147 réponses à ce sujet

[wowpwnslol]

1) A game with multiple dialogue options, not the lame "dialogue wheel" copied from that platform shooter mass effect

2) A game that is actually difficult, not by virtue of monsters having a billion HP and absurd damage, spawning in waves out of nowhere, but by having smart AI, interesting abilities and responding to player's tactics.

3) Stats that are incorporated into RPing - like STR being used for smashing doors/locks or intimidation, Charisma for persuasion, intellect for solving puzzles, dexterity for avoiding traps etc?

4) A LONG single player campaign with epic storyline, atmosphere, lots of interesting locations and properly developed companions. Story where choices you make MATTER and impact the game world in a meaningful way.

5) A proper inventory system with plenty of junk items that so upsets the "casual" gamer.

6) A game that rewards, tactical thinking and not spamming buttons in order for "something cool to happen"

7) A freedom of stat/gear customization to build your character how you want without fear to confuse "casuals"

8) Some frustrating elements to actually feel good when you accomplish something and not being handed everything on a silver platter, because the former option is not "fun" - no more healing to full instantly after every battle, make health potions limited in supply etc...

9) Freedom to do things that might have irreversible consequences (such as killing crucial NPC or pissing off entire town, if you do something stupid)


10) A game not available for consoles

[Kalypto]

No.

/Thread

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Witcher 2?

New Vegas has everything on that list except tactical combat and AI. You can play it like a pure FPS and it still has RPG elements coming out the wazoo.

Honestly though, I don't get the console hate. I mean, yes there is a stereotype, but that's what it is, a stereotype. There are many enjoyable games you can only get on consoles that don't amount to "press button, wow that's awesome".

But we will probably need more indie devs to step up for a classical type of RPG.

From the mainstream developers, Obsidian is the only one I can forsee going in that direction. Bethesda makes sandbox RPGs and Bioware is moving towards interactive narratives.

Modifié par mrcrusty, 13 avril 2011 - 12:37 .

[wowpwnslol]

mrcrusty wrote...

Witcher 2?

New Vegas has everything on that list except tactical combat and AI. You can play it like a pure FPS and it still has RPG elements coming out the wazoo.

Honestly though, I don't get the console hate. I mean, yes there is a stereotype, but that's what it is, a stereotype. There are many enjoyable games you can only get on consoles that don't amount to "press button, wow that's awesome".

Vegas isn't an RPG, what a preposterous notion, none of the Bethesda games are. It's a shooter, with RPG elements. The "sand box" concept serves well to mask the poor storyline, though.

[Deadmac]

wowpwnslol wrote...

1) A game with multiple dialogue options, not the lame "dialogue wheel" copied from that platform shooter mass effect

2) A game that is actually difficult, not by virtue of monsters having a billion HP and absurd damage, spawning in waves out of nowhere, but by having smart AI, interesting abilities and responding to player's tactics.

3) Stats that are incorporated into RPing - like STR being used for smashing doors/locks or intimidation, Charisma for persuasion, intellect for solving puzzles, dexterity for avoiding traps etc?

4) A LONG single player campaign with epic storyline, atmosphere, lots of interesting locations and properly developed companions. Story where choices you make MATTER and impact the game world in a meaningful way.

5) A proper inventory system with plenty of junk items that so upsets the "casual" gamer.

6) A game that rewards, tactical thinking and not spamming buttons in order for "something cool to happen"

7) A freedom of stat/gear customization to build your character how you want without fear to confuse "casuals"

8) Some frustrating elements to actually feel good when you accomplish something and not being handed everything on a silver platter, because the former option is not "fun" - no more healing to full instantly after every battle, make health potions limited in supply etc...

9) Freedom to do things that might have irreversible consequences (such as killing crucial NPC or pissing off entire town, if you do something stupid)

10) A game not available for consoles

Yes. Even though BioWare has chosen to take path B, there are always other companies willing to take pach A. Someone will eventually make a modern version of old schools rpgs. "Skyrium" is one possibility.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

And yet it has everything on the list except point 2 and possibly 6.

[Phantom13NWN2]

wowpwnslol wrote...

