174 réponses à ce sujet

[sympathy4saren]

A lot of people were upset that inventory and rpg elements were gutted in me2, and now for me3 all you hear about is how inventory is again limited, melee is enhanced and you can pick up guns on the battlefield "Call of Duty" style.

If fact, it says in the article that rpg elements have been beefed up, but I see specific mention much more to, again, friggin combat.

How is my INVENTORY going to be? I'm glad larger skill trees are coming back, but what about Inventory?

After this trilogy, is Mass Effect going to devolve into pure shooter, and is Bioware catering too much to the Call of Duty/Halo crowd?

Modifié par sympathy4saren, 11 avril 2011 - 03:21 .

[AdmiralCheez]

So... it's bad to make the shooting better in a game with shooting in it?

[javierabegazo]

Guys, can we stop it with the trite hyperbole of "catering to ____ crowd". It implies a superiority in the speakers preference and stinks of elitism. There are good and bad things about every genre, and more importantly, it's good for a game, book or movie to NOT just hug tight to pre established "rules" but rather forge ahead and find a system that works for that piece of work as an individual

[DTKT]

ME3 is not a step towards the traditional RPG. It's the core mechanics of ME2 with more "shooter" elements to make it more appealing to a wider crowd of gamers.

There seem to be no inventory to speak off and to more you hear about it, it sounds like Gear of Wars with a dialog tree.

Not really accurate. It's late :S

Modifié par DTKT, 11 avril 2011 - 03:45 .

[LPPrince]

With all the talk of Bioware catering to people, I want to look at their menu.

[SomeKindaEnigma]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

So... it's bad to make the shooting better in a game with shooting in it?

[javierabegazo]

DTKT wrote...

ME3 is not a step towards the traditional RPG. It's the core mechanics of ME2 with more "shooter" elements to make it more appealing to a wider crowd of gamers.

There seem to be no inventory to speak off and to more you hear about it, it sounds like Gear of Wars with a dialog tree.

Hmm...

• Decisions shaping quest and world outcomes?

Check

• Interesting characters that react to eachother and Mission decisions?

Check

• Skill Trees with evolution paths?

Check

• Side quests and interesting rich lore+ updating Codex as you progress through game?

Check

• 3rd person perspective with shooter gameplay + squad that you command?

Check

• Character progression with Paragon and Renegade persuasion?

Check

Hmm... nope.

Sounds like Mass Effect to me.

[Inquisitor Recon]

AdmiralCheez wrote...
So... it's bad to make the shooting better in a game with shooting in it?

I thought it was agreed that good shooting mechanics are for knuckle-dragging neanderthals who also like Gears of War and Halo like myself?

[Scimal]

sympathy4saren wrote...

A lot of people were upset that inventory and rpg elements were gutted in me2, and now for me3 all you hear about is how inventory is again limited, melee is enhanced and you can pick up guns on the battlefield "Call of Duty" style.

Don't see anything wrong with this. I never thought dozens of junk items and miniscule upgrades buried in any inventory system (grid or linear) for a few more DPS or Defense rating were ever integral to the RPG experience.

Plus, the only reason you're calling it "CoD" style is because you're picking up guns instead of staves/knives/swords/etc. I seem to remember that you could take your opponents' weapons in quite a few RPGs.

If fact, it says in the article that rpg elements have been beefed up, but I see specific mention much more to, again, friggin combat.

Boo hoo. Cry me a river. "RPG" elements is simply a euphamism for customization via stats which are supposed to "define" your character and dialogue. Well, there's plenty of dialogue, and I don't miss the fact that I have to min/max between Dex/Str/Char/Will/Int so I can just get to the awesome parts.

How is my INVENTORY going to be? I'm glad larger skill trees are coming back, but what about Inventory?

There will be weapon mods like ME1, but weapons like ME2.

After this trilogy, is Mass Effect going to devolve into pure shooter, and is Bioware catering too much to the Call of Duty/Halo crowd?

I have never, not once got all excited because I got to organize my items.

I have never, not once, been on the edge of my seat while determining my stats.

The RPG Grognards like to call it "devolving" or "dumbing down" because BioWare is straying away from a direct P&P RPG port with one of their IPs and a pathological hatred for anything that's "too popular to be cool" to the RPG gamer clique they associate with. To them, the game's fantastic if it sells 750,000 copies to 90% return customers because that means it's a familiar playerbase. They don't have to start changing their expectations, their wants/hopes/dreams for the One True RPG ™ that is surely just waiting to be made of the studios would just stop faffing about and learn from whatever idealized game the Grognards hold to from a decade ago.

