of an RPG.

Lol... After seeing the post above yours, I can 100% say your statement is correct.

If people got into table-top role playing games (rpgs), they will definitely see the differences between the two. "Dragon Age II" loses out on being called an rpg because of the voiced player character. Anything that takes 'you' out of playing a 'role' automatically disqualifies it from being called a "role"-playing game. During many points in your character interactions, Hawke replies to npcs without any dialogue being clicked. Other words, the player is no longer 'role'-playing, and the character's personality is being played by preset (coded) switches.

When the player character is silent, your mind creates the personality of the character (through your imagination). All your player character's vocal responses are your own, for you are playing the 'role' out according to how 'you' think the dialogue is being expressed. Once "Dragon Age II" replaced your imagination with preset vocals, the game became something entirely different than "Dragon Age: Origins". "Dragon Age II" has more in common with "BioShock" than "Dragon Age: Origins".

Since many people have not played a table-top rpg, I can see how this may be a hard concept to grasp.

You are still dead wrong.

An RPG is a system that has rules that define how characters are represented in a world,  and demands that all skill check outcomes be based upon the character's attributes and skills,  NPC interaction is not a necessity,  nor is your ability to make choices to affect the outcome.

Entire campaigns can be designed in any given system in which you do not make any NPC interactive choices,  and the rules function just fine without any breakage. 

You are attributing your preference for a style of RPG as if it were the basis of all RPGs,  it isn't.  None of the sourcebooks expressely require the concepts you put forth,  and in truth,  most of the source material printed for virtually every PnP system stand in stark contrast to what you are asserting.  Any given module or prebuilt campaign has one or two preset paths to the end,  and DM's essentially force characters to follow those paths no matter what the PC's say or do.

Once again,  Dragonlance is the easiest example.  There is no possibility for the PC's to side with Verminaard and assist his armies in wiping out the Qualinesti,  You either kill him and free the slaves,  or you are done playing.

So with all due respect,  the major problem here isn't that "People don't know what an RPG is",  the problem is that you keep trying to define a sub-genre of RPG as the basis.  Looks to me like you probably need to go and reread whatever sourcebooks you have before trying to discuss the topic again,  you really need to notice how the rules actually work.

What kind of limited thinking is this BS?

*steps on soapbox

You talk about modules like they are what most people play in PnP games. Modules are just as bad as video games, they are a predefined story that you must adhere to. That is not true roleplaying. True roleplaying accounts for any & all PC interactions. If you want to kill the guy giving you a quest well have at it, something else will happen instead. If you want to kill slaves for Verminaard then your DM should make it possible. If he/she doesn't then they are a lousy DM, & if you are too lazy to come up with your own stories & worlds for D&D, then you should at least pay respect for those that do, because we are the ones that imbrace true Roleplaying, if you limit it in anyway then you are marring the original form of creativity that is roleplaying.

*steps down from soapbox

Modifié par Aermas, 11 avril 2011 - 01:32 .

[Otterwarden]

Zepplin_Rules wrote...

wowpwnslol wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

A lot of people don;t seem to know what RPG means..........

What do you expect? Most users on this forum were born in late 90's and raised on consoles.

Heck I'd say a good many are Bioware employees, just trying to make it seem like they are a good RPG developer anymore.

Zepplin who? 

[Romantiq]

XxTaLoNxX wrote...

v_ware wrote...
 are later retconned by the game.

Please, provide an example. Prove to me you are not just another mindless drone echoing a word that they heard on the forums without knowing the meaning.

Retcon = Retroactive Continuity; Retroactive continuity (often shortened to retcon) refers to the alteration of previously established facts in a literary work.

Examples... please.

If you kill Leliana during sacred ashes quest, she will still make cameo in both Exiled Prince and the ending of the game. During chantry scene you get an option to ask her something like "Leliana, from Ferelden? I heard you died" or something of that effect. To which she replies complete bull**** that "maker knew its not my time yet"

So yeah, even if you get a killing blow - beheading on Leliana in origins then she will reappear. Awesomesauce.

Modifié par Romantiq, 11 avril 2011 - 01:40 .

[neppakyo]

Romantiq wrote...

XxTaLoNxX wrote...

v_ware wrote...
 are later retconned by the game.

Please, provide an example. Prove to me you are not just another mindless drone echoing a word that they heard on the forums without knowing the meaning.

Retcon = Retroactive Continuity; Retroactive continuity (often shortened to retcon) refers to the alteration of previously established facts in a literary work.

Examples... please.

If you kill Leliana during sacred ashes quest, she will still make cameo in both Exiled Prince and the ending of the game. During chantry scene you get an option to ask her something like "Leliana, from Ferelden? I heard you died" or something of that effect. To which she replies complete bull**** that "maker knew its not my time yet"

So yeah, even if you get a killing blow - beheading on Leliana in origins then she will reappear. Awesomesauce.

I never bothered to pay for a crappy dlc, so I didnt know she was in that. Interesting.

Im guessing the awesomesauce is what is holding her head on her neck.

[Otterwarden]

Romantiq wrote...

If you kill Leliana during sacred ashes quest, she will still make cameo in both Exiled Prince and the ending of the game. During chantry scene you get an option to ask her something like "Leliana, from Ferelden? I heard you died" or something of that effect. To which she replies complete bull**** that "maker knew its not my time yet"

So yeah, even if you get a killing blow - beheading on Leliana in origins then she will reappear. Awesomesauce.

Yeah, but we solved that with the line ... "I got better" (hint:  ME 2 )

[element eater]

bioware should recognise that choosing your appearance isnt the same as creating a character .

additionaly ff games were good until ff9,  ff10 and onwards sucked 

Modifié par element eater, 11 avril 2011 - 02:09 .

[Tommy6860]

Abispa wrote...

I loved both games, but neither game is a "true" role-playing game. No matter what background and race you chose, you were still "the Warden," and in DA2, you're still "Hawke." If you are going to ****** and moan about not being able to rename Hawke, how exactly was DA:O better? You still only have a given last name, maybe, and then only for the opening segment. Having three races and three classes to choose from still meant you had 99 percent the same game each time.

I think you're oversimplifying defining the end of the games to what can be developed as the games play. In Origins, you cand define a great deal, especailly how the game plays using different races, but the in the end, the hero kills the meanie, but you get summary of the choices you made. In DA2, there's virtually no development, near no choices in what to do for quests (IOWs, you have no choice on how to to do the quests), and the ending is always the same with no summary all starteed from one race. That's hardly 99%.