1) A game with multiple dialogue options, not the lame "dialogue wheel" copied from that platform shooter mass effect

2) A game that is actually difficult, not by virtue of monsters having a billion HP and absurd damage, spawning in waves out of nowhere, but by having smart AI, interesting abilities and responding to player's tactics.

3) Stats that are incorporated into RPing - like STR being used for smashing doors/locks or intimidation, Charisma for persuasion, intellect for solving puzzles, dexterity for avoiding traps etc?

4) A LONG single player campaign with epic storyline, atmosphere, lots of interesting locations and properly developed companions. Story where choices you make MATTER and impact the game world in a meaningful way.

5) A proper inventory system with plenty of junk items that so upsets the "casual" gamer.

6) A game that rewards, tactical thinking and not spamming buttons in order for "something cool to happen"

7) A freedom of stat/gear customization to build your character how you want without fear to confuse "casuals"

8) Some frustrating elements to actually feel good when you accomplish something and not being handed everything on a silver platter, because the former option is not "fun" - no more healing to full instantly after every battle, make health potions limited in supply etc...

9) Freedom to do things that might have irreversible consequences (such as killing crucial NPC or pissing off entire town, if you do something stupid)


10) A game not available for consoles

Personally, I think the next installment of Dragon age will tell us, either Bioware will revert back to the good ways, or they will continue further down the path of "awesomness".

[mordarwarlock]

sorry OP, those days are long dead gone

you have to take into account, that in order for developers to amass profits in these days of they have to catter to the lowest common denominator, they don't care about creating games, they care about marketing and profits, period

and hence, DA 2 has been born, and thousand more will come

luckily, there are still some developers that actually care more about the RPing experience over most things, even if they don't fill the whole criteria you listed they focus at least on more than 4-5 of them, Cdprojeckt is one of them, heck, most European game developers are still caring about the Old RPG experience, problem is that their games are not noticed enough because they don't have a gazillion dollars to support their games like Bioware does

[BY-TOR STORMDRAGON]

The RPG is far from dead. I loved "Lost Odyssey", "Blue Dragon" and "Star Ocean: The Last Hope." I have Final Fantasy 13 and a sequel is due for that game. "Dungeon Siege" is coming soon. BioWare certainly isn't a company (or EA) to judge the future of RPG's!!! The only REAL one is "Dragon Age: Origins" and someone was genius for that game.
The future of RPG's is bright. It's those damn shooters that ruin the game landscape.

[mordarwarlock]

I have Final Fantasy 13 and a sequel is due for that game

that falls into the "RPG's are dead category", like DA 2 coming from DA:O, FF 13 it's like going from Eating a fine meal into eating garbage

[Gatt9]

XxTaLoNxX wrote...

Age of Decadence and Dead State. Both are "classic" RPGs that were put out this year by the Indy scene. The graphics are on par with PS/PS2 graphics, which is still by today's standards... decent. But the gameplay, environment, and story are the most important qualities in games like those and within a few minutes you will be immersed in the games, by the end you will feel good about spending your time on those games.

This guy know what he's talking about. ^

sorry OP, those days are long dead gone

you have to take into account, that in order for developers to amass profits in these days of they have to catter to the lowest common denominator, they don't care about creating games, they care about marketing and profits, period

Actually,  what the problem is,  is that publishers control the industry and all they care about are blockbusters,  things to wow the shareholders with.  They aren't interested in a game that sells well,  only a game that sells like Starcraft.

That's why we get so many repetitive games that are all too similiar,  because suits think that's all that'll sell and all that's worth making.

It is possible to make money making other things,  *especially* with digital distribution.  Stardock made a very decent amount of money,  so did Mount & Blade,  and Minecraft.

It's ok though,  we're headed to a market crash.  The publishers are pushing the same few games over and over,  each selling less units due to gamer fatigue caused by the same few games,  making publisher nervous and so they release even more games in the same few genres that historically sold the best on average (Meaning a even a crappy game sells enough units to make some profit.)

I've been talking with a few insiders,  developers,  artists,  engineers,  they're all of the same opinion,  it's just the solution that varies.  Digital distribution is seen as the saving grace though.