As long as Mass Effect has a well-written story, as long as it's a Sci-Fi setting, and as long as it's a quality game - I will buy it and play it. I will do so regardless of whatever completely subjective and artificial genre it's shoe-horned into.

You don't have to. That's your choice. However, tread carefully. Implying those of us that enjoy the streamlining of ME1 are somehow "devolved" or beneath the "RPG crowd" is not the best way to make friends.

Modifié par Scimal, 11 avril 2011 - 03:41 .

[DTKT]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

So... it's bad to make the shooting better in a game with shooting in it?

I think the main gripe is that "traditionnal" RPG are being folded into the "third-person shooter" genre. Lets take the skills for example. Let's say that in ME3, there are no more active powers but passive abilities? They provide bonuses to your HP or your shield.

But, the HP bonus is just a percentage, there's no HP meter since they used the usual "strawberry" jam visual cue. 

Is it still an RPG?

[Fluffy Pyro]

Let's bring back guns that were so inaccurate, you wouldn't even be able to hit a Krogan from close/medium range. Let's also bring back an inven - wait, did ME1 even have an inventory? All I remember was a one giant garbage bag filled with hundreds of pointless mods and weapons. Boy that was fun converting loot that was automatically picked up into omni-gel. Auto-loot? In a RPG? Pretty sure that's considered a sin amongst RPG fanatics. Well, why not bring back the old skill system? Where a power did a whooping 2% more damage and lasted a massive 1 second longer?

Tangible weapon mods and multiple power/skill stages along with a wider variety of weapons in ME3 seem like improvements over ME2. If they introduce customisable squad armor and some form of planetary exploration then it'll be an improvement on ME1. So where's the downside? Larger levels with more verticality and a melee system that's more polished than elbowing someone to death some how translates to less of a RPG?

No wonder there are so few devs trying to make 'traditional' RPGs. You guys are even more fickle and narrow minded than the voting panel for academy awards.

Modifié par Fluffy Pyro, 11 avril 2011 - 03:44 .

[JeanLuc761]

I think people have forgotten that the Mass Effect trilogy was always designed to be a hybrid of a third person shooter and an RPG.

Mass Effect 1 had workable shooting mechanics but they were very behind the curve especially when compared to the extremely well designed Gears of War. Mass Effect 2 simply sought to improve the already existing shooting mechanics by making combat smoother and more intuitive. A fine example of this is the fact that Shepard can actually aim worth a damn in Mass Effect 2, whereas at the start of Mass Effect 1 he, a supposed ELITE MARINE, could not hit something 20 feet in front of him with any reliability.

If Bioware can continue to smooth out the combat while bringing back maybe 2-3 "levels of improvement" for deeper stat mechanics, I think they'll be golden. Glad to hear they're bringing back weapon modification as well.

Modifié par JeanLuc761, 11 avril 2011 - 03:41 .

[javierabegazo]

DTKT wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...

So... it's bad to make the shooting better in a game with shooting in it?

I think the main gripe is that "traditionnal" RPG are being folded into the "third-person shooter" genre. Lets take the skills for example. Let's say that in ME3, there are no more active powers but passive abilities? They provide bonuses to your HP or your shield.

But, the HP bonus is just a percentage, there's no HP meter since they used the usual "strawberry" jam visual cue. 

Is it still an RPG?

Mass Effect was never a traditional RPG though. And increasing combat MOBILITY doesn't make it less of an RPG. Just makes it more...fun, responsive. No where in the mythical RPG Handbook does it say that all RPG's must have clunky controls and have levels 1-100 that consist of +1% stat increases

[Knightsire]

I think they are approaching a good balance of both RPG and shooter.

[Marta Rio]

Heh, the GI article says that they are both (a) improving the shooter elements of the game and ( putting back in some of the RPG elements that were taken out. It's a win-win guys, and yet we still have much complaining...

[Wereslayer]

To be honest, I found the inventory and barter system in ME1 to be completely Anti-Role Playing. Your character is a member of an elite squad funded by not one but two governments, the Human Alliance and the Council. The fact that you still have to go from store to store to purchase weapons and armors, even one merchant on a military ship, breaks from the role you are playing. In my opinion, the fact they had weapons armor and ammo provided for you in the second one, that you then could then by modifications for worked a lot better in terms of role playing.