Mrcrusty, you won't make any progress in convincing wowpwnslol that anything Bethesda has put out are indeed RPGs. You know and I know that Elder Scrolls/Fallout are RPGs, so just move on knowing that you are right.

Nothing can be gained from any further discussion on that topic

I can go buy a copy of Candy Land,  put it in a Monopoly box,  but no matter what the box says and what I tell you,  Candy Land is still not monopoly.

Character Based Skill and Defined Characters are the fundamental basis of an RPG,  Bethseda's games fail at it.  They are what their type of gameplay makes them,  Adventure game and Shooter,  despite what the box and the incredibly egotistical developers tell you.  Bethseda does not make RPGs,  they make games for people who hate RPGs but for some odd reason want to claim they play them.

Modifié par Gatt9, 13 avril 2011 - 12:58 .

[wowpwnslol]

JRPG's can't be classified as RPGs - to do otherwise would be an insult to the genre. They have almost none of the elements that make an RPG what it is. Interactive movies are what those games are.

[Embargoed]

Wow...

#10 is just ****ing absurd. I started agreeing with you somewhat until I read #10 and thought "Yeah, another so called PC Elitist. This thread is a pretty cool story."

Just because you don't like consoles doesn't mean that the hundreds of thousands of BioWare fans who bought DA2 on consoles should be shafted. The game just needs longer development, not an ridiculous list made by some butt-hurt PC gamer who wants moar lewtz.

Excuse me for liking combat in DA2, excuse me for not liking loot systems unless they're randomized, excuse me for not buying a good gaming computer instead of a console, and most of all, excuse me for not having all the same likes as you.

[naughty99]

wowpwnslol wrote...

Vegas isn't an RPG, what a preposterous notion, none of the Bethesda games are. It's a shooter, with RPG elements. The "sand box" concept serves well to mask the poor storyline, though.

What is your definition of an RPG?

It seems to be quite different than my understanding of what a role-playing game is.

[casadechrisso]

Vegas is very much a RPG, even though it has a lot of action. It features many things you mentioned and Obsidian even added good writing where Bethesda failed in the past. Calling it simply a "shooter" just because it comes as something slightly more modern than an Infinity-Engine game is quite shortsighted. There were many aspects in the game even Bioware could learn a bit from.
The main storyline wasn't great, but the sidequests even more... actually, I just have a deja-vu... could the same be true for the last couple of Bioware games too?

Modifié par casadechrisso, 13 avril 2011 - 01:04 .

[MassEffect762]

I'm assuming they cost more to develop(great ones at least) and that EA is too cheap to do so.

Yes from another company and a likely no from EA Bioware at the moment.

[Tpiom]

Phantom13NWN2, what you say it's true. I think Bioware is (was... hopefully?) looking for a new audience with DA2, hence so many changes - let us they pick us (DA) over the new wave (DA2).

[maladictor2009]

EA owns bioware = Bioware makes ****.

[McHoger]

There are some indie ones in development, like AoD or Dead State. But I wouldn't expect much more because companies that make them tend to go under because those games aren't practical.

[Kandid001]

Short answer: It all depends on demand.

[wowpwnslol]

naughty99 wrote...

What is your definition of an RPG?

It seems to be quite different than my understanding of what a role-playing game is.

Baldur's Gate series, Icewind Dale series. Planescape: Torment. NWN: Hordes of the Underdark (+many user created modules), NWN2: Mask of the Betrayer. Dragon Age Origins (despite its many faults).

[Sir Caradoc]

I fear that DAO was last the of it's kind from Bioware. EA has done it'sjob well. They don't care about fans of the old school rpgs anymore. We are a burden.

I'm also looking forward Age of Decadence and Dead State. Those both seem quite intresting and orginal concepts.

As for bigger studios, I live in a hope that Witcher 2 (CD project Red), Risen 2 (Piranha bytes) and Skyrim (Benthesa) will deliver that classic rpg feeling and gameplay we all so desire. And there is always Obsidian entertaiment...who knows what those guys are going to make in the future.

Modifié par Sir Caradoc, 13 avril 2011 - 01:14 .