[Fluffy Pyro]

Not to mention the ME series was never supposed to be a 'traditional' RPG. Thanks to the RPG fanatics sporting rose tinted glasses who spend more time nit-picking and breaking down a game, I sure as hell wouldn't want to develop for a tiny demographic who stick their noses into the air thinking RPG games are for more 'intelligent' people because it has arbitrary numbers and mundane fetch quests.

[MrDizazta]

I am excited because we are finally getting the prefect combination of RPG and Shooter. All I can say is if the combat is as good as I think it will be and the story elements and the promise of multiple endings, my God, I think Mass Effect will rule my world.

[Lacan2]

Regardless of how much the game favors one side of the shooter/RPG spectrum, it has to be fun to play.

They should go for addictive gameplay over worrying about to which crowd it caters.

[Pscyon]

While I hate how they turned my Vanguard into a Soldier with Biotics when it used to be a Biotic with combat training, how they removed all my Biotic powers and replaced them with ammo powers, how they removed armour from the squad members (fighting in jumpsuits? Seriously? Even Jacob who's supposedly a Soldier?), gave us a grand total of 2 weapons of each type unless you buy all the DLC, made all areas either hubs or combat areas, downsized the Citadel and removed health, I generally found ME2 to be much more pleasant to play.

Having to continuously sell stuff because you find so much damn loot was a real chore in ME. All the party members being one of the core classes with just an additional talent tree slapped on was rather boring. Dropping down in the Mako to survey 1 ore deposit, loot 1 debris of some kind and look at 1 anomaly (almost always a thresher maw) over and over was tedious. Trying to understand the difference between the effects of some upgrades was just confusing.

ME2 fixed more than it broke really. Looking at some of the info on ME3 that's out now, it seems they're taking a step back in the right direction rather than dumbing it down more. So no, I don't think they're catering too much to the shooter crowd. They made mistakes with no.2 sure, but it wasn't less of an RPG than no.1. Just different. Different isn't always bad.

[sympathy4saren]

Nobody ever said Mass Effect was a traditional rpg. I don't think many people thought it would become holding down the trigger button non stop because I. MUST. SHOOT!!!!!

BioWare made games for "traditionalists" long, long before this series. That is what they did. So their fan base has a huge composition who want more of those elements in the series....and BETTER than in the original Mass Effect. You make the false preliminary assumption that the Inventory in Mass Effect was perfect. It wasn't. But something even more robust and user friendly could have taken its place.

But no, it was all dumbed down so the shooters could LITERALLY play the game. It was too hard for them. Hell, anyone one can play a shooter, its a stinking shooter. It's baby cake. You think rpg players have trouble playing it? Not because of the infant mechanics....but because its mind meltingingly simplistic, linear and mindless. You primarily push one button.

I'm pumped for this game, but this game and series could have been so much more if the gameplay and interface weren't streamlined.

[DTKT]

The issue is really finding the right balance between the two.

[nremies1]

Wereslayer wrote...

To be honest, I found the inventory and barter system in ME1 to be completely Anti-Role Playing. Your character is a member of an elite squad funded by not one but two governments, the Human Alliance and the Council. The fact that you still have to go from store to store to purchase weapons and armors, even one merchant on a military ship, breaks from the role you are playing. In my opinion, the fact they had weapons armor and ammo provided for you in the second one, that you then could then by modifications for worked a lot better in terms of role playing.

Tend to agree here...and to take that a step further I am okay with paring down the skill trees for ME2.  It reminds me of a WTF moment I had when playing the original Ghost Recon so many years ago: why the hell am I skilling up myself and my squadmates?  Aren't we already Green Berets and some of the most lethal soldiers the US Army has to offer?

In Mass Effect terms, I never understood why my soldier Shep had to level up her assault rifle skill in ME1.  Isn't she wearing the Mass Effect equivalent of a Special Forces tab on her sleeve??? 

I do wish they'd kept the ME1 health and healing system, and the persuasion skills, though.

[Tazzmission]

javierabegazo wrote...

Guys, can we stop it with the trite hyperbole of "catering to ____ crowd". It implies a superiority in the speakers preference and stinks of elitism. There are good and bad things about every genre, and more importantly, it's good for a game, book or movie to NOT just hug tight to pre established "rules" but rather forge ahead and find a system that works for that piece of work as an individual

i agree 